Characters you hate.

[CuteClops]

I don't know, complaining seemed to work for Hal Jordan fans .

Speaking seriously, althougth i think that getting on fights with other fanbases and hating on fictional characthers is pointless, i can understand about being pissed when your fav has been written like crap for years, is never an easy or pretty thing to see. Not that i justified their actions or condone then, but when you see something happening for a long time with not sign of changing anytime soon is difficult to let things go when it come to your favorites, it doesn't help when you see missinformation about the characthers being spread around like they were facts, something that i had seen more and more over the years sadly.

Hal Jordan is one of my favorite characters.
Well, yes, I have no luck with my favorite characters.

But the way they are slaughtered by Marvel and DC, and other fanbases, just makes me love them even more.

[Lemurion]

I've been tired of Wolverine for a long time, but that's about it.

I really don't like Cyclops as a villain.

Sam Nova just doesn't interest me, though Rich was one of my favorite characters.

I don't like Punisher, and really find all the Symbiotes to be a turn-off.

[CuteClops]

You realize you're arguing against your favorite character now, right?

Yes, obviously, my favorite character and almost all Marvel characters.

But do you realise that only Scott Summers and Hank Pym are eternally punished for something that happened 30 years ago.
Do you understand my point?

Also, according to Marvel, Scott is a villain, a terrorist and Hitler, and him alone.

[TheCape]

I guess what I'm trying to say is be pissed all you want, but don't hold it against fictional characters with no agency. Who you blame it on is writers/editors. There are constructive ways of doing things and there are nonconstructive ways of doing things. Constructive would be getting people on-board for your cause. Nonconstructive is alienating part of the Marvel community through misplaced anger at something they love.

I do agreed, tearing down fictional characthers or hating then is pointless, as i said, i don't really hate any of the ones that i mentioned, i just dislike then for certain reasons. Writters and editors should be the one to blame because they took those decisions, after all. As a casual fan of Steve Rogers, it does annoy me when people call him a facist, because that doesn't really fit Cap at all, but i had something similar going with Hank and Scott, so a part of me kind of symphatizes with then, althought i don't like how they go about it.

[Mary Jay]

I think at time hank pym wasn't the best image of mental sanity and he admitted he screwed up and sent himself to jail

Correct on the sanity part. He was in the middle of an accute manic episode. He did not send himself to jail. The two events are unrelated.

no. no he didn't! he did not send himself to jail for beating up his ex-wife. Egghead tricked him into breaking into a government building. he was caught and sent to prison.

Correct.

Although I would argue about the use of the term "beating up" but as usual you're exhausting me.

afterwards, Clint Barton gave him a spot on the West Coast Avengers as if nothing had happened. if he was insane, he shouldn't have been allowed to continue on as a superhero. it would make him a danger to the public; especially because he refuses treatment for his "illness" (see: Avengers A.I.).

Things happen between the jail time and the WCA time. Egghead's accomplices abducted Hank in the middle of his trial, forced him to work for Egghead again, but Hank, having now overcome his manic phase (as it happens with BPD) managed to defeat Egghead. Clint saved Hank's life by shooting Egghead while he was trying to kill Hank. Then Hank left New-York for a while and went to work in a private lab somewhere in the mid-west, and we didn't see him for a couple of years after that.

After those few years, he went to see Clint and the WCA, and Clint offered him a spot, as Hank and he had always been good friends.

And it's not "illness". It's a real illness. A real-life illness.

I don't get why you're even comparing the two. Scott was a decent man despite having a literal horror story of an upbringing. he ran out on his wife and kid. that was repugnant. but he made up for it by raising Nate in the future. he couldn't have known that Madelyne was some kind of Mr.Sinister scheme to further manipulate him. Scott takes accountability for his screw-ups. and I'm not asking anyone to let of anything. please just stop making Hank Pym out to be a victim. Janet's the one who got hurt. Pym created his own problems.

I really wonder why you seem to imply that Hank didn't take responsibilities for what he had done. He literally spent years trying to atone for what he had done, he'd still be doing it if he weren't dead. Jan forgave him a long time ago, even before Busiek's run, when they were in the WCA together. What Johns and Austen wrote later on contradicts everything every writer has written before them.

[AcesX1X]

i've learned over the years that characters don't deserve any sort of 'hatred' as they don't have autonomous action. they have no free will.

there are quite a few characters who are used in ways i dislike, but that's not what this thread seem to be asking.

[TheCape]

A couple that of characthers that i forgot to mention:

Bendis Norman Osborn: Now many Spider-Man fans don't like the fact that he came back, either becuase they think that it ruined the "Death of Gwen Stacy" story or that he was changed too much, i dissagreed with thise notions and i think that bringing him back was a good thing, but what Bendis did to him, turning him over by Luke Cage and making hin an Avengers enemy was going to far and really didn't make sense, i think that it was goos for him to face other heroes outside of Spider-Man, but Dark Reign was an overkill.

Iron Man: This is more about his relation with Peter Parker than anything, i don't think that Tony is a bad characther, nor i do have any ill will toward him for Civil War, but i really have with turning him into a mentor/father figure for Spidey, because i think that it goes against the characthers concept and i'm dissapointed that they went with that direction in the MCU. It doesn't help that they way that the two are written while together is basically "Dude we both like science OMG", is pretty shallow and is a disservice to boths IMO.

[capandkirby]

I do agreed, tearing down fictional characthers or hating then is pointless, as i said, i don't really hate any of the ones that i mentioned, i just dislike then for certain reasons. Writters and editors should be the one to blame because they took those decisions, after all. As a casual fan of Steve Rogers, it does annoy me when people call him a facist, because that doesn't really fit Cap at all, but i had something similar going with Hank and Scott, so a part of me kind of symphatizes with then, althought i don't like how they go about it.

Yeah, Marvel really did need a wake-up call, from Avengers and X-Men fans alike, so I do sympathize with all of we readers, no matter which character is preferred. It just seems that they keep trying to recreate the success of the original Civil War story by continuously pitting all of their heroes against each other event after event after event but it's had the opposite effect. It's actually alienating readers who are just plain sick of it, because in the process of creating 'sides' they've taken away many of the aspects of the characters that are likable (and recognizable). Plus it made fandom a battle ground and really, super unpleasant, which also causes interest to wan. It worked the first time because of the drama associated with shock value. But shock value works once, then loses it's edge. The writers and editors are entirely accountable for that. We'll see if the new EIC can manage to fix it. The April numbers were promising.

It doesn't hurt, also, that Bendis is now gone since he was a heavy perpetrator of this.

[capandkirby]

i've learned over the years that characters don't deserve any sort of 'hatred' as they don't have autonomous action. they have no free will.

there are quite a few characters who are used in ways i dislike, but that's not what this thread seem to be asking.

Well said!

[TheCape]

Yeah, Marvel really did need a wake-up call, from Avengers and X-Men fans alike, so I do sympathize with all of we readers, no matter which character is preferred. It just seems that they keep trying to recreate the success of the original Civil War story by continuously pitting all of their heroes against each other event after event after event but it's had the opposite effect. It's actually alienating readers who are just plain sick of it, because in the process of creating 'sides' they've taken away many of the aspects of the characters that are likable (and recognizable). Plus it made fandom a battle ground and really, super unpleasant, which also causes interest to wan. It worked the first time because of the drama associated with shock value. But shock value works once, then loses it's edge. The writers and editors are entirely accountable for that. We'll see if the new EIC can manage to fix it. The April numbers were promising.

It doesn't hurt, also, that Bendis is now gone since he was a heavy perpetrator of this.

I had always argued that make Civil War was going to be a bad idea for the long term when it happened, in spite of the short term sales bump, seems that i wasn't completly wrong, i hope that things improve for both sides with the new direction.

[Angrel-San]

Personally I don't see a point to holding grudges against fictional characters that change more hands than any other genre of fiction.

To give an example, I counted once, the Captain America solo title has had over 50 different writers in the 77 years Cap has been around as a character. This is just the solo book, not counting any time Steve has been in the Avengers or featured in events or a part of the Invaders. Didn't like him in AvX? Well, that doesn't negate the amazing work from the likes of Kirby, Englehart, Stern, Gruenwald, or Waid.

Moreover, just because a character, like Cyclops from the sound of it, has had a slew of bad writers in recent years, doesn't mean the character can't get an awesome rebirth. The Cap title went through a decade of the Mace and Burnside years, which ultimately resulted in the title being cancelled until Lee and Kirby decided to bring Steve back in the 60's and interest in the character got renewed. Starlin brought Warlock back. The Eternals went through a very long lull until Neil Gaiman revisited them a decade or so ago. So honestly just because Cyclops has had a bad run of things lately doesn't mean he's destined to stay that way forevermore. Same with Hank. You know what would help in these characters getting huge comebacks? Fans letting things go.

The hell?

Cyclops pre Bendis was amazing. He is easily one of the best fictional characters there is.

And is easy to hold that point of view when your favorite character is the Gary Stu of the Marvel Universe and the symbol of "perfection" and everyone must adore him. Trying to speak to other fanbases from that angle is actually not productive, especially when said character is the nemesis/rival of the other character and one of the major reasons why that character is having a hard time.

I don't mind Cyclops haters or Steve lovers personally but let's call a spade a spade, please!!!

[mikeb]

no. no he didn't! he did not send himself to jail for beating up his ex-wife. Egghead tricked him into breaking into a government building. he was caught and sent to prison. afterwards, Clint Barton gave him a spot on the West Coast Avengers as if nothing had happened. if he was insane, he shouldn't have been allowed to continue on as a superhero. it would make him a danger to the public; especially because he refuses treatment for his "illness" (see: Avengers A.I.).

When Henry was part of WCA, he pretty much chucked the superhero montra. After an encounter with Whirlwind, Pym severely questioned his self-worth and was about to shoot himself when Firebird ended up talking him out of it and talking to him about the person he needed to be. After this, Pym redefined himself as Dr.Pym, scientific adventurer, in regular street clothes.

[Angrel-San]

i've learned over the years that characters don't deserve any sort of 'hatred' as they don't have autonomous action. they have no free will.

there are quite a few characters who are used in ways i dislike, but that's not what this thread seem to be asking.

Completely disagree.

Any form of literature will create an impact/bond with the reader and there will be those characters that create real antagonistic views on people.

And that's fine!!!

If it creates that sort of emotion, even if negative, the character is written well (most of the time).

[Angrel-San]

You realize you're arguing against your favorite character now, right?

I think you are confusing Beast with Cyclops.

[AcesX1X]

Completely disagree.

Any form of literature will create an impact/bond with the reader and there will be those characters that create real antagonistic views on people.

And that's fine!!!

If it creates that sort of emotion, even if negative, the character is written well (most of the time).

perhaps you misunderstood. these stories should absolutely provoke emotion in the audience. but the characters themselves have no control over that. they are as blameless as you or me. they are puppets for puppetmasters.