Freedom Reborn

Community Forums => Comics => Topic started by: HarryTrotter on July 04, 2016, 04:07:29 PM

Title: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on July 04, 2016, 04:07:29 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_iCAivfGsg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_iCAivfGsg)
Linkara takes a look at Civil War.Not included Death of Captain America,Sally Floyd and Iron Man-war profiteer.When you line it up like this things are really bad.So a reminder:
Steve and Tony are jerks,everyone else is an idiot,most of it is Reeds fault.And who the hell had the idea to kill Goliath and bury him wrapped in chains? :blink:
Mark Millar and Steve McNiven really had no idea what they were doing.Also,looking at it like this,could the part of the blame lay with Secret War by Bendis?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 11, 2016, 12:45:43 PM
So in discussing Civil War II in the Marvel Thread, I remembered that I actually wrote a draft for a response to this thread back when you started it a month ago and then totally forgot about it. I did skim through the review; I don't remember how much I saw of it but I think I watched most of it. Anyway, had some stuff of my own to chime in. For the record, I've read virtually every comic that's part of Civil War so I have extensive knowledge of the details. Mind you, that was like a decade ago, but the nice thing about a story as infamous as Civil War is that the more egregious moments keep coming up in online discussion so I get my memory jogged a bit on it.

Just a sidenote, on top of all the cringe-worthy moments and villainization of Tony Stark (such as being a war profiteer in Frontline) he euthanized Happy Hogan, one of his longtime best friends, in the main Iron Man book, using technology to do so no one would know he did it. Ouch.

-Regarding Secret War: Secret War definitely laid the groundwork for this book, which makes it appropriate that Bendis is writing Civil War II and that the first level of the Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 video game, which loosely adapted Civil War, started with a truncated version of Secret War (which I think tied into the bizarre Take-A-Third-Option original ending the game came up with). The ever-present Maria Hill originated there, and New Avengers Illuminati was written by Bendis and that was part of "The Road to Civil War". The original book even included the first scene from Civil War #1 tacked on at the end as a sort of preview/epilogue.

-I'm a little disappointed that he posits the question of whether or not there were already supervillain/superhero prisons without answering this question for the audience. He later admits he knows DC better than Marvel (something he's copped to many times) so I'm not sure he actually knows the answer. For the record, Marvel has a bunch: There's the Vault, which has been around since at least the late 80's/early 90s and was featured prominently in the crossover "Acts of Vengeance" and also appeared in Busiek's run on Thunderbolts, The Raft, which is the most well known one from the late 10 years or so and was made by Bendis, if I recall. There's the Big House, which was made by Hank Pym in Dan Slott's She-Hulk run and involved shrinking all the supervillains and keeping them in a miniature prison (which surprisingly wasn't used in other comics, but it was used in the Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes cartoon). And these were all before Civil War so they're relevant.

-Not sure I agree with his choice to exclude stuff from the tie-ins since he constantly shows pages from the tie-ins as visual aids, and uses stuff that happened in the tie-ins as discussion points when talking about the Spider-Man unmasking part. In addition, the book was always meant to be an event with tie-ins, and plot points in the mini were kept brief BECAUSE they knew they'd be explored in more detail in other books. The book doesn't exist in a vacuum. All of this is standard operating procedure for event comics for both Marvel and DC, even going back to Millennium, Invasion, ect from DC in the late 80's, early 90s.

-"The Impetus" (Stanford and Nitro): He outright admits he doesn't know the details and the only research he did was check Wikipedia, but he asks if Nitro is really that powerful. The answer is NO, he was using a drug to make himself more powerful, this was explored in Wolverine's CW tie-in arc. I'm disappointed that he tried to look it up and still didn't get it right.

As for "Is this really the thing that makes causes all this"? No. There was another book before this, New Avengers: The Illuminati, where Hulk rampaged through Las Vegas, which was what cause Tony Start et all to launch the Hulk into space, leading to Planet Hulk. Tony shows the others a early draft of the Super Hero Registration Act, and tells them in no uncertain terms, this is happening no matter what, so be ready for it. Stanford just caused them to rush the act into congress, kinda like in real life sometimes. The visual aids he shows during this part of the review shown plain as day that these other incidents (along with Wolverine being brainwashed in Mark Miller's Enemy of the State) are brought up in the book.

For the record, I've always been of the opinion that most of the tie-ins to Civil War are better than the main book. Examples include Amazing Spider-Man, Sensational SM, Friendly Neighborhood SM Wolverine, That one issue of Dan Slott's She-Hulk, Young Avengers/Runaways, Punisher War Journal, Thunderbolts, Brubaker's Cap of course, Heroes for Hire, Cable & Deadpool. I think that was all of them. Mind you, tie-ins being better than the main book happens very often in Marvel and DC event minis. You could take that as indication that the idea for the main story isn't very good.

-I'm also a bit iffy on his repeated mentioning of the traumatizing effects of the Negative Zone for strictly for one reason: unless my memory is really failing on this one, they are never mentioned in the storyline itself. I know it's a bit hypocritical for me for pick at that because I use that kind of established canon internal logic to criticize stories in Marvel books all the time, but I still thought it was worth bringing up. The other thing you gotta remember is, Marvel's internal logic and continuity is so all over the place after 2004 or so that for all we know, none of that was "considered true" of the Negative Zone at the time. Is the Rhino Irish, a guy from Jersey or a Russian? Is he intelligent or incredibly stupid? Is Fixer a perverted snarky opportunist or a more traditionally heroic character? Is Zemo a hero or villain? How about Madame Mask? How stupid is Hawkeye? How immature are Johnny Storm and Iceman? How much of an a-hole is Hank Pym? Sometimes it really does depend on which book you're reading.

So yeah, that's what happens when you review a massive event comic storyline in a single video as part of a weekly review series: You don't quite have the prep-time to do all the extra research. I still enjoyed the review though, but I get the feeling this one was more for the AT4W fans who aren't familiar with the comic firsthand.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2016, 01:35:35 PM
Frontline was written by Paul Jenkins,so nothing good could have happened in the first place.As much as I complain about MArk Millar or Brian Michael Bendis or somebody else,there is still a lot of stuff by them that I did like.There is nothing by Paul Jenkins that I could even stomach.Just remembering his Hellblazer run makes me want to kill myself.

-I think the harmful effects of Negative Zone were established sometimes earlier in FF,and not Civil War itself.But Im not 100% sure.Then again,how Negative Zone works has changed from writer to writer.Same could be said for its inhabitants.One day Annihilus is trying to kill every living thing,and tomorrow hes reading newspapers on the toilet in Peters and Johnny apartment.That really happened,I kid you not.

-One thing I would have to mention,is that a few years earlier Reed shot down the mutant registration act,and now he was supporting pretty much the same thing.I think that was explained as him trying to stop a bad future he saw from happening.

-And Kang blew up Washington a little before these events.Something thats pretty much never mentioned again.But only person that blamed Nitro was Penance,who goes to hunt him down in Penance miniseries.I think I just saw the first issue of that,so I cant say how it went down.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 11, 2016, 04:35:04 PM
-Oh c'mon now, did you ever read Jenkin's Spider-Man run? While there was stupid stuff in it, and nearly all of the humor fell flat, there was quite a bit of humanity and maturity with his version of Peter that I just don't see in Slott's version these days.  Not to mention his Green Goblin story with Ramos (which I believe was his first Marvel gig) was really good before the final issue where he kinda botched the landing a bit. Fusion was pretty good. His Doc Ock and Venom stories in Spectacular were pretty good too, though he may have created Ock's daddy issues backstory, so I have him to thank for that annoying aspect of Otto in Slott's run. His take on Venom laid the groundwork for Anti-Venom, his Queen story (hated as it was, and no, I don't think it was that bad), led to Spider-Island, and going even further back, his Chameleon story, melodramatic as it was, laid the groundwork for the actually-pretty-darn-good Chameleon story by Fred Van Lente during The Gauntlet. There's definitely nothing in Jenkins' run on Spidey that I recall that offends me on the level of any number of things in Slott's run from Inferior Spider-Man onward.

-Not sure about Civil War, but Dark Reign: Fantastic Four by Johnathon Hickman is the true starting point for Hickman's entire marvel "saga". The whole premise of his Future Foundation and Avengers run with the Incursions and such starts with that, with Reed detailing how he was visited by beings from the future or alternate worlds or some such and gained knowledge of other universes that were basically Marvel's "What If"'s.

-Ah, yes, The Kang Dynasty/Kang War. One of my all time favorite comics from one of my all time favorite runs. Busiek, back when the books were decent. It really was all downhill from there wasn't it? #trollface. Nah, but seriously, Washington got one scene referencing it in the fist issue of Johns' run (two issues later, since Busiek's run ended on a fun-but-pointless done-in-on story that ironically was what got me into Avengers) where Hank and Jan were saying it was "being rebuilt" or some such. Man, Damage Control must have got some serious overtime on that one, am I right guys?

-I did read the Penance mini a few years ago. It was alright, not great, but definitely not terrible. Its main negative IMO was that the art was kind of weak, and its main positive was that the pacing was a hell of a lot better than Warren Ellis' Thunderbolts, where Penace was appearing at the time. The one thing about it I absolutely adored though was that Jenkins took the opportunity to resolve a hanging plot thread (Mendall Stromm, the Robot Master) from early on in his Peter Parker Spider-Man run in a minimum of dialogue in a way that actually made a lot of sense. I really liked that, I wish stuff like that happened more often in the comics. The days of Busiek's Avengers and Thunderbolts seem so long ago...
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2016, 05:02:23 PM
Heh,curiously,Penance is also written by Paul Jenkins.I cant say how he stacks against Dan Slott(Clash of the Titans,right there),I do know hes the guy who invented Rich the Punk.I rest my case.

-I meant sometimes earlier in Fantastic Four.And technically,wouldn't Secret Warriors be the start of Hickmans mega-story?With Ultimate Comics:Ultimates as something of a trial run?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 11, 2016, 06:09:51 PM
Well, Secret Warriors spun out of Secret Invasion, just like Dark Reign, as such, the two books came out around the same time. 1 month apart, to be exact, (yes, I looked it up), so they were basically playing out concurrently. You could think of it like how he had Avengers and New Avengers coming out at the same time. Mind you, I'm not sure how much SW had to do with his Secret Invasion run, though Manifold was in Avengers.

I had to look up who Rich the Punk was (Hellblazer). The Spider-Man equivalent would have been Typeface. Who as it happens, was killed off in Civil War: Frontline.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2016, 06:33:01 PM
Rich was just the tip there.There was a whole supporting cast of equaly annoying charaters.Who all got sweapt away when the next writer took over.I think it was Andy Diggle.
Jenkins was trying to spin something about Arthurian myths,which ended up fastly resolved,and revealed Rich was a descendant of king Arthur.Most of it was spent on John helping his neighbours with haunted houses,Rich doing something stupid,Rich trying to play music,Rich surfing on the roof of a van and Rich teaching Slobodan english.Slobodan was another Jenkinsian character- Funny Foreigner/Serbian War criminal(because ofc).And so it went on for around 30 issues.Jenkins claimed he based the supporting cast on his friends.He must have really hated them.And so yeah,after that,I try to avoid him.
In this case,CW Frontier is a prime example.Sally freaking Floyd.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 11, 2016, 06:43:16 PM
Actually, considering what you just said, I wouldn't be remotely surprised if Jenkins based the neighbor characters in his Spider-Man run off people he knew in real life. The ones in Spectacular seemed especially off.
Actually I just remembered another things Jenkins worked on for Marvel - Sentry. I know a lot of people hated the Sentry, but I actually thought those two minis Jenkins wrote about him were pretty darn good. Particularly the second one that Jr. Jr. did the art for. Not so much Bendis' use of character. Funny how they never bothered to bring him back after the whole zombie thing in Uncanny Avengers.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2016, 06:50:04 PM
Oh yeah,Sentry...Because Superman with mental issues was so original,but it gets a lot worst from there(his funeral).Turns out Sentry helped Tony with alchocolism,helped Reed with math,was bff with Hulk,had an affair with Rogue...He was awesome,everybody loved him,nothing in the MU could be accomplished without him.It hits the self insert fic territory.
About Spidermans neighbours there,I guess I can eliminate Rich and Slobodan types(original name there,btw),so was there a fat guy with a crazy mother,or maybe an annoying kid who gave stupid nicknames to people?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 11, 2016, 07:54:05 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot about the funeral issue. Yeah I can't defend the funeral issue, that was completely stupid and unnecessarily.

There was definitely a fat guy, he was an Aussie, and there was a blonde bimbo character who tended to get into TMI territory. And a dog that may or may not have been building something in the other room. Other than the guy being fat I don't think the others were the same. It's been too long.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 11, 2016, 08:22:07 PM
Okay,that doesnt sound similar.I guess Paul moved between Hellblazer and Spiderman. :)
Oh,and he also showed up in New Avengers to meet The Sentry.Which,I guess,was meant to emulate Animal Man/Grant Morrison meeting,but just falls flat.Sad thing is,that there were some promising things in New Avengers,but execution was the problem.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Talavar on August 12, 2016, 02:16:47 AM
This thread has ranged all over, but I want to chime in that yes, Civil War did suck.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 02:35:53 AM
This thread has ranged all over, but I want to chime in that yes, Civil War did suck.

No one was questioning that. Ironically, it didn't have to suck. The basic premise could have actually made for a compelling, fascinating story in the right hands, and thanks to the Russo brothers, it got turned into one just this year. Unfortunately, the original Civil War took that premise and placed it in a dumpster fire, essentially shooting itself in the foot despite itself. Sort of like Donald Trump come to think of it. ;)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 05:05:42 AM
Not sure how Donny factors here...
If you want a subtle story,dont hire Mark Millar.
At first,you can kinda see Tonys position,but then he goes way overboard.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 10:55:33 AM
^ I believe Tvtropes calls that "The Rule of Cautious Editing Judgement" or to put it into laymen's terms: I ain't touching that one sir. [I really wanted to post a clip of Alfred saying that in Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman, but couldn't find one. Oh well.]
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 11:20:55 AM
(http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s102/Linkara/AT4W/ironman.png)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 12:34:33 PM
That was Shortpacked, right? Such a good series. I can't believe Willis ended it.

That last bit really makes me think of Superman's speech about how no-nonsense tactics just don't work in a world of jet powered evil gorillas.

And of course, Marvel's own writers took the piss of Civil War. In the Marvel Adventures line, Cap and Tony assured Hulk that "We'd never shoot you into space."

On the topic of Spider-Man though, in Atop the Fourth Wall's One More Day review, Linkara successfully argued that Peter Parker is incredibly irresponsible. (admittedly, using at least one example that came out after Civil War and also after One More Day itself)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 12:51:45 PM
Speaking of which,have you seen Linakara and Last Angry Geek review One Moment in time.
LAG:Turns out that Peter,like so many of us,spent his bachelors night under a fat guy.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 02:14:36 PM
I have, but I wasn't crazy about it. It was nice to see them tackle it, but it was dry (as LAG always tended to be; I remember he joked that his fellow reviewers called him "that bland guy") and I wouldn't begrudge Linkara a proper review of OMIT. It took years of fans bugging him to get him to admit he'd review new Spidey comics if they sent them to him (since he doesn't want to buy them), since half his output these days is fan requests now. I still think it's all bullcrap because he's outright admitted he read Scarlet Spider, and actively reads Silk and Spider-Gwen, ALL of which directly spun out of the main Spidey book. You are buying Spider-Man books. Amusingly, if Spider-Man/Deadpool is any indication, sometime in the future he might have to keep his promise and buy every comic since One More Day.

On that note, I want to take the opportunity to address something else from an AT4W review. Linkara reviewed the Deadpool comic with Brute Force in it and got super offended that Deadpool of all people made an autism joke. Did I miss something? Deadpool makes un-PC jokes all the time. It's one of the things he's most known for. Complaining about that is like complaining that the Punisher shoots people. Which would be fine, except he's an unabashed Deadpool fan. It doesn't make any sense to me.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 02:32:26 PM
I havent seen that review(I havent really seen anything from at4w in a while,except this ofc),but that isnt out of character for Deadpool.Maybe Linkara took it personaly for some reason?
I would really like to see him buy all the Spiderman comics since OMD.:)
Counting just Amazing(and Superior and then again Amazing),it comes to 100-120 issues?Probably more.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 04:05:21 PM
Not sure how Donny factors here...

Donny was (unfortunately,) doing just fine in the Republican shock tactics. Sure, they were rude, crude, and made him out be a moron, but they worked for his audience. Except now, his audience has drastically expanded, and the same tactics that worked for him in the past are doing him in. Rather than switching up gears and delivering his 'message' in a way that people with actual good taste can understand and digest, he is instead continuing to enact such f-ups as telling the Russians to leak Hilary's emails, insulting the Khans, and saying that Obama and Hilary founded ISIS. He is shooting himself in the foot and driving away some of the very people who supported him. Much like Civil War. ;)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: BentonGrey on August 12, 2016, 04:40:23 PM
This seems to be drifting into some dangerous political territory guys.  Remember the board rules, and stay away from such topics.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 04:50:38 PM
I regret asking that.Anyhow,I dont care much for political scene in the US.Not living there and all that.
And like Shortpacked Iron Man points out,real-politik doesnt work well in a crazy fictional universe.
Punisher: Sometimes it looks like Im the only normal person around.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 05:06:30 PM
This seems to be drifting into some dangerous political territory guys.  Remember the board rules, and stay away from such topics.

Sorry about that. I, uh, never actually bothered to read the rules. Until now, it didn't really seem that important. >_>
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: BentonGrey on August 12, 2016, 05:07:48 PM
No worries.  Think of it like talking with family.  We avoid religion and politics in order to keep the peace.  :P

Those are topics that can breed some pretty ill will and some nastiness that FR is better without.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 05:13:16 PM
No worries.  Think of it like talking with family.  We avoid religion and politics in order to keep the peace.  :P

Those are topics that can breed some pretty ill will and some nastiness that FR is better without.

I understand. It's just that on the topics on other boards where we can discuss politics, everyone's more or less on the same page, so there isn't any real nastiness or disputes because we already agree on the same basic things. So I guess I thought it would be OK to talk about that sort of stuff here too. But if you don't want to talk about any of that here, then that's completely A-OK.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 05:22:16 PM
Yeah, I don't think it was necessary to go into detail about Trump. This isn't really the place for that.
Different boards, different atmosphere, different rules. On Tvtropes, you can say the f-word and noone cares, but it's against the rules to acknowledge the existence of gay jokes, even when discussing the Deadpool movie, which had at least one gay joke in it.
I learned a loooong time ago to just walk away and pick your battles.

Actually, speaking of the Deadpool movie, Spade -- Linkara gave a very enthusiastically positive review to the Deadpool movie -- which makes it all the more baffling that he complained about the autism joke considering the Ryan Reynolds flick includes - last I checked - gay jokes, r@pe jokes, child abuse jokes, and a trans joke. See, if anything that one should get to him since as a member of That Guy With the Glasses/Channel Awesome, he worked alongside fellow reviewers for years who later came out as trans. Aaaand that's all I'm saying about that.  On the other hand, the Deadpool movie gives the most positive depiction of a prostitute I've seen since Morena Baccarin's other nerd role, Inara from Firefly.

I think it's possible he was trying to stay "in character" when getting indigent about the autism joke, but considering how much he loves to rant about the -isms, I kinda doubt it. I just think he missed the forests for the trees on that one.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 05:42:16 PM
Like I said,lets forget politics,I personaly dont care either way.
For the record,TvTropes is not a good example of a civil board.I dont really have to explain why.

Anyhow,like I said about the event,it was an interesting idea,but poor execution.
And a different Civil War,but I have to say it-anyone remembers when Carol tried to kill Tony because he was trying to get her to quit drinking?Pretty funny now.You think she still holds a grudge?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 06:09:02 PM
For the record,TvTropes is not a good example of a civil board.I dont really have to explain why.

Actually, you might, because I think TvTropes is actually pretty darn civil myself, at least compared to most boards.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 06:15:18 PM
They claim to be family friendly,yet there is swearing everywhere,they have an obssesion with r@pe,and they use the words "thought crime" unironicly.Thou that might be just the impression I got.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 06:21:42 PM
They claim to be family friendly,yet there is swearing everywhere,they have an obssesion with r@pe,and they use the words "thought crime" unironicly.Thou that might be just the impression I got.

There's some swearing, sure, but it's not constant, and I don't really mind it. But as for everything else you mentioned, yeah; I just don't see it. I have been on TV tropes for more than half a decade, and I have never seen anyone there obsessed with r@pe or 'thought crime' mentioned even once except maybe as either a reference to 1984 or a sarcastic joke. So I don't really have any problems with it.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 06:41:49 PM
Hasnt really attracted me to register.Just saying.But Im not that crazy about the site either,so there is that.I visited it a few times,but I dont see whats all the fuss is about.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: GhostMachine on August 12, 2016, 07:02:22 PM
Paul Jenkins is a hack, pure and simple. No other explanation.

And I take offense at the Sally Floyd character not only because she's an incredibly stupid character (She's Sarah Palin as a reporter!), but because my real last name just happens to be Floyd. The whole part about Cap being out of touch because he didn't use MySpace or watch NASCAR was beyond idiotic, and I'd love to slap the tar out of the writer for coming up with that crap.

The biggest problem with Civil War is that Stark, Pym and Richards didn't end up in prison for their actions once it was done. They were supervillains, not heroes, in that event.

Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Talavar on August 12, 2016, 07:31:11 PM
Paul Jenkins is a hack, pure and simple. No other explanation.

And I take offense at the Sally Floyd character not only because she's an incredibly stupid character (She's Sarah Palin as a reporter!), but because my real last name just happens to be Floyd. The whole part about Cap being out of touch because he didn't use MySpace or watch NASCAR was beyond idiotic, and I'd love to slap the tar out of the writer for coming up with that crap.

The biggest problem with Civil War is that Stark, Pym and Richards didn't end up in prison for their actions once it was done. They were supervillains, not heroes, in that event.

Pym at least had the good grace to be a Skrull imposter.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 07:41:19 PM
Wow, do I have a lot to respond to *deep breath*

[checks forum rules for rules against complaining about other message boards, just in case.....even though Tvtropes isn't strictly a message board...whatever]

Quote
For the record,TvTropes is not a good example of a civil board.I dont really have to explain why.

Wasn't saying it was. Because you're right, it really depends on what part of the forums. The AT4W or Jimquisition thread fine, but there's a reason barely anyone posts in the Zero Punctuation thread, it's because Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw's fans are THE most defensive mofos you'll find outside of....well, Kirkman fans. (and keep in mind, that's WITHOUT making a political reference. Fill in the blanks yourself).

Quote
Actually, you might, because I think TvTropes is actually pretty darn civil myself, at least compared to most boards.

I used to say that too. It used to be my favorite site full stop. Then drama happened. And I just stopped reading anything that had to do with forum rules, forum drama, ect. I was much happier that way. Perfect example. Some overexcited little twerp made a thread called "Invincible aka SUPER AMAZING AWESOME SUPERHERO COMIC!!!!!" I choose to believe he was like 12 or something. I made one relatively innocuous comment that I didn't like the book. And someone else just straight up tells me "#$%^ your #$%^ my good man." I immediately called him out by saying that's not civil. Then someone (might have been the same guy) said I wasn't civil either. All because I said I didn't like the book, and that I dissagreed that every superhero series should be equally as violent. So yeah, not a civil site. That was years ago. I'm pretty sure it got worse from there.

I haven't really seen firsthand evidence of this myself, but I heard the site accused of having a large Neo-Nazi userbase. Take that as you will.

The site got so bad large chunks of userbase left and made their own chintzy rippoff versions of the site on free wiki sites that barely ever get updated.

Quote
They claim to be family friendly,yet there is swearing everywhere,they have an obssesion with r@pe,and they use the words "thought crime" unironicly.Thou that might be just the impression I got.

Fast Eddie's still in charge, isn't he? We all basically accepted that as long as he was running the site, it would never improve in a meaningful way. There was a girl who work on it in the beginning who was apparently his anchor, reigning in his worst habits, but she's not around anymore. Mind you, they say Eddie works/worked at either Raven Software or Human Head, and I'm pretty sure I read Human Head got shut down, so who knows. I certainly don't. I stopped following all this stuff somewhere around "The Google incident".

Quote
Paul Jenkins is a hack, pure and simple. No other explanation.
Look, I'm not defending Frontline, I never said that in this thread, but not everything he wrote was as bad as Frontline. Case in point: the scene in Peter Parker Spider-Man where Pete has a conversation with God after Flash is in a coma. I defy anyone to tell me that scene isn't well written. Yes, the entire rest of that two parter kinda sucked, but that one scene? Golden.

Quote
The biggest problem with Civil War is that Stark, Pym and Richards didn't end up in prison for their actions once it was done. They were supervillains, not heroes, in that event.

Hey, if nothing else, we all got that awesome sequence in Thor after the real Thor came back, tracked down Tony, curb stomped him, and told him in no uncertain terms to go &*%^ himself. That was a great scene.

Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 12, 2016, 07:46:28 PM
@TvTropes: All I know is that in the threads I visit, nothing like that has ever come up. Maybe if I went exploring other parts of the board, I'd find it, but as is, I just don't see it. For better or worse.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 07:54:29 PM
That's probably for the best. The "no referencing gay jokes, even if the movie you are discussing has gay jokes in it" is the only one I've seen recently, and I think that's completely unreasonable and draconian. For example, If we're discussing Identity Crisis on FR, a book that's infamous for including a sexual assault, that had a massive effect on the DC line for years, I think it's completely reasonable to mention sexual assault in the context of the comic. Not in painstaking detail or anything like that, but still.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 07:57:44 PM
So,lets forget TvTropes.I know Im trying to.Civil War,or at least Marvel comics,lets focus on that.
Okay,Peter meeting God was a nice touch.BUT,in the very next issue he goes to make a deal with the Devil.God just told him everything will work out,and he goes to Mephisto a minute later.Yeah,Peter is an idiot.
Well,I like Invincible,but Super Amazing is waaay too strong description. :)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 08:34:21 PM
Actually, wrong comic. That was Sensational Spider-Man by Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa. I actually read that series as well, and that issue was actually real good. It's also one of the biggest reasons why One More Day just doesn't work. The story's critic's point out the God thing all the time as one of the big criticism (remember, Peter also has a seance where the spirit of Aunt May tells him to let her go, since she's lived a long live. We all know how that ended). The sycophants at CBR insisted it didn't count because the character was never explicitly referred to as God, as if that nullifies even a single criticism of One More Day.

No, the Jenkins story happens years before that. This was around the time Spider-Man 1 was coming out (Marvel did this thing where whatever villain was in the Spidey movie at the time, would have a big arc in the comics. This time it was Green Goblin. Marvel actually PROMOTING the movies? Wow, times have changed) I think it was the very next arc after the Green Goblin arc with Ramos. Can't quite remember. But no, this was before Civil War. Heck, I'm not sure it wasn't before Avengers Disassembled. It's been WAY too long.

Forgot to comment on the Carol/Tony thing. They made Carol kinda hard to like back then, but that was Busiek's run. The story was covered in both Avengers and Iron Man, actually a lot of it happened in a crossover that included Captain America's and Quicksilver's ongoings. Yes, Quicksilver had an ongoing back then, and it was really good too. I just remembered they actually reprinted it when the Age of Ultron movie came out. I gotta order that one some time. Anyway, considering Carol got kicked off the team for her alcoholism, she had a reason to be ticked at Tony (even though it was Pietro who really called her out at the hearing), but again, she was a complete screwup/burnout at this point in the comics so it was hard to sympathize with her. She also caused a passenger jet to blow up in Tony's book, so yeah, kinda a low point for Carol. Things really worked out for her eventually though. One thing we can actually thank Bendis for. I'm actually a big fan of Carol Danvers. I read her ongoing by Brian Reed and I really liked that. I still need to read the newer stuff though.

Even if you like Invincible, would you really want every superhero series to have the same amount of violence, regardless of tone or approach? Doesn't make any sense to me.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 12, 2016, 08:58:12 PM
My bad then.But Peter tends to meet God fairly often,it seems.
About Invincible,ofc I wouldnt want others to emulate it.Im first to point out it went too far with some things.But that would be a different and long subject.
I think the crossover you are talking about is Live Kree or Die.Way back when Mark Waid was writing Captain America.And for better or for worst,that the version of Carol Im mostly familiar with.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 12, 2016, 09:06:06 PM
Yep that's it. One of the first trades I ever read. I totally forgot about Waid's run on Captain America. That was a really good one too. It's funny, the 1998-2004 or so era had really good books, and Morrison and Waid's JLA over at DC at the same time. Kinda makes you wonder happened after that in some respects?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2016, 05:30:21 AM
Not a whole lot to wonder.Identity Crisis and Civil war happened.Btw,havent seen Meltzer writing comics in a long while.Identity Crisis aside,his JLA and Green Arrow were pretty good.
Not that I defending him or anything,but I guess Jenkins meant to say that the real America  isnt as ideal as Captain holds it to be.Only you know,it came out stupid.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 13, 2016, 10:24:04 AM
Never read his GA, but His JLA was decent. The main problem I had with it was the pacing sucked. I liked what McDuffie did with his groundwork more, you know, before DC mucked around with his run and fired him.

I totally got what the idea with Cap and Jenkins and Frontline was supposed to be, but the actually execution was just not handled well. There's lot of material to be had about Cap being the ideal of America that they should all strive for, and it's been utilized in the comics before (Gruenwald's Cap run, for example) and I feel the movie's have captured that very well. There's a really good fan edit of the Frontline scene that has Cap call out Floyd instead of just sit there, and it turns out I still have it on my computer all these years *deep breath* [edit for language, naturally]

Cap: Oh for $%^&'s sake, I'm going to jail soon, so I'll just say my piece and let Ben [Ulrich] translate it into [expletive deleted] for you.

Firstly, Myspace? Nascar? Are you really that #$%^ing stupid?  You're talking about cultural flotsam. If this had been happening ten years ago, you'd be lecturing me about, #$%^, beanie babies or Pokemon or some #$%^ like that. [Ok, that's actually funny considering Pokemon Go, but I digress]. America's ideals - you know, the ones we pledge allegiance to in school -- don't change. I would have thought that would have been obvious, maybe it's just been a long week for you, what with your busy schedule of being offended by superheroes and all. I mean, it was only us horrible unlicensed superheroes who sent Kang packing a little less than two years ago. You might remember how he blew up Washington DC, which your whining about causalities in New York - well, as dumba$$ed as every else you say, Miss Floyd.

And as for you "I want superheroes to be elected and accountable" spiel, sure, it sounds good, but the thing about all bad ideas is if you don't think about them too hard at first, they sound good. Where are these elected and accountable superheroes going to come from, anyway? You think anybody with half a brain and moral fiber would want Spider-Man's life [kinda funny, considering Avengers: The Initiative tackled that exact idea and did a really darn good job at it in the process. There, I just praised Dan Slott. "Hey, I got a deal for you - you get these Spider-powers, and in exchange, you get to constantly help people and be met with not just indifference but outright hostility. And on top of that your friends and family will constantly be under the threat of attack from super-powered enemies, and many of them will die.

You've overlooked, Miss Floyd, that most superheroes get their powers by accident. We have been @#$%ing blessed to get such an array of human and decent people working for the common good. But really, it's to be expected that superheroes would mostly get their abilities through luck, because no morally sound person would ever endanger their loved ones for power, or even duty. If you told American soldiers that their duty would endanger their families, they wouldn't be an army anymore! [I'm not touching that one!]

Are you starting to get it, Miss Floyd, are you @#$%ing enlightened yet?

[awkward pause]

Cap: Not surprised. Say, how about them T-Bolts! An army of supervillains! That's keen! That, plus the suddenly-involuntary "Initiative" that Tony's cooked up, means that [Nope! Not leaving this part in! WAY too political! fill in the blanks yourself, folks!] Think they'll be making "Cap was Right" T-Shirts?
------------------------------

By the way, Marvel at least were good enough sports to take the piss out of themselves. World War Hulk Frontline had a short strip making fun of how annoying Sally Floyd was, where the punchline was hear yelling at Cap's grave "When was the last time you logged into Myspace?", while Dan Slott's Avengers: The Initiative featured Floyd as a noisy, Vickie Vale-esque reporter who prompted Henry Peter Gyrich (whatever happened to that guy anyway?) to utter "I hate that woman."

Quote
The biggest problem with Civil War is that Stark, Pym and Richards didn't end up in prison for their actions once it was done. They were supervillains, not heroes, in that event.

Because I'm me, I have to ask: in the case of Hank (if it had really been him and not a Skrull) would that be better, or worse, than a grotesquely out of character Hank being ok with committing robot genocide on the grounds that "they're not real people" in the Marvel U of all places? Though at least when that happened he got called out on it.

 
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2016, 10:59:01 AM
I saw that image of CA's response before.Anything is better then just a blank stare.You know,it would have been easier to judge whos right if we actually knew what was in the freaking registration act.Nobody ever tells us what the act actually IS.

Gyrich: Call IRS,tell them to check if  miss Floyd payed all her taxes.Yeah,that was savage. :)
And good question,I havent seen him in a long while.And about the political part of Captain meme,Peter Gyrich and Gauntlet were pretty explicit about that in Initiative #1.They flat out say they are training a superhero army for deployment in Irak.Word for word.

Meltzers Archer Quest had Oliver an Roy collecting all the mementoes Oliver left around in life(because Oliver returned from the dead a bit before that),like the diamond tipped arrow,or the pickup truck from Hard traveling heroes.It sounds a bit corny,but its a good story.

The aftermentioned group,in similar line up,also got a free pass for everything they did in Hickmans New Avengers.Thou,it maybe be that some of this played a part in Tonys retirement.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 13, 2016, 12:19:14 PM
And good question,I havent seen him in a long while.And about the political part of Captain meme,Peter Gyrich and Gauntlet were pretty explicit about that in Initiative #1.They flat out say they are training a superhero army for deployment in Irak.Word for word.

Absolutely. I haven't gone back and re-read (God, I hope it holds up) but Slott and Gage's Initiative was a damn good book that completely owned up to how f-ed up a concept the Initiative was. They made no bones about it: the young heroes in the book were child soldiers. They trained Cloud-9 (her power was she could ride on a cloud) to be a sniper. The main villain of the series was literally called "K.I.A." if I recall correctly.

Come to think of it, that means the book was essentially Kyle and Yost's New X-Men run if it was actually good, didn't have the worst pacing in comics, and was actually self-aware. Ironic considering the last non-crossover issue of NXM had one of the characters insult The Initiative ("Some moron named 'Justice'", yeah, screw you too Hellion)

Quote
Meltzers Archer Quest had Oliver an Roy collecting all the mementoes Oliver left around in life(because Oliver returned from the dead a bit before that),like the diamond tipped arrow,or the pickup truck from Hard traveling heroes.It sounds a bit corny,but its a good story.
I did have an interest in reading that one back in the day. I read Kevin Smith Green Arrow run and I loved that, even if it had to be a little edgy for edgy's sake, but this is Kevin Smith, and you know what? It was Green Arrow, there's precedent for that too. And it's not like Judd Winick didn't own up to Mia being a former prostitute either. He treated that responsibly.

Quote
The aftermentioned group,in similar line up,also got a free pass for everything they did in Hickmans New Avengers.Thou,it maybe be that some of this played a part in Tonys retirement.

Well, if nothing else, the time-displaced younger Beast called out present day Beast for how much of a massive hypocrite he'd been for the last years of comics, so that was pretty sweet.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2016, 12:55:22 PM
I havent read Winicks run,and nothing I heard about it makes me want to;but Smith-Meltzer era was very good.And Smith was pretty self-aware there.And he had a good grasp of DC characters.Some cool guest appearances there.

Initiative and Avengers Academy were good examples of introducing new characters,as opposed to basically everything Marvel does now.But IIRC,mostly everyone there got killed in a attempt to make Arcade look cool.

"Hey,Cyclops,you killed the professor.Now excuse me,I got planets to blow up in another title"
I know I complained about it way too much but-Avengers vs X-men-ANOTHER screwup that Tony is almost single-handedly responsible for.Ofc,some part of the blame lies with Wolverine.And just like Civil War,we get to see it in reruns this year.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 13, 2016, 01:23:13 PM
Oh boy, let's not get into AVX again. Just think, if Marvel didn't take the timeskip as a opportunity to add in the Inhuman B.S. and Wolverine didn't go and croak, we'd STILL be hearing Him and Scott kvetch back and forth about him killing the old man.

Don't get ME started on Avengers Arena. Before the Inhuman B.S. settled in and I was all "nope, not buying any X-Men books until Marvel stops acting like a bunch of petulant children", I had already decided to boycott the otherwise-pretty appealing All-New X-Men purely because the writer of Avengers Arena/Undercover wrote it.

Even ignoring the callous disregard for established, cult-favorite characters that people might actually want to read about because "muh drama" (with Mettle dying in the first flipping issue), Hopeless sabotaged his own creations to boot. As soon as we were introduced to Deathlockett, I was like "this is one the greatest new characters in the past 15 years of comics". She was a teenage girl cyborg with a pandabear tank top. She was like if someone looked at Molly from Runaways and went "Nah G, we can make her WAY more awesome." Cats in the letters pages were already calling for this new bundle of wonderful to get her ongoing series running for one thousand issues and I was 100% on board for that.

And then Hopeless turned her into a grouchy emo girl who wanted to kill Captain America and I was like "I never want to see this character again." And I didn't, because none of the characters from this series (including the established ones) ever appeared again, last I checked (and no, Battleworld Runaways doesn't count). And then Marvel had to rub acid in the wound by having her appear in some mobile game a while back.....as a villain.

I have a lot of "If I ever write for Marvel" anecdotes. One of them is: If I ever write for Marvel, I'll bring Deathlockette back and completely ignore Undercover. If I reference it at all I'll pull a Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker and go "Finally, we can leave all that crap in Bagalia behind us."
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2016, 01:49:51 PM
Lets just,when Wolverine Lives #1 hits the stores(and we all know something like that will happen,with weapon etched 3D covers),I wont be waiting in line to buy it.But Im sure Death of X will remind us of that glorious era.
It think the biggest irony is that pretty much everything since Utopia was meant to paint Scott as an anti-hero,or a straight up villain,but ended up giving him more fans then ever.
Another old complain,but Robinson(another guy I not all that fond of in newer time) about killing Namor because of his crimes during New Avengers,yet he forgot everyone else.Okay,Reed is writen out of the universe,but Doctor Strange and others are still around.Thou,Namor is coming back now that Marvel had movie rights to him,so much for that.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 13, 2016, 02:17:04 PM
Another old complain,but Robinson(another guy I not all that fond of in newer time) about killing Namor because of his crimes during New Avengers,yet he forgot everyone else.

LOL. I totally forgot about that. That was definitely a thing that happened.

Quote
Okay,Reed is writen out of the universe,but Doctor Strange and others are still around.Thou,Namor is coming back now that Marvel had movie rights to him,so much for that.

I think the Fantastic Four has suffered enough by this point.  :P That just reminds me, going back to Civil War, at least there was World War Hulk, where Hulk also got a chance to curb stomp Iron Man, AND Doctor Strange...and I'm pretty sure he beat up Black Bolt too didn't he? Planet Hulk/World War Hulk was actually really good.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2016, 02:26:46 PM
All things considered,Secret War provided a dignified sendoff to Fantastic Four,and even left a hook for a possible return.So i don't have any complains there(about the epilogue itself).Actually,you could look at Secret Wars as a finale for the whole Marvel universe.
Now that you reminded me,Im sure there will be a Planet Hulk 2,whats with the event partially being adapted in a movie.I know Bruce is dead,but I dont really see that sticking either.Because movie.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: daglob on August 13, 2016, 04:55:18 PM
Nah, Bruce will stay dead, just like Clark, other Bruce, Logan (95 weeks and counting), Matt, Hal, Johnny, Ben, Barry, J'onn... oh, wait...

Does anyone remember when they killed everyone on Earth in an issue of Dr. Strange? Maybe twice? Or did they decide that was an illusion?

I object to Bruce's death on the grounds that it is just a publicity stunt, to try and make people believe that  Civil War II is serious. The logic behind this is a free pass to kill every super-being in the Marvel Universe, because they MIGHT go bad at some time (hey, radiation tuned The Angel bad once).

And didn't Marvel do a miniseries that resulted in death being more permanent than before? Or did they make that didn't happen?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 13, 2016, 05:27:54 PM
And didn't Marvel do a miniseries that resulted in death being more permanent than before? Or did they make that didn't happen?

I don't know about a miniseries, but I do know that Marvel apparently had a policy in the early 2000's or so that anyone who was dead was DEADER THAN DEAD. Glad to see that sticked.;)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 13, 2016, 05:50:43 PM
Yeah,If your Jean Grey.Anyone else...not so much.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on August 13, 2016, 06:17:11 PM
Yeah,If your Jean Grey.Anyone else...not so much.

I was being sarcastic...
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Talavar on August 13, 2016, 06:37:06 PM
It's true though.  Despite her reputation of dying and coming back all the time, original Jean Grey (not the time displaced teenager) has been dead quite a while by comic standards.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 14, 2016, 05:38:15 AM
Another earlier thing;not to defend Dan Slott or anything(the guy is a jerk),but he had some good stuff.Like Arkham Asylum:Living Hell,Thing,She-Hulk,Initiative,I would even add Mighty Avengers there.
Im not that versed in his Spiderman run,outside a few odd collections here and there.And Superior.Which we discussed a few times before.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 15, 2016, 02:56:09 PM
Yeah, I read AA: Living Hell and I thought that was good (I've heard people say Magpie was out of character, but I can live with that, plus gonna characters acting out of character in a Dan Slott book?). She-Hulk I read a decent chunk of back in the day, and I actually really liked that. Though it was the right book at the right time. It had far-reaching continuity nods and used a lot of more obscure characters at the time (like the New Warriors). This was kinda a novelty at the time because Marvel wasn't big on that, so it stood out. That being sad, there were warning signs. It was nice that there were Young Avengers cameos but an out of character Stature and Vision acting like morons and getting their a$$es kicked by Boomerang the Ox? That's modern Slott through and through (see the Young Allies acting like morons and getting their a$$es kicked during Spider-Island). Never read Thing, but it seemed like a fun book in line with She-Hulk. I'd give it a soft pass.

Mighty Avengers was a mixed bag in my opinion. The book always felt like it had potential it never lived up too; it was writing cheques Slott couldn't cash.  Then after the book was over Slott took to twitter to blame editorial meddling for the book not being as good (which came off a bit like sour grapes IMO). Besides, Gage wrote half that book anyway.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 15, 2016, 04:16:36 PM
There was also Spiderman/Human Torch,another fun series with a ton of continuity nods.Spider-buggy anyone?(okay,its not that obscure,but a nice touch)But I guess Slott kinda lost that energy on the main title.Or hes too busy tweeting.

Okay,Mighty Avengers had its ups and downs,no denying that.And Im not that big on Frank Chos artwork btw.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on August 15, 2016, 10:04:44 PM
I actually forgot about Spider-Man/Human Torch. I did read that years ago; it was fun. I know a lot of the critics of Slott's run who are longtime Spidey fans pointed to the mini and wondered why more of his run wasn't like that.

Actually, Frank Cho did the art for Bendis' run on Mighty Avengers, not Slott's. That was Koi Pham and later Rafa Sandoval (neither of which I'm much of a fan of) and Neil Edwards (who like Steve Kurth, is very much discount Bryan Hitch. I've found he's improved admirably over the years).
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 16, 2016, 05:49:52 AM
Heh,I guess the whole thing kinda blended together.It was a long time ago.
Im not a huge fan of Rafa Sandoval either.But I mentioned that before.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on September 09, 2016, 01:46:55 PM
To kinda return to Linkara being overly sensitive about stuff-in a recent review of Star Trek/Green lantern he lists almost all unfortunate implications various series had over the years(like Cisko being space Jeezus),and then blows up about Enterprise supporting genocide.Only that being one of the few Enterprise episodes I do remember(Dear Doctor),it plays out nothing like that.And really,there was no simple choice there.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: kkhohoho on September 09, 2016, 05:12:28 PM
To kinda return to Linkara being overly sensitive about stuff-in a recent review of Star Trek/Green lantern he lists almost all unfortunate implications various series had over the years(like Cisko being space Jeezus),and then blows up about Enterprise supporting genocide.Only that being one of the few Enterprise episodes I do remember(Dear Doctor),it plays out nothing like that.And really,there was no simple choice there.

He was trying to be funny. No need to take it so seriously.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on September 09, 2016, 05:49:38 PM
No,he was pretty serious about it.Granted,the evolution doesnt really work like that,but hey,its Star Trek.
Honestly,Im not the greatest ST fan around.I saw that episode once on TV.
On the other hand,if your reviewing ST comics,dressed in Star Fleet uniform while wielding Nitpickers guide to Star Trek,you should get that the episode presented a no win situation.Which motivated the whole Prime Directive thing.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on September 09, 2016, 11:22:38 PM
Haven't seen the review yet, but yeah, I'm sure he was being serious, since this isn't the first time he ranted about that specific thing. I read his Tumblr and he ranted about that there once.
Title: Since this already ended up being the At4w thread...
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 20, 2017, 10:04:31 AM
I really fell behind in the past year or so,so checking whats new,I see Trouble #3 is reviewed.  :lol:
You do have to wonder how high were Quesada and the gang when they came up with this?
Title: Re: Since this already ended up being the At4w thread...
Post by: kkhohoho on February 20, 2017, 03:30:38 PM
I really fell behind in the past year or so,so checking whats new,I see Trouble #3 is reviewed.  :lol:

...

<__<

>__>

>__<

We're really in a lot of trouble-- {is shot}
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Deaths Jester on February 20, 2017, 04:30:00 PM
This bullet brought to you by DJ's pistol. Thank you.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 20, 2017, 06:09:14 PM
And everyone starts wondering-Why the hell did Peter save aunt May?Shes kind of a terrible person.
But then again,Mark Millar and likable characters
(http://68.media.tumblr.com/7d47dbc24fe5232adbf10a0316530981/tumblr_nlgsg5YFLu1qzptwgo1_500.gif)
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Tomato on February 26, 2017, 10:36:27 PM
Trouble is a fiasco, but ultimately a harmless one. Aunt May's done enough questionable things (like knowingly harboring an escaped supervillain in her home despite her nephew living there at the time) even without that being in continuity, and it's one of those books that would be safely swept into obscure continuity hell if not for AT4W.

Don't get me wrong, it is not by ANY means good, but Trouble is nothing compared to the likes of Sins Past and OMD.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on February 27, 2017, 06:10:57 AM
Well,thats true.And it contradicts enough established continuity,that its pretty safe to say its not canon.
Title: New 52 autopsy
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 02, 2017, 05:14:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgU3MBShRNY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgU3MBShRNY)
But you probably heard it all before.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Tomato on April 02, 2017, 05:51:30 PM
Fair warning, that IS an april fools video, so the opening is a bit odd. Linkara (and most of the other producers) has got a running gag of doing mock versions of other channel's formats, and this year was Jim Sterling.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 02, 2017, 07:37:24 PM
Everything else,was unfortunatly,true.High collars and everything.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 03, 2017, 06:12:55 AM
Oh snap! I didn't see that one yet. Definitely going to have to check that one out later. I loves me some Jim effing Sterling Son.

*watches first few minutes, bursts out laughing* Oh my goodness, wearing the getup, he's a dead ringer for Jim. Bloody brilliant! I was kinda expecting him to do the accent though....OMG Z-Bots I totally had those as a kid. Awesome.

On a slightly related note, the announcement of Linkara's Exile's retrospective (which I haven't actually watched yet)_ actually got me back into the book after probably close to a decade. I'm knee deep in the Proteus arc, and man was that a great book.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: detourne_me on April 03, 2017, 08:21:22 AM
A pretty good Jim Sterling parody!
I would love to see some comics reviews from Jim... maybe the 90s Dark Horse AVP stuff.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: BentonGrey on April 03, 2017, 02:21:51 PM
That was quite entertaining and quite accurate.  That's pretty much exactly what I said at the time. 
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: spydermann93 on April 03, 2017, 11:17:47 PM
It's Lin ****** kara, son! :lol:
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Tomato on April 04, 2017, 01:44:34 AM
On a slightly related note, the announcement of Linkara's Exile's retrospective (which I haven't actually watched yet)_ actually got me back into the book after probably close to a decade. I'm knee deep in the Proteus arc, and man was that a great book.

Ironic, since that's about where Linkara fell off before coming back to the series for the retrospective.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 04, 2017, 06:09:45 AM
Don't know about Linkara, since I haven't watched the retrospective, but me dropping off at about this spot wasn't due to lack of interest or declining quality IMO, but simply being distracted by other things. In fact where I am right now I feel it got a lot better due to the artist changing from Jim Calafiore to Paul Peletier.
Title: Counting this as an at4w thread
Post by: HarryTrotter on August 22, 2017, 07:07:58 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st5I3RqvRPY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st5I3RqvRPY)
Linkara reviews first 4 episodes of JoJos bizarre adventure.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 30, 2019, 06:16:44 AM
Im trying to catch up on Superman stories between Man of Steel and the triangle era and I reached that Sleez story.
And Linkara DID review that.
Honestly,didnt know Oberon was human,all this time I thought he was a New God.
And contrary to popular belief,Superman and Big Barda didnt actually...they just kissed.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 30, 2019, 12:46:59 PM
If I recall correctly Oberon was a carnival folk.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 30, 2019, 12:57:23 PM
He was the asistant of the first Mister Miracle.The guy Scott Free got the name and the costume.
Everything else about the story...the eww element aside- Sleez mindcontrols Superman and Big Barda,tries to make a video nasty starring them so he could sell the tape and finance an army to attack Apokolips.Why not just have Superman beat up Darkseid,or at least rob a bank?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Deaths Jester on March 30, 2019, 05:04:26 PM
...because Sleez's powers could only make folks "surrender to their baser desires" - per DC's words - instead of true mind control.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 30, 2019, 05:13:23 PM
Not really.The comic kinda states that hes using the MegaRod to control them.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: daglob on March 30, 2019, 05:40:32 PM
I remember Oberon and Fire having a kind of a "thing" going.

Wow, how long ago was that?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 30, 2019, 06:05:49 PM
Justice league International?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Deaths Jester on March 30, 2019, 09:07:00 PM
...maybe Sleez had heard Amazing Grace bragging about bedding Superman and how his super...appendage.... was, that he just had to see it himself, Harry?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on March 31, 2019, 03:47:34 AM
Look the important thing is that storyline gave us the memetic awesomeness that is Darkseid chilling out on a couch. Which caught on to the point that someone made an entire Tumblr account devoted to images of Darkseid sitting a some kind of comfy chair, couch of throne.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on March 31, 2019, 05:44:50 AM
...maybe Sleez had heard Amazing Grace bragging about bedding Superman and how his super...appendage.... was, that he just had to see it himself, Harry?
Hes supposed to be exiled so I doubt hes up to date...crud,I already gave this more thought then John Byrne ever did.And I guess Sleez and Grossman (really) subscribe to that theory of Superman needing super strong women for...that.

The comfy chair is a reference to a scene from New Gods where Orion comes home and Darkseid is chilling in a wooden chair.Similar thing also happens a bit later in Doctor Fate.And JLI.It actually happens a lot doesnt it?
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: Silver Shocker on April 01, 2019, 11:23:18 AM
So that didn't in fact originated in the Superman story, and the creative teams were in on the joke even back then? Neat, today I learned something.

Anyway, Linkara did mention in his review that most of the stuff involving what Sleez was using his powers to make Superman and Big Barda do was implied. And really, comics that weren't Mature readers, from that era, tended to be more implicit in terms of such things. As one of the producers of Doctor Who put it "There's no hanky-panky on the Tardis." At some point they got less subtle, it was probably sometime between the 90's where the Spider-Man writer were trying to spice up Peter and MJ's marriage, and let's say when Scott Summers started a relationship with Emma Frost.

Quote
subscribe to that theory of Superman needing super strong women for...that.

Linkara mentioned that being bullcrap in his review of JLA: Act of God, and I'd say the logic involved makes about as much sense as most things in the comic book superhero genre, relatively speaking.
Title: Re: 15 Things wrong with Civil War
Post by: HarryTrotter on April 01, 2019, 11:49:46 AM
While it didnt go full mature readers,I assume it was a case of "look what we can get away with".
Anyway,others wrote about this story at leght and I cant really add anything else except WHO in the name of Rao thought this was a good idea?!