Also in a way it's kinda the DC Silver Age Vs Marvel Silver Age problem.
And the legacy of Stan, Jack and Steve : the Hulk is probably the one character who was forged by an equal contribution of the three great men.
Frankly, I wouldn't say anything about any of them "replacing" the originals so much as being maybe worthy successors to the originals, which I'd think would go over a lot better than just "replacing" them. Steve, Bruce, Tony, Thor (Odinson), and Peter are basically the roots of modern Marvel and that's not something you can take away all that easily, if at all. The best way to look at it, in my opinion, is whether or not these new characters can live up to the examples set by their predecessors and build on the strong foundation they established.
The spider is always on the hunt.
Amadeus is Hulk light. He has his own style, but he is struggling to be as persistent as Banners Hulk, because he reverts to Cho too often, in Sakaar. Banner Hulk would stay Hulk until all the challenges are defeated. It’s a different style. Both characters have different ways of problem solving and Banner Hulk is very unique. He’s more of a gorilla, while Cho Hulk is more of a party hound. Banner is more serious, and Cho is too up-beat and devil may care. But it’s more complicated than that. Throw away Banner and you lose a rich dimension of humanity he defines. We have an attachment to that rich tapestry that is the Banner Hulk.
And what Huntsman Spider and XPac say above.
Last edited by jackolover; 11-30-2017 at 05:05 AM.