:spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler:
Seriously? That is it? All that time, all the delays, all of it for what? Civil War #7 was so hyped and then just landed with a thud. The boards are alive with the sound of anger all over the net. IGN was right when they voted Tony Stark (at least as he appears in Civil War and it's tie-ins) as villian of the year in '06. I wanted some redemption of the character. This can't really be the way that he's going to be going forward. He is such and egotistical, over the top arrogant, smarmy sack of sludge here. He's smug facing off with Captain America who is supposed to be his best friend. He's sexist and demeaning to Maria Hill (who in my opinion so richly deserved it) and then is sipping lattes with Miriam Sharpe and smiling on the SHIELD helicarrier while his 'friend' Steve Rogers is rotting in jail, and apparently not the nice, pleasant Negative Zone prison either. Not a touch of remorse for what he's done to anyone. Locking up HEROES, taking away their personal and private freedoms (even the ones that did register had to give that up). betraying long time friends and allies...the list goes on. As portrayed here, he is pretty much a low-rent Dr. Doom in a lot of ways. Captain America realized that this particular argument could not be solved with fists anymore. Resisting was the right thing to do, but this was not the way to do it. Cap is a soldier of the people and once he lost touch with what they wanted (even though it means bad things for them too) it was over. Cap, Spidey, and the rest knew that this was the first step on a slippery slope that could lead to something out of Orwell's 1984, not just for their fellow heroes but for the common man as well. The common person in the Marvel U doesn't see that at this time, they just want to feel safe...and they will just like most Americans did after 911 when all the legislation was going through. However, now they are questioning if it was a good idea and the public opinion has really swung the other way and a lot of common people think that government may have overstepped it's bounds. The same will probably happen eventually in the Marvel U when the rest of Tony's, Reed's, and Hank's police state ideas come out. Throwing people into lockdown without rights, or a trial for eternity just because they are different? Yeah, it didn't go over in the X-Men books years ago, but apparently fascism is more palatable now to the common Marvel inhabitant; I mean it worked so well for America during WWII and at Gitmo, right? I see a lot of parallels to DC's Kingdom Come in this story. Captain America (Superman) has given up his never-ending battle because the people turned their backs on him. They wanted to feel safer so they embrace a new, harsher way of dealing with superpowered threats put forth by Iron Man (Magog). Eventually, the world is in the toilet, and people find humanity is losing ground the the new regime. Will this all be tied up later by the return of Captain America? Will Miriam Sharpe threaten to leak the superheroes secret ID's to keep them in check? If so, what happens when those who have registered start seeing their loved ones gunned down by psychotics? Will Tony just play the fiddle while the whole thing burns? I know both sides are heroes, but in this single issue from Simon punching Cloak to Tony having a coffee break with Miriam, the pro-reg people are portrayed as having no qualms about trampling anything or anyone who gets in the way of their government ordained rightness. They are shown to be thugs and bullies to any super powered person they come in contact with despite any personal feelings or experiences they may have with that person. "Hey, I know that the people of America owe you their lives about 100 times over, but they want you arrested now because you think you are entitled to the same freedoms that they are". I was so angry about this that I nearly tore my issue in half. Security is more important than freedom, is that the message? Joe Q, this is the ending we didn't want, you were right about that, but not the one we needed. The Marvel Universe: where great power means a responsibility to a government mandate to join the army or face a lifetime of imprisonment without trial. :thumbdown:
I bought and read all the Civil Wars yesterday. I have to agree with you Spe-Dog, the ending was, at best, anticlimatic. Not even just Iron Man but many others on his side I'm having a hard time viewing as heroes right now.
In Illuminati, Namor, Black Panther and Dr. Strange were appalled at Iron Man's plans (which is at odds with Strange's later conversation with Uatu in CW #7, where his rationale for not getting involved was rather weak I thought; especially when in Illuminati he called the entire plan manipulative and playing off of people's fears).
I also don't buy Cap's surrender or his reason for doing it. I don't accept that damaging a few streets and apartment buildings would cause a complete collapse of Cap's psyche.
Iron Man doesn't even acknowledge Dr. Strange's or Luke Cage's arguements for why what's being done is wrong. Reed Richards doesn't even acknowledge his wife's heartfelt plea that you can't view people as just numbers and statistics. Yet at the end he has his own plea for his wife that she (apparently) accepts. Ugh.
Thor's hammer Mjolnir has always been very picky about who it would let hold it. I don't believe for a second that a psychotic fake Thor would have been able to wield the hammer.
The story had some good moments at various points but the ending/resolution was atrocious. So is the US a police state now? That's how it sounded to me. The only ray of hope I see is that the New Avengers under Luke Cage are not giving up the fight. I think it's going to be in May where they have the New Avengers fighting Iron Man's new team (the Mighty Avengers). We'll see where that goes.
DK
Quote from: Spe-Dog on February 23, 2007, 08:30:16 AM
:spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler: :spoiler:
The boards are alive with the sound of anger all over the net. IGN was right when they voted Tony Stark (at least as he appears in Civil War and it's tie-ins) as villian of the year in '06. I wanted some redemption of the character. This can't really be the way that he's going to be going forward. He is such and egotistical, over the top arrogant, smarmy sack of sludge here.
I can't speak for New Avengers since I don't read it but in his own title this wasn't the case. Tony was genuinely conflicted about what he was doing almost to the point of a full on depression. He was also torn up by the fact that he and Cap were at odds in Casualties of War. The inconsistency between those portrayals and the one in CW is why I say Millar wasn't writing Tony Stark he was writing the Invincible Generic Rich Guy. If Millar had actually portrayed that insecurity and inner conflict for not just Tony but all the pro-reg heros, fan reaction wouldn't have been so one sided and Marvel wouldn't need as much damage control for those characters now.
I'm glad to hear that Agent. One of my friends is a huge, huge Avengers nut (of which Iron Man has frequently been a part of so I've read quite a few issues over the years) and I didn't care for the CW portrayal of him. It's good that, at least in his own title, he wasn't portrayed so one-dimensionally.
DK
[quote author=Dweomer Knight link=topic=41342.msg575927#msg575927 date=1172253070
Thor's hammer Mjolnir has always been very picky about who it would let hold it. I don't believe for a second that a psychotic fake Thor would have been able to wield the hammer.
DK
[/quote]
That hammer wasn't Mjolnir by the way. Reed made it, just a techno war hammer made to mimic and look like Mjolnir.
We've been talking about a lot of the same stuff in the comic review thread, and I mostly agree. I can see why people would want super-powered people registered with the government, but the methods and attitudes of the pro-reg side ranges between super-villainous to the just plain jerky.
Quote from: captmorgan72 on February 23, 2007, 12:00:39 PM
[quote author=Dweomer Knight link=topic=41342.msg575927#msg575927 date=1172253070
Thor's hammer Mjolnir has always been very picky about who it would let hold it. I don't believe for a second that a psychotic fake Thor would have been able to wield the hammer.
DK
That hammer wasn't Mjolnir by the way. Reed made it, just a techno war hammer made to mimic and look like Mjolnir.
[/quote]
I hate it when I somehow miss stuff like that.
DK
[EDIT] Though it makes me wonder, if it was just a techno hammer, why go through all that trouble of falling from the sky biz?
The hammer that fell from the sky in Fantastic Four was the real Mjolnir; the guy who picked it up is still conspicuously absent. The hammer Bizarro-Thor was using wasn't it.
The problem with Civil War is, they've painted themselves into a corner.
They can't eventually pull some sort of cop out like DC did with Hal Jordan and make it so Tony wasn't responsible for his actions, and I don't see any way that Tony can redeem himself and still be a hero. What he's done has gone beyond misguidance or misunderstanding and into the realm of villainy.
Iron Man used to be one of my favorite Marvel heroes. Probably my second favorite after Cap, in fact. But the character has been screwed with an twisted so much that I can't stand him now.
Hopefully, they'll do some kind of sequel that has a lot of damage control. Stark as head of S.H.I.E.L.D.? I don't think so. Is the Fury controlled LMD still running around? If so, then Nick could screw up Stark's plans considerably.
I hate to say it, but I wish someone would assassinate Stark, and make it so they can't later bring him back and reveal it was actually an LMD that was shot or whatever. Tony Stark is now one of the most dangerous villains in the MU, and is NOT a hero, and some kind of `he was being manipulated by Psycho Man or Hate Monger' or `its Kang....again' type of bs to let him off the hook will NOT be acceptable.
Civil War should have ended with either some of the pro-reg heroes realizing that they've been going about things the wrong way and turning on Stark, not with the pro-reg side winning, no matter if the public was on their side or not.
The whole series shows another reason why Mark Millar sucks as a writer and why Joe Q should be ousted as EIC, because it wouldn't ended the way it did with someone competent behind it and might have actually been a good series if characters were actually written in character.
I hope Marvel's readership drops off sharply as a result of this crap and the powers that be have the sense to fire Joe Q. But that probably won't happen.
Quote from: GhostMachine on February 23, 2007, 03:07:20 PM
I hope Marvel's readership drops off sharply as a result of this crap and the powers that be have the sense to fire Joe Q. But that probably won't happen.
That's because WE are not the totality of marvel readership. And honestly I dont mind the ending too much, I think it's kind of hardcore that the badguys won. Then again Im the kind of guy who loves movies with unhappy endings as they seem more realist to me. Also with the lack of tons of mutants well now unregistered heroes are the new mutant, and well worth a few years of original storytelling hooks. Also I think it is a great political commentary, I mean expect to see "dont blame me, I was anti-registration" bumper stickers and "free negative zone detainee" t-shirts. ;)
Was everything perfectly executed? Nope. Am I glad that Iron man acted the way he did? Nope.
And on the subject of clone thors hammer let me add one thing: pay attention to the pannel. You will notice it was not much harder than clone thors head (heheeh, ouch!).
And on Captain America I agree with one thing he said: "We are not fighting for the people, we are simply fighting". It is sad that he surrendered but then again his oponents where not going to until every innocent hero and civilian had suffered a considerable price.
I hope the World War Hulk event has Hulk beating the ever-loving **** out of most of the mainstream Marvel characters when he comes back. Come on, the only pro-reg hero Hulk couldn't wipe the floor with is the Sentry, and they're supposedly BFFs anyway. Maybe the Sentry will help him.
Well, if Hulk inlist some of his new friends, then the eorlds gonna have issues.
This was an excerpt from Axel Alonzo's comments on the Newsarama site at the editors panel yesterday:
"The growing diversity of the Marvel Comics' line excited Axel Alonso. He discussed how Civil War used superheroes to comment on the cost of freedom and how much freedom people will give up to have security."
They don't get it. The thing that gets me is the people of the Marvel U are pretty ungrateful to their protectors. It's not how many freedoms and liberties the people gave up to feel secure, just that the people sacrificed the HEROES' freedom and liberties so that the people could feel safe. This costs the average person nothing, while it costs the hero EVERYTHING.
Quote from: Spe-Dog on February 24, 2007, 11:33:05 AM
This was an excerpt from Axel Alonzo's comments on the Newsarama site at the editors panel yesterday:
"The growing diversity of the Marvel Comics' line excited Axel Alonso. He discussed how Civil War used superheroes to comment on the cost of freedom and how much freedom people will give up to have security."
They don't get it. The thing that gets me is the people of the Marvel U are pretty ungrateful to their protectors. It's not how many freedoms and liberties the people gave up to feel secure, just that the people sacrificed the HEROES' freedom and liberties so that the people could feel safe. This costs the average person nothing, while it costs the hero EVERYTHING.
I can see that though. The normal people aren't stand-ins for normal people in real life, the super-heroes are, and most of them were willing to give up almost everything for this "greater security" too.
Quote from: Spe-Dog on February 24, 2007, 11:33:05 AM
This was an excerpt from Axel Alonzo's comments on the Newsarama site at the editors panel yesterday:
"The growing diversity of the Marvel Comics' line excited Axel Alonso. He discussed how Civil War used superheroes to comment on the cost of freedom and how much freedom people will give up to have security."
They don't get it. The thing that gets me is the people of the Marvel U are pretty ungrateful to their protectors. It's not how many freedoms and liberties the people gave up to feel secure, just that the people sacrificed the HEROES' freedom and liberties so that the people could feel safe. This costs the average person nothing, while it costs the hero EVERYTHING.
Dude... comment = criticism in this case. The idea is that if the state of the marvel universe makes you mad the current state of politics should make you mad. Dont think of it as a comic about everyone's favorite hero beating up a villain and going home. Think of it as a comic about the government changing its definition of who is good and who is bad, of what certain crimes mean... and people having to choose if they are going to sit idly or fight back. Also it's not canned rebellion like the V for Vendetta movie... here they fought the law and the law won.
I get it. It's just that in the real world, the good guys don't win; more often than not the bad ones do. I expect better in the comics. Even when something like this happens there is some light or redeeming quality shown and here there was none. The arrogance of the pro-reg side, in particular Iron Man in this issue really left a bad taste in my mouth. I almost expect him to show up in Cap's cell to do the "I told you so" dance. In this issue, and others, a lot of the pro-reg side have been portrayed as pretty cavalier when it came to FORCING friends to register or JAILING them. These are people that they have bled with and fought with. I wanted to see more conflict and emotion from the pro-reg heroes and all I got was Tony being the king of jerks and Simon's emotion of anger that the plan was screwed up. Aside from that, no one among the pro-reg side even gave a care that they were not jailing villians, but heroes and friends. That should mean something more.
That's one of my biggest gripes about CW:
If people had been written in character and the pro-reg side had acted as heroes conflicted because they have to battle and capture other heroes...some of whom they've been close allies and friends with....it might have worked. Instead, they acted more or less as cold-blooded jerks who didnt care that they were battling other heroes and used tactics that were more suited to what villains would do, such as the Thor clone. It doesn't matter that the public was on the pro-reg side, because the pro-reg `heroes' crossed the line and committed villainous acts.
So I guess once the Mighty Avengers series hits the stands, we'll have yet another villain book out.
Quote from: GhostMachine on February 24, 2007, 10:49:42 PM
That's one of my biggest gripes about CW:
If people had been written in character and the pro-reg side had acted as heroes conflicted because they have to battle and capture other heroes...some of whom they've been close allies and friends with....it might have worked. Instead, they acted more or less as cold-blooded jerks who didnt care that they were battling other heroes and used tactics that were more suited to what villains would do, such as the Thor clone. It doesn't matter that the public was on the pro-reg side, because the pro-reg `heroes' crossed the line and committed villainous acts.
So I guess once the Mighty Avengers series hits the stands, we'll have yet another villain book out.
Agreed. The pro-reg side was portrayed so one-dimensionally that it's difficult to ascribe anything less than outright villainy to them. I'm glad that Stark was portrayed as more conflicted in the actual Iron Man comic but, unfortunately, a lot of people will read CW but not the individual character titles.
Just my opinion, but I
hated the whole mutant hysteria thing. You've got a 100' Dormmamu striding down New York, Galactus trying to eat the planet on numerous occassions, Terminus wipes out the entire Savage Land etc. etc. and what do people freak out about: "Jubilee, get her!" I understand that mutant hatred was meant to mimic discrimination in its various forms but within the MU itself, it made little sense to me that people were so worked up over mutants but had no problems with other hero types; many of whom were vastly more powerful and dangerous.
DK
DK, I understand your confusion about the mutant hysteria stories, but I would suggest that you pick up Alex Ross and Kurt Busiek's 'Marvels.' It does a really wonderful job of creating a discernable.......thread in the Marvel Universe. It's a really interesting look at the births of the the heroes and villains from the eyes of a man living in the time. It actually, at least to my thinking, provided a very good explination about why people were so upset about mutants.
Quote from: BentonGrey on February 26, 2007, 09:41:56 AM
DK, I understand your confusion about the mutant hysteria stories, but I would suggest that you pick up Alex Ross and Kurt Busiek's 'Marvels.' It does a really wonderful job of creating a discernable.......thread in the Marvel Universe. It's a really interesting look at the births of the the heroes and villains from the eyes of a man living in the time. It actually, at least to my thinking, provided a very good explination about why people were so upset about mutants.
How should I look for them? Are they trades?
DK
I believe it's only been done as a graphic novel, at least that's what I've got. I'll encourage you to pick it up, it is a REALLY wonderful story, and an absolute delight for any Marvel fan.
Quote from: Dweomer Knight on February 26, 2007, 09:33:23 AM
Just my opinion, but I hated the whole mutant hysteria thing. You've got a 100' Dormmamu striding down New York, Galactus trying to eat the planet on numerous occassions, Terminus wipes out the entire Savage Land etc. etc. and what do people freak out about: "Jubilee, get her!" I understand that mutant hatred was meant to mimic discrimination in its various forms but within the MU itself, it made little sense to me that people were so worked up over mutants but had no problems with other hero types; many of whom were vastly more powerful and dangerous.
DK
well, we got billions of dollars being put into an ineffective war machine (killing thousands on all sides) that could be better spent on eliminating poverty and researching renewable energy resources, but still people are afraid of two men getting married or a teenager choosing not to have a baby...
and thats the essence of the x-men, and why for the most part they've been much more popular than Avengers et al,
but well, Civil War kicked in and ideological differences create controversy, and look at what we got, the new avengers have topped x-men.
its a rather interesting shift having stories about the underdogs and the discriminated upon, to having stories about upholding and evolving the status quo (illuminati being a prime example)...
actually strike that, its plain demographics, marvel has been built upon it. baby boomers and generations afterwards are the inspiration and reflection of marvel comics since peter parker was a twinkle in Stan Lee's eye.
Ha, not exactly DM....but your general point is true enough.
I have no problem with creating conflict amongst heroes in order to tell a good story. But one of the things I would expect with the writing is to stay consistent with the characters.
Cap is a soldier. And by that account has a good understanding of what war is all about. How many countless times has Cap been involved in battles/conflicts that resulted in destruction of civilian property? To just all of a sudden throw his arms in the air and surrender seems a bit flat. It feels as if the writer didn't know how to end the event. I would have preferred to see Cap go out fighting, maybe getting jumped by several other "heroes" and winding up in the hospital - with the head of the resistance out of action the remaining force begins to crumble into defeat.
We already knew Cap was going to lose - he had too many odds stacked against him. It would be foolish to believe that Cap and his few resistance fighters would be able to defeat S.H.I.E.L.D. and overturn a political law in a 7 issue event.
In the Captain America Iron Man Casualties of War, Captain America says a line that reminded me why he's a "hero". Cap said, "What's right is what's right. If you believe it you stand up for it." This is a man who is standing for what he believes in, even when the idea is not popular, even when public opinion is against him. Yet in Issue 7 Cap folds and changes course like a politician reviewing the latest negative polls. I expected something more from one of the premier heroes of the Marvel U.
As far as Stark is concerned, well that character has been totally obliterated. Even when he was battling with alcohol that was a dark side of Tony that readers could rally support for him to "get clean". His drinking primarily affected Tony only. While his drunken binges may have lashed out to others around him, the episodes were typically constrained and easily dealt with which only built on the heroic deeds Tony did while he was sober. In essence Tony was making up for all of the heartache he caused friends while he was Iron Man.
If during Civil War the depression of attacking friends such as Cap, Spider-Man, etc caused Tony to fall back into a drunken jerk, then there may have been more compassion from the readers. Instead we were treated to a Tony who's just plainly a jerk.
I can't even stand Mister Fantastic anymore after Civil War. While I never was a Fantastic Four fan, I never thought of Mr. F one way or another. But to completely throw away his marriage is deplorable. I could never see myself continuing a war knowing I would meet my wife on the battlefield. I would have to respectfully bow out of the entire thing. And I agree with a previous poster - creating a clone of Thor to battle other heroes is akin to somebody like Dr Doom.
Apparently the only way to write conflict at Marvel is to just step all over characters and make them do something completely against their nature. I would rather have seen all the Marvel heroes battling the US military/SHIELD as the Civil War and watch villains run amok while the heroes are in hiding. The other thing that turned me off of Civil War was the whole registration act. It's too similar to the Mutant Registration Act. Where was Tony Stark when all that was going down in 616? I know, getting all fat off his government contracts, drinking, and relishing in the fact that he didn't have to register. And yet he has the audacity to go to the X Mansion and ask the mutants to join his side???
The Marvel villain list now looks like:
1. Tony Stark
2. Reed Richards
3. Dr. Doom
4. Magneto
5. Galactus
Galactus doesn't care he's just hungry. Magneto thinks the whole Civil War fiasco is a nice diversion and humorous at best. Dr. Doom is mad that he's being out done by his own nemesis. Reed is to narrowminded to see the forest for the trees. Tony is now set for an amazing downfall.
When Hulk comes back to earth I hope he smashes Iron Man into a pulp along with his super villain teams.
Something tells me Avengers North Dakota isn't going to be seeing much action.
Quote from: detourne_me on February 26, 2007, 10:52:15 AM
Quote from: Dweomer Knight on February 26, 2007, 09:33:23 AM
Just my opinion, but I hated the whole mutant hysteria thing. You've got a 100' Dormmamu striding down New York, Galactus trying to eat the planet on numerous occassions, Terminus wipes out the entire Savage Land etc. etc. and what do people freak out about: "Jubilee, get her!" I understand that mutant hatred was meant to mimic discrimination in its various forms but within the MU itself, it made little sense to me that people were so worked up over mutants but had no problems with other hero types; many of whom were vastly more powerful and dangerous.
DK
well, we got billions of dollars being put into an ineffective war machine (killing thousands on all sides) that could be better spent on eliminating poverty and researching renewable energy resources, but still people are afraid of two men getting married or a teenager choosing not to have a baby...
and thats the essence of the x-men, and why for the most part they've been much more popular than Avengers et al,
but well, Civil War kicked in and ideological differences create controversy, and look at what we got, the new avengers have topped x-men.
its a rather interesting shift having stories about the underdogs and the discriminated upon, to having stories about upholding and evolving the status quo (illuminati being a prime example)...
actually strike that, its plain demographics, marvel has been built upon it. baby boomers and generations afterwards are the inspiration and reflection of marvel comics since peter parker was a twinkle in Stan Lee's eye.
Well, I don't want to say too much on your first point because it'll just devolve into a political debate. However, even if we weren't at war, I highly doubt that those monies would be going towards poverty and alternative fuels.
As far as controversy boosting sales, what controversy? CW is widely regarded as a poorly written poorly portrayed piece of crud. And X-Men had as many Civil War issues as New Avengers did. So I have trouble believing that had anything to do with any sales boost. The mutant hysteria wasn't confined to X-Men either. It came up in Thor, the Avengers and many others. Scarlet Witch was frequently a target of anti-mutant sentiment during her time as an Avenger. One slur was made by a guy standing right next to Cap. Of course, Cap goes off on the guy but Tigra is standing right there perfectly accepted by everyone. I fail to see, to a normal Joe in MU, what the distinction is.
I'm very interested in finding 'Marvels' and seeing what the take there is but until I do, Mutant Hysteria remains, in my mind, a poor and wildly inconsistent attempt at mimicing social ills (namely discrimination) in the comics. And X-Men didn't hit huge popularity until the second team which contained (surprise, surprise) Wolverine who's popularity had nothing to do with the Mutant Hysteria theme. I always thought Rogue was the most interesting character pertaining to the Hysteria theme, and no one gives crap one about her.
I have no problem with them trying to work in social ills in the comics; I just don't think the Mutant Hysteria succeeded. And from an internal MU point of view, made little sense to me. Who knows though, maybe 'Marvels' will change my mind.
DK
MyndVizion: There are many reasons people have given why they don't like Civil War but you've highlighted the one that seems to stand above the rest: bad (sometimes really bad) character portrayals. Cap has been at odds with both the government and the public before and his insta-psyche collapse is pretty lame and hard to swallow.
Not to this scale, but hero vs hero has happened before. The X-Men and Alpha Flight hated each other for years, and fought each other more than once. It can be done and done well. CW had its moments, but on the whole, just wasn't done well.
DK
So, issue 7 of the parody is up. Two thumbs up.
Quote from: MyndVizion on February 26, 2007, 12:07:18 PMIt's too similar to the Mutant Registration Act. Where was Tony Stark when all that was going down in 616? I know, getting all fat off his government contracts, drinking, and relishing in the fact that he didn't have to register. And yet he has the audacity to go to the X Mansion and ask the mutants to join his side???
Wrong. Tony Stark and pretty much all of Marvel's big name heroes opposed the Mutant Registration Act. That's another reason why the pro-reg side's actions didn't make sense. A lot of them opposed legislation that was almost exactly the same as the SHRA in the past.
In fact, Reed Richards testified against the Mutant Registration Act before Congress.
...and characters changing their minds on issues when there are only slight situational changes directly mimics real life politics. I'll try to make examples while trying to avoid direct reference to RL issues. (ha! Good Luck) There have been conflicts in which certain governments have declared outrage at the treatment of social/ethnic groups. Skip to another situation in which there is a percieved threat to a country, and it becomes ok to imprison, threaten or railroad a minority group in the name of safety. I know people who cry out discrimination when it comes to their situation, but in another conversation can talk about rounding up or kicking out another ethnic group because "they're all the same". "Civil War" is not that far from reality. I eagerly anticipate what will come next.
Well another thing is that it is a continuation of a certain undercurrent in the superhero genre. For a while we have seen lots of comics that toy with the idea of enforcing the arrest of vigilantes. Two of the classics (watchmen, dark knight returns) present worlds where superheroes cannot exist in the classic sense. Incredibles too, since using superheroes to stop crime is like stopping muggers with tanks (insert tank police reference). The collateral damage was worse than the crimes commited and superheroes break laws and infringe on the rights of others for a living (she-hulk's recent comics play with this notion a lot). Authority presents a world where super powers means ultimate power. Ultimates and supereme power play with those ideas too, of superheroes as weapons controlled by a very clever and resourcefull state. Pretty much every Image or post podern comic is about goverment heroes and criminal vigilantes except when being intentionally retro.
This development is the idea that its easier to believe that a man can fly and wield the power of lightning than to believe that the goverment and the people will sit around and do nothing about it. I like this, its more cerebral at least than the whole bad girls thing, at least we dont have to deal with hologram covers of tony stark in spedos.
Quote from: Agent on February 26, 2007, 05:08:57 PMWrong. Tony Stark and pretty much all of Marvel's big name heroes opposed the Mutant Registration Act. That's another reason why the pro-reg side's actions didn't make sense. A lot of them opposed legislation that was almost exactly the same as the SHRA in the past.
In fact, Reed Richards testified against the Mutant Registration Act before Congress.
I know, I was going off on a tangent but trying to raise the point that Tony all of a sudden embracing registration, but being against it in a different form doesn't really make sense. See, he was against the mutant kind but for non-mutant kind. Whatever. Given that the mutant registration act was not really that much different than this one. Tony doesn't embrace one form, but does embrace a different form even when both registrations were for the "betterment of civillians".
It just all doesn't make a whole lot of sense in my opinion.
Quote from: MyndVizion on February 26, 2007, 06:38:55 PM
It just all doesn't make a whole lot of sense in my opinion.
Here's how I view it. The mutant registration act discriminates on people, not their actions. It's like rounding up and tagging all Mexicans without taking into account if they are in this country legally or illegally. In oldschool marvel mutants where everywhere and only a small portion of them used their powers or even had the ability to do anything besides looking weird.
In the superhero case they have already broken the law by putting on a mask and causing massive property damage. The registration act is giving them an option to do this legally, to train so they dont hurt anybody or themselves killed. They arent alone, they can count on the goverment to step in and assist them in upholding the law. The only scary part is them being "drafted" or forced to act against their principles which of course will happen sooner or latter, otherwise we would have no drama.
While the registration act dosent sound appealing for superheroes I can picture tons of veteran heroes saying "wow, I wish we had this 20 years ago... I get a salary, dental and this cool wrist radio".
The problem with the Mutant Registration Act was that it was trying to force mutants to register with the government so the government could keep tabs on them - all for the protection of the populace. There was tremendous fear that someone like Professor X could show up at the White House and simply force the President to do something, or someone like Storm showing up in Congress and blasting all of the congressmen/women. The whole thing was bread out of fear for what mutants could do.
The Superhuman Registration Act (is that it's name?) of Civil War is still like the Mutant Reg Act but it does take a small step forward, in that the superheroes all work for the government now. It's still designed to 'control' superheroes.
While it would be nice to have a government contract, pull a salary (and later a pension), and fight crime, that only works for a limited number of superheroes. Primarily the ones who have nothing to lose. The registration act in its current form forces heroes to reveal their identity - prime pickings for supervillains.
What happens when Tony Stark is put in a position of battling some supervillain and the whole thing is caught on tv which results in his defeat and his business' stock plummets to 35 cents a share - resulting in him losing billions of dollars? He'll drink himself silly and think, "Well at least I'm making 20 grand a year on this government salary." Or when the Avengers need a new spaceship/program that's going to cost a couple billion dollars so they can (yet again) save the world from a Kree/Skrull invasion and the government says, "Too bad we'll never get Congress to authorize it and it's not in the budget." Or the government does give the money and then tax payers or some upstart presidential nominee gets people all riled up over government spending....
Tony had it made when he was private. He could finance the Avengers with all sorts of experimental prototypes that he would later perfect then turn around and sell. He doesn't have that luxury anymore.
I didn't think about all that....
Hopefully, it does backfire on Stark. I'd like to see some companies who Stark does business with turn out to be run by people who are either anti-reg or who don't approve of how Stark's pro-reg heroes handled things suddenly decide to quit doing business with him.
And I'd love to see some villain or group of villains gain access to the registration database and cause havoc, so that Cap and other anti-reg heroes can throw it back in Stark's face and at the government. It would be cool to see some trouble come out of this and for Stark to offer to help other heroes fix it, only to be told that he caused it and better stay out of it unless he wants his face caved in.
Bottom line is, Tony Stark (and Iron Man, since he's tried to pull off `its someone else wearing the armor when it really isn't' crap before) should be a pariah at best once all is said and done.
If the Fury-controlled LMD is still running around, I hope Fury causes a lot of headaches for Tony.
Quote from: GhostMachine on February 27, 2007, 04:27:05 PM
I didn't think about all that....
Hopefully, it does backfire on Stark. I'd like to see some companies who Stark does business with turn out to be run by people who are either anti-reg or who don't approve of how Stark's pro-reg heroes handled things suddenly decide to quit doing business with him.
And I'd love to see some villain or group of villains gain access to the registration database and cause havoc, so that Cap and other anti-reg heroes can throw it back in Stark's face and at the government. It would be cool to see some trouble come out of this and for Stark to offer to help other heroes fix it, only to be told that he caused it and better stay out of it unless he wants his face caved in.
Bottom line is, Tony Stark (and Iron Man, since he's tried to pull off `its someone else wearing the armor when it really isn't' crap before) should be a pariah at best once all is said and done.
If the Fury-controlled LMD is still running around, I hope Fury causes a lot of headaches for Tony.
Dude, it's a comic... if anything CAN go wrong then it WILL. I expect much ill to fall upon Tony, registered heroes, non registered heroes and shield. If characters face adversity in comics its to give them a chance to be heroes or at least to make the readers go Oh @#%#! That is why girlfriends die, new sentinels are minted or Lex Luther becomes president.
Quote from: lugaru on February 26, 2007, 06:28:33 PM
I like this, its more cerebral at least than the whole bad girls thing,
what's wrong with the "whole bad girls thing"? I like bad girls!
In all seriousness, I think the reason that so much has been sacrificed character-wise is that the writers are more interested in using the characters to make commentary on current events . . . for better or worse.
This guy pretty much nailed it for me.
http://www.comixexperience.com/savblog/2007/02/its-not-that-bad-hibbs-on-civil-war-7.html
Hi, we're Marvel, and we like money!
Quote from: Spe-Dog on February 28, 2007, 08:35:41 AM
This guy pretty much nailed it for me.
Same with me too... He narrowed it down to Marvel making everything a "Epic Event" which can be pimped out in reprint after reprint and then double-dip the fans with the hardcover special editions a few months later. Sure, Civil War was set up as a turning point for the 21st Century Marvel comics... but it's apparent that the script initially created was lost as it reached the bullpen as the editorial staff started dividing up the story. Thus we never really got a whole story told at the same time... such as the 2 or 3 tie-in titles coming out this week which needed to be read before Civil War #7 was released. Then technically leaving Civil War an unresolved storyline while forcing the closing of the "event" with the final issue of the series.
As far as Villians go... It's very apparent that Quesada decided to really wipe the slate clean with recycling the same old school criminals getting their butt kicked time after time. The "break out" set up at the beginning of New Avengers got everyone out onto the playfield with some shadowy figure setting it up. The Red Skull has been operating inside the body of a political force using his classic methods of using pawns to set up some bigger plan of his in motion. Kingpin while being locked away in a non-powered prison is making sure that his organization can hurt those who crossed him but not reveal his whole agenda. Most of the C & D level villians were removed from action by the conflicts of Civil War and the return of the Punisher. Jack O' Lantern was upgraded in the style of Demogoblin for use in Ghost Rider's series and I love the change - we need more supernatural villians. Quesada has dropped hints that two characters from the BEYOND! limited series will be key factors in the next few years - one of them will return to be a major hero and the other will bring forth a new age of villians.
The biggest "out-of-character" moment for me was Captian A throwing in the towel after other writers in the side stories set him up as willing to die before that freedom was sacrificed. And they needed to have Steve meet with the speaker of the Stamford Wives Club (what I call them anyway) to realize how much vigilante heroes needed to be trained or watched over to make sure those "mistakes in judgement" don't end in tragedy. Besides I skimmed thru the April/May catalogs which hype that the "Fallen Son" is the death of a major hero which spins out of Civil War... Did I miss something? Heh, Probably in one of the Civil War books not released yet... <_<
- CrimsonQuill
i still want to know what's wrong with "the whole bad girl thing"
Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on February 28, 2007, 07:47:45 PM
i still want to know what's wrong with "the whole bad girl thing"
Im going to take that as a "warriors! Come out and play!" on your behalf.
I dunno, It was just the period where I felt that comics were at their most juvenile. All of a sudden every female character ever was a thong wearing "badder than the badguys" vigilante who got their costume torn constantly and existed in a limbo of shower scenes and random debree covering naughty bits.
Dont get me wrong, I love cheesecake within the right context (she-hulk) but when that's the only selling point, I mean man, that's a pretty weak comic book.
I guess this is where somebody trumps me and say's "well not as bad as heroes reborn!"
Check out Civil War: Frontline #11.
:spoiler:
TONY IS THE BAD GUY! Welcome to 1984; show us your papers...
No, the writers who didn't bother to learn the character's history and established personality are the bad guys.
Stark should be getting a headache soon. A big, green, gamma powered headache!
I heard that in one of the books.....Frontline #11, I think....they've tried to do some damage control and revealed Stark had somewhat justifiable motivations for what he did, but that is a Grade-A load of crap.
There are two things Stark is going to have to deal with that won't be easy: The Hulk, and Thor. The Hulk was sent into space by S.H.I.E.L.D., so they should be one of the Hulk's main targets during World War Hulk, and I don't think Thor will be too happy when he finds out about the clone once he returns.
I used to be a Marvel zombie, but right now the only book I've been reading is Captain America (I was reading Ms. Marvel but dumped it because of the writing and the change in art team; Mike Wieringo is normally one of my favorites, but they gave him a horrible inker), and I will likely drop it after the next issue. But I am going to pick up the new Captain Marvel series whenever it starts. The rest of the Marvel line, however, is dead to me right now.
I think you're taking that the right way but I'm completely blank on the "warriors! come out and play" referrence.
It was meant with one part sarcasm, one part generally liking girls who are of the "reformed bad girl" or "good girl with a bad streak" (but not going there beyond that), and one part generally liking a lot of the anti-hero characters.
Quote from: lugaru on February 28, 2007, 08:00:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on February 28, 2007, 07:47:45 PM
i still want to know what's wrong with "the whole bad girl thing"
Im going to take that as a "warriors! Come out and play!" on your behalf.
I dunno, It was just the period where I felt that comics were at their most juvenile. All of a sudden every female character ever was a thong wearing "badder than the badguys" vigilante who got their costume torn constantly and existed in a limbo of shower scenes and random debree covering naughty bits.
Dont get me wrong, I love cheesecake within the right context (she-hulk) but when that's the only selling point, I mean man, that's a pretty weak comic book.
I guess this is where somebody trumps me and say's "well not as bad as heroes reborn!"
"Warriors! Come out and play!"
Listen boppers, the Lizzies are packing and Swan, Ajax, and the boys are on the run. Reference to the 1979 Movie 'The Warriors', directed by Walter Hill.
Great movie, that. Also, they made it into a pretty good game.
Quote from: GhostMachine on March 02, 2007, 07:21:57 PM
I used to be a Marvel zombie, but right now the only book I've been reading is Captain America (I was reading Ms. Marvel but dumped it because of the writing and the change in art team; Mike Wieringo is normally one of my favorites, but they gave him a horrible inker), and I will likely drop it after the next issue. But I am going to pick up the new Captain Marvel series whenever it starts. The rest of the Marvel line, however, is dead to me right now.
You should check out the X-books, if you're an X-men fan at all. Astonishing, New, Uncanny and Adjectiveless are all in good hands right now, and largely free of the stink of Civil War. I mean, the X-men Civil War tie in book was totally pointless, and Bishop and Storm were the only X-Characters I can think of to really take a part in the Civil War, and neither are in any of the books I mentioned.
Guys, watch it with comments. Cross the line and it will get locked. Thank you.
Quote from: JeyNyce on March 07, 2007, 05:28:36 PM
Guys, watch it with comments. Cross the line and it will get locked. Thank you.
if that were only true for the Marvel writers, editors in question.
Having just finished reading Civil War, I thought I'd chip in with these comments;
1) Wow. I really enjoyed it. For the first time in a long time it felt like I was reading a story that actually mattered, where the good old Marvel re-set button wasn't going to get hit at the end of the story and restore the status quo.
2) This isn't the end of the story. Folks who are all "the bad guys won, grrr" need to realise that is only part of a continuing saga. We're going to see people come to terms with what they've done and why in the coming years. Tony Stark is a smart guy, and we're going to see him coming to realise that he's made a terrible mistake in the years to come. Guarenteed.
3) Tony Stark is a bad guy now? Marvel is trying to make its characters more believable, in line with Asimov's comment that, when writing about the fantastic, one must make everything else absolutely realistic. And in the real world, people often do terrible things for what they think of as good reasons. No-one really believes that Bush, for example, is cackling gleefully about the war in Iraq. He probably genuinely believes in what he's doing, even if large numbers of folks think he's an idiot. Tony Stark and Reed Richards are the smartest men in the Marvel U. We now know why Reed did what he did, and Tony, being in the heart of power right at the start, knew that after Stamford there were only two options; registration or elimination. In the Marvel U, superheroes function like the world's immune system, so elimination would inevitably lead to the extinction of humanity. As detestable as his behaviour has been, he has good reason to believe that he's preserved the mechanism that will save the world. Granted, that could have been better portrayed, but whether or not that makes him a bad guy depends on whether you believe that the ends justify the means. And given that a majority of the heroes we follow regularly violate the civil rights of others in the pursuit of justice, that should be most of us, right?
4) I've seen a lot of comments about the writers being "hacks". Sorry, I don't buy it. It's easy to call people names when they don't do what you want, but the fact is I found Civil War more engaging and intelligent than the vast majority of Marvel stuff I've read over the years. Your milage, of course, may vary, but I'd remind folks who are using the general internet fanboy reaction to justify the name-calling that fanboys are always the last ones to embrace change. Civil War sold extremely well, which suggests that somebody liked it.
5) The mourning of the loss of mainstream accessibility to kids is laudable, but misplaced. Back when every comic book on the shelf was for kids, we also had EC selling graphically nasty horror comics. There's always been comic books that aren't suitable for young kids. Now, granted, the balance has shifted considerably in favour of the older reader, but that's because the average reader is now between 16 and 25. Kids do have their own comics, with things like Marvel Adventures and Johnny DC. In fact, there are about the same number of kids comics available now as there were in the "golden age". It's just that there are a lot more comics being published now, so that the percentage of kids comics has reduced.
6) The ending. I've just re-read it, and Cap's surrender wasn't caused by him being in opposition to the government or by some property damage, it was caused by his realisation that he was standing at odds with the American people. Steve Rogers has opposed the government before, but he has always said he represented the people, not their leaders. Suddenly understanding that that was no longer true is the reason he stood down. Personally I think he was wrong to do so; the people have been wrong before, but it's the mark of a hero that he was willing to let go and surrender rather than go against the people he championed. And that's good writing.
So, the american people wanted Steve to stop? What about the american people that helped Luke Cage when shield showed up? It's ok when non blacks that work in the community have a say, but if they were black it's not enough of a reason to keep the fight up? Not trying to be antoganistic, but the Village People tackling me would not be enough for me to change my beliefs if I felt I was right.
A fair point, but if you'd set yourself up - prided yourself - as representing and championing them, and then they tackled you and told you to stop, you'd still keep on going? That's going the route of "you don't know what's good for you, but I do", the sort of elitist thinking that Tony Stark was espousing. To keep going in the face of the people - ordinary people, physically intervening - would have made Cap as bad as the forces he was opposing. He's always stood against that kind of dictatorship, and by standing down remained true to himself and the ideals he represented. By surrendering the way he did, Captain America is the only one to come out of that mess with his honour and character intact.
The secret Avengers still have their honor and characters in check. And they haven't given up. They should have never attacked Steve in the 1st place. And since when could a couple civil service types get the drop on him anyways? If that were the Thunderbolts, he would have been dead.
I pretty much empathize with Doctor TOC. Good replies my man, good replies.