-
[QUOTE=Dboi2001;5089384]Maybe I’m just misremembering things but you’re telling me a guy with a bow and arrow wouldn’t realistically kill? Not very many marvel heroes have a no killing rule so why should Hawkeye exactly? I don’t see the issue with Hawkeye, a secret agent, killing. How about the mcu do you think it was a mistake to make Hawkeye a killer? I don’t even see the problem with Hawkeye killing[/QUOTE]
He uses trick arrows. He's a hero, not a killer. I'm not saying that as a critique on Ultimate Hawkeye, they were just different characters.
Considering I find MCU Hawkeye duller and less fun than 616 Hawkeye...yeah? He's got nothing on EHM Hawkeye.
-
Yeah I agree but Killerbee used Hawkeye killing to show that he was an *******
Like the hate Ultimates gets is basically from things that were out of context
-
[QUOTE=Revolutionary_Jack;5087318][ATTACH=CONFIG]99556[/ATTACH]
Marvel didn't really have a "Big Three". It has a Big One (Spider-Man), and a really big team (X-Men). At a distant third, you might have Fantastic Four but that was more contestible. Spider-Man and X-Men were far far ahead of the rest. Do you think it's an accident that when Marvel were optioning rights to bail out of bankruptcy, Spider-Man and X-Men were the ones that studios had most interest in?
Iron Man, Thor and Captain America were considered the "big three" of the Avengers which you know didn't have the sales, fame, influence that the X-Men did. Furthermore, calling it a "Big Three" is also a misnomer because it implies a level of equality between the three. Of the lot Iron Man was always the least prestigious of the bunch, there wasn't a single run in the classic era (and arguably still hasn't been) as good and important as Simonson's Thor, Englehart on Captain America, Roger Stern on Captain America not to mention the classic Kirby Thor and Kirby Cap issues. There have been above average Iron Man stories and runs (Michelinie, Fraction, Ellis briefly) but even those stories don't rate on the level of the best Thor, the best Cap...leave alone the best FF, X-Men, Spider-Man.
The 1000 people that Jim Shooter talked about didn't know them.
That was comics in the 2000s, no matter how much they sell, it doesn't come close to mainstream exposure and raising out of obscurity.
That happened because Marvel wasn't getting enough revenue from the movies since they sold the rights to Fox and Sony at "over-the-barrel" prices because they were desperate. The MCU originated for pure profit reasons not out of real love and affection for the Avengers over other properties. David Maisel, the godfather of the MCU, figured out that the characters they still had rights to would lead to the Avengers and if Marvel created its studios and made the movies themselves they get a bigger cut.
It showed that Marvel was doing all it can to maximize and generate interest out of all its properties, which has always been the priority for them, it was the reason for the shared universe in the first place, it was the reason they resorted to chicanery to make sure characters like Namor and the title of the Human Torch stayed with them and so on.
The fact that Marvel outsourced Avengers to Image studios indicates the lower level of prestige it had at the time compared to Spider-Man and X-Men.[/QUOTE]
Iron Man, Thor and Captain America are considered the Big Three of Marvel MCU. Overall I consider Spiderman, X-Men and Hulk and by some distance F4 the overall big 3 because they have managed to have some kind of relevance for 50-70 years with comics, movies, games, cartoons and they have more pop culture references. Also since movies are the biggest medium spiderman and xmen by some distance have all marvel's artistic driven films that will age better , self contained made films vs the monopoly coperate nature of Iron Man, Thor and Captain America movies which is not going to age well. We have already seen the backlash against their movies. Noone called for the ruins of cinema when the first Spiderman film made the top 5 USA all box office list.
With Star Lord's drastic change, people seem to be forgetting GOTG was the one film that set the course for Marvel movies becoming big fluff comedies. The main character had to be a representation of that.
GOTG and their characters are a strange bunch. their style should only works once, any further push gets irritating and makes the characters look immature. The GOTG crew got the most hate with Infinity War, people still hate the Star Lord/Thanos thing, also their second movie is rubbish, at least their first once was rubbish with some charm.
GOTG and Star Lord is the type of series that supposedly stars of as a comedy than should straighten out to something less. I think that is what would work best for the series but we know it ain't gonna happen when characters like Star Lord has been changed so much.
-
[QUOTE=Dboi2001;5089415]Yeah I agree but Killerbee used Hawkeye killing to show that he was an *******
Like the hate Ultimates gets is basically from things that were out of context[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't use the killing aspect as a knock against him but he was generally abrasive and cold, so not very likeable.
-
just because someone isn’t quippy and funny doesn’t make them unlikable. It just comes off as because the Ultimates weren’t perfect human beings makes them assholes
Kinda ironic they then praise the mcu and the gotg
-
[QUOTE=chamber-music;5088833]
Captain America is a cold, stern jingoistic neoconservative parody, Hulk is a genocidal cannibal, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver are an incestuous couple, Ultimate Hawkeye is a hardened murderous emo black-ops soldier, Black Widow is child murdering anti-American terrorist, Giant-Man is a bipolar wife frequent wife beater, Wasp is a browbeaten mutant who lays and eats her own larvae, Iron Man is a drunk cynical gleeful war profiteer, Thor is crazy and Nick Fury was a serial adulterer (even sleeping with his mother in law and all his wife's friends).
The writers after Millar tried to tone down some of these aspects a bit but the characters were intentionally made to be jerk versions of their 616 counterparts[/QUOTE]
I’d argue Jeph Loeb took those negative traits and amplified them to 1000 leaving us with Ultimates 3 and Ultimatum
How was Cap a stern neoconservative jingoistic (which is a contradiction btw)? When he met Sam Wilson he talked about how terrible racism was in his time and when he found Zemo experimenting on blacks and Jews Cap lost it and said they were better people than he would ever be. And like I said cap admit the France thing was a stupid thing to say
Hulk was also a monster and was bringing back to his roots
Pietro and Wanda didn’t officially become incestuous until Ultimates 3
Hawkeye didn’t murder anyone and wasn’t an emo
I’ll give you that with Black Widow even though I did like the twist
Hank was always bipolar and he didn’t frequently beat Wasp. Betty mentioned 2 other instances in college before Hank started taking meds after that Hank and Jan were a pretty happy couple and after Wasp broke up with Cap she did reconcile with Hank. On top of that Hank did regret almost killing Jan and was kicked off the Ultimates and beaten up by cap
What’s wrong with Wasp being a mutant?
You literally just described 616 Stark too
Loki manipulated reality to make Thor look crazy
I don’t remember Fury mentioning that
You seem to think one bad character trait makes someone a jerk
-
[QUOTE=Dboi2001;5089487]just because someone isn’t quippy and funny doesn’t make them unlikable. It just comes off as because the Ultimates weren’t perfect human beings makes them assholes
Kinda ironic they then praise the mcu and the gotg[/QUOTE]
Not saying he had to be, but in my opinion there wasn't much likable about Ultimate Hawkeye other than him having a family...which didn't last long.
