What's your opinion on Sentry?

[mace11]

Sentry is a near-omnipotent man

Incorrect.
Only when he is sentry void.
Void is independent again now.
This is how i see it.
Anyone that is near omnipotent would be in my view above thanos and darkseid.
Sentry with out void is below thanos.
Viod with out sentry is below thanos and sentry.

Sentry normal power level like i have been saying along and well keep saying is closer to blue marvel's,thor's and silver surfer's,hyperion's superman's,immortal hulk,ww hulk and wb hulk.

Sentry power level is really close to blue marvel's power level's,but overall less powerful.
Blue marvel is more powerful then normal sentry.
Sentry is more powerful then silver surfer,superman,ww hulk,wb hulk,immortal hulk and female and male thor.



This is conner sims before the current ultimate comics.
Conner Sims (Earth-616)

Anti-Man returned with the same intentions as before but now his powers had grown exponentially. He single-handedly defeated the Mighty Avengers whom consisted of Iron Man, Sentry, Wasp, Wonder Man, Ares and Hank Pym. Luckily for the Avengers, Conner was unable to stay long, but after his disappearance the Avengers began their search for the Blue Marvel.

http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Conner_Sims_(Earth-616)

Now conner sims in the ultimate comics was near-omnipotent.

[mace11]

Edited above.
By the way i will be reading the new sentry comics.

[Conn Seanery]

Folks, I've edited & deleted more posts than I care to. Keep it civil or people are going to get bounced.

[Thor-Ul]

I was wondering was had happened.
Anyway.
It was argued than Paul Jenkins, himself creator of Sentry, had based the character in Superman. I searched the evidence ( I don't like to argued without evidence).
And here, this I found:

Can you tell us any of the rejected ideas you refer to that you really wish had made it? What do you believe the effect of such thinking in the comics industry will be?

Hmm. The most notable example I can possibly give is the editor who told me (with a straight face) that if Alan Moore pitched a book like Watchmen now – the broken relationship being no factor – that DC would probably not publish it. Who am I to argue with that creative approach? Years ago at San Diego comic convention, Eddie Berganza tried to gauge my interest in writing the Superman title. I told him he would be unlikely to let me do what I thought had to be done: Lex Luthor holds a gun to Ma and Pa Kent’s heads, asks Superman if he is “faster than a speeding bullet,” and then blows their brains out. The idea being that the only way to get this untouchable, invincible character is to drive him crazy. Eddie blanched, of course, and said no. I told him it was okay because I was already doing that story with the Sentry.

Interview to Paul Jenkins, june 5, 2013.
Highlight by me.
(Mmm, I wonder if Jenkins would had liked to write Injustice, but that is off topic).

[Tendrin]

Sentry shares surface similarities to Superman, yes, in that they both held similar places in their respective universes and both have an S on their costumes and both are mighty, mighty types. Once you scratch even vaguely beneath the surface, that's where those similarities end.

Age of the Sentry is where this is lampshaded most seriously (and it is an amazing mini, anyone who has not read it needs to go read it seriously) but it's plainly obvious that once you get there, Sentry is more 'Miracle Man' than he is Supes, really.

When I, or even Enz, say he's 'Not Superman',. we're rejecting what is, to us I think, relatively shallow ways to characterize him, you know? It's not a refusal to acknowledge that there's similarities or debts or direct acknowledgement of tropes, but rather, that there's just more there beyond the surface than people want to acknowledge when they're busy dismissing him as 'just another clone'.

Blue Marvel and Hyperion are /way/ more indebted to Superman than Sentry is and are both far straighter takes on him.

[Superfan90]

Sentry shares surface similarities to Superman, yes, in that they both held similar places in their respective universes and both have an S on their costumes and both are mighty, mighty types. Once you scratch even vaguely beneath the surface, that's where those similarities end.

Age of the Sentry is where this is lampshaded most seriously (and it is an amazing mini, anyone who has not read it needs to go read it seriously) but it's plainly obvious that once you get there, Sentry is more 'Miracle Man' than he is Supes, really.

When I, or even Enz, say he's 'Not Superman',. we're rejecting what is, to us I think, relatively shallow ways to characterize him, you know? It's not a refusal to acknowledge that there's similarities or debts or direct acknowledgement of tropes, but rather, that there's just more there beyond the surface than people want to acknowledge when they're busy dismissing him as 'just another clone'.

Blue Marvel and Hyperion are /way/ more indebted to Superman than Sentry is and are both far straighter takes on him.

Miracle Man is himself a homage to Superman. I'm not sure what is the issue here with acknowledging that Superman was the blueprint for Sentry as deemed by his creator himself.

[Thor-Ul]

Sentry shares surface similarities to Superman, yes, in that they both held similar places in their respective universes and both have an S on their costumes and both are mighty, mighty types. Once you scratch even vaguely beneath the surface, that's where those similarities end.

Age of the Sentry is where this is lampshaded most seriously (and it is an amazing mini, anyone who has not read it needs to go read it seriously) but it's plainly obvious that once you get there, Sentry is more 'Miracle Man' than he is Supes, really.

When I, or even Enz, say he's 'Not Superman',. we're rejecting what is, to us I think, relatively shallow ways to characterize him, you know? It's not a refusal to acknowledge that there's similarities or debts or direct acknowledgement of tropes, but rather, that there's just more there beyond the surface than people want to acknowledge when they're busy dismissing him as 'just another clone'.

Blue Marvel and Hyperion are /way/ more indebted to Superman than Sentry is and are both far straighter takes on him.

Of course Sentry is not Superman. But neither are Blue Marvel nor Hyperion. Superman is Superman and they are they own characters but they all start as the base archetype represented by Superman, in visual and narratives ways and then explored differents stories not explored in Superman. But that can be said from many characters than share those qualities in other editorials (Invincible and Supreme, also share the Superman archetype but went in different paths too). You can argue or defend your point by saying than Sentry is another exploration of the Superman archetype, but saying he is not based in Superman or than they only have superficial similarities does not make a sustained argument. His background characters, his visual, his powers set, his attitude, everything was designed by his creators to resemble Superman context and then tell a story different by diverging from a familiar trope. You can check even his own creator admited the Superman connection.

Even if Sentry would be a twist of Miracleman/Marvelman, you must to remember than Mike Moran himself is a british version of an american character, Captain (Shazam) Marvel, who was himself a variation of Superman (that part is open to disscusion, but that is another story). A riff on a riff on a riff as would say Grant Morrison.


But the starting point of Sentry is the most part as a beloved overpowerful hero who is hope for everyone and then twist! He hides a dark side which is part of his origin, which is he is also his own archenemy and everything is in his head and he was addict to his power. That worked in his own mini, but when they bring him to the main line, it felt like they just not had thought about how to insert him in the prime continuity. Most of the time there Sentry was just a overpowerful Deus-Ex-Machina with unclear/confuse origins and difficult to emphatize. It doesn help when everybody talked how awesome was Sentry, but hardly it was showing on the page.

I like your passion and your delight for the character and for defending him. But you will not convince people who don't like the character to like him because you like him. But obviously there will be rejection and everybody is open to express it too. Many people doesn't like the Sentry because many of them meet him during the post Dissassembled-Dark era and that is not the best way to present him. And the retro-continuity where he was the best of the best didn't help. Compare for example what happened with Voyager: when she was presented with an origin similar to the Sentry (the forgotten hero inserted via retcon) the rejection was very evident. However when the hints revealed than she was a contemporary character, the rejection decresed. I suppose if Sentry would had gone for a similar, more straight narrative explained his context, the rejection would be less strong.

Can still make good stories with him? Yes, as with every character. The most skilled writers played with the notion than everything happens in Sentry's mind and I think that is the best way of play with him. Maybe Lemire can go in that direction and maybe make something interesting with him. Or maybe Sentry will lose another chance to gain a bigger fandom. Until then, everyone can express his reasons why they love or loathe the character.

[Tendrin]

Don't mistake my defense of the character for trying to persuade people to like him. It's not. It's okay for people to like or not like things as appeals to them personally. That said...

I want people to dislike him for what's on the page rather than what they think is on the page. If I hear another person declare, 'I hate him because he beat Galactus instead of Reed!' again...

I mean, honestly, you can tell people who don't like him for legit reasons and people who don't like him because of what they read on message boards.

[Killerbee911]

Of course Sentry is not Superman. But neither are Blue Marvel nor Hyperion. Superman is Superman and they are they own characters but they all start as the base archetype represented by Superman, in visual and narratives ways and then explored differents stories not explored in Superman. But that can be said from many characters than share those qualities in other editorials (Invincible and Supreme, also share the Superman archetype but went in different paths too). You can argue or defend your point by saying than Sentry is another exploration of the Superman archetype, but saying he is not based in Superman or than they only have superficial similarities does not make a sustained argument. His background characters, his visual, his powers set, his attitude, everything was designed by his creators to resemble Superman context and then tell a story different by diverging from a familiar trope. You can check even his own creator admited the Superman connection.
.

Thank you I was trying to say something like this early,I used Superman clone but it is really the archetype style I was talking about not that character is a rip off. A couple of characters in comics Superman, Batman, Spiderman,Wolverine, Hulk, etc and more recently Iron Man and Deadpool have become really strong archetypes and you see the clear influences in other characters.Influence in style is not a bad thing Moon Knight is not Batman, Sentry is not Superman, Sideways is not Spiderman,Damage is not Hulk but you can see the influences of the bigger character.

I was trying to stress that Sentry is the closest I have seen to someone successful pulling of the Superman archetype in Marvel, In moments without Void shenanigans Sentry check off almost all the Superman archetype check marks.Like Sentry has the superman position of being the arguably the most powerful hero in Marvel and is accepted by the fans. Which is amazing for new character note I am not saying that they can't write another at that power level. I am saying that fans accept the fact that Sentry could beat a Thor or Hulk. Just as an example DC created a character called Damage which is basically Hulk-like character and they had a throw-in line in his book where wonder woman said "this is the strongest character that I fought" implying that he was possibly stronger than Superman and I watch fanboys have a hissy fit with that. The forced the character importance which is what people hate the most about him. Is actually a strength now because continuity however bad is still continuity and those forced relationships get flesh out as time goes on.And because of earlier forced importance Sentry could easily make transition to "the man" that Captain America or Spiderman gets because of thing most people hate him for and funny thing Cap or Spidey is importance is story dicatated and people don't care because it seamless.

I understand them going back Sentry he has so much potential. People care about him whether it is negative or positive. Sentry evokes enough emotion that people care enough to want him to wipe out existence. The fact that people care is important and that fact he evokes strong emotions is a good thing.It is better to have a strong reaction than no reaction. It is going to take a good writer pull off the "Heel to headliner" but rewards are when does happen.

Lastly I want to throw interesting scenario that shows another way the potential of Sentry Lets say Marvel decides to fast track a Sentry Movie.Why Because JL and Superman movies done have been meh. If you can pull off a good Sentry movie it creates tremendous pressure on the other company to make a good movie and not doing so lessen the impact of the character(see Green lantern). And the Man of steel is difficult character to pull off in this movie environment(Wonder Woman 1 and Captain America 1 are unicorns) The idealistic all ways do the right thing style heroes are challenge to pull off in today society where people are use to flawed heroes. A Sentry movie is with his issues is actually easier to pull that Supes movie. And with them maybe phasing out Thor and Hulk , Sentry is a character that can fill those two spots so he has a place in the cinematic universe if needed (also hilariously Marvel can focus on Black Panther,Captain Marvel and Sentry) . Sentry might not be amazingly appealing to comic book fans but cinematically he is more appealing. Superman is the archetype and the Icon but imagine if Marvel successful put a out a Great "Superman" movie with Sentry before DC. I don't think it will happen but not every move is just comic book related anymore they are other forms media to think about with Disney, Netflix, ABC, Freeform and the movies as platforms for marvel content. A comic nowadays can just be showcase for something else.

[Thor-Ul]

I understand them going back Sentry he has so much potential. People care about him whether it is negative or positive. Sentry evokes enough emotion that people care enough to want him to wipe out existence. The fact that people care is important and that fact he evokes strong emotions is a good thing.It is better to have a strong reaction than no reaction. It is going to take a good writer pull off the "Heel to headliner" but rewards are when does happen.

You can say a lot of things about Sentry but you can't deny than he trigger reactions.

Lastly I want to throw interesting scenario that shows another way the potential of Sentry Lets say Marvel decides to fast track a Sentry Movie.Why Because JL and Superman movies done have been meh. If you can pull off a good Sentry movie it creates tremendous pressure on the other company to make a good movie and not doing so lessen the impact of the character(see Green lantern). And the Man of steel is difficult character to pull off in this movie environment(Wonder Woman 1 and Captain America 1 are unicorns) The idealistic all ways do the right thing style heroes are challenge to pull off in today society where people are use to flawed heroes. A Sentry movie is with his issues is actually easier to pull that Supes movie. And with them maybe phasing out Thor and Hulk , Sentry is a character that can fill those two spots so he has a place in the cinematic universe if needed (also hilariously Marvel can focus on Black Panther,Captain Marvel and Sentry) . Sentry might not be amazingly appealing to comic book fans but cinematically he is more appealing. Superman is the archetype and the Icon but imagine if Marvel successful put a out a Great "Superman" movie with Sentry before DC. I don't think it will happen but not every move is just comic book related anymore they are other forms media to think about with Disney, Netflix, ABC, Freeform and the movies as platforms for marvel content. A comic nowadays can just be showcase for something else.

Yet it would be hilarious than Sentry could have his own movie, I don't think this would be possible for several factors:

1. The MCU have not the tone for a character like Sentry: the most pivotal and central plot of Sentry is his addiction and traumatic background. Without that, he is even more a Superman facsimile. In the MCU those kind of traits has been lessened in favor of the comedy in the MCU. You have just to see how the most traumatic elements of characters like Iron-man (his alcoholic problems), Hulk (his pathological fear to the monster inside him) and Spider-man (the guilt trip from his uncle Ben death) have been dimished, avoided or played for laughs in the MCU. With that scope, Sentry would be a mock-up Superman in the MCU, with big power but who traumatizes in the most relevant moments. Maybe a comical take on the Bendis version. In fact, I would wait how will the Shazam movie play, because the comparations with Superman here will be relevant.
In other plataforms I think is least probable, because the networks seems like turning towards series with less expensive fx . Maybe an animated series would be a possibility in a darker mood, but in USA there still the attached idea than animation is only for kids and Disney is pretty tight with their IPs.

2 We, as comic readers, can see the similitude with Superman and understand it. But I don't think the casual movie audience will see it in the same way. They will see a big guy who flies and uses an S and is invulnerable and they thought inmediatly "Superman". Or optimistically, "Look, another Thor". I still remember than when I went to see Watchmen, there was a girl with his boyfriend talking about wath had happened to Batman and his boyfriend saying "maybe he lost his fortune". They had confused Nite Owl with Batman. An obscure character confused with another famous one is something tha happens.
At the worst, it could transmit the idea than the MCU has left without ideas and they started recicling the ones from the competitors. Also, don't forget how many people were disgusted with the brooding Superman from Man of Steel? Would they like a broodier Superman from Marvelstudios, the house of the fun movies?

3. Other problem is the fact than Sentry is a straight caucasian male. (Yes, I'm going there, I can't believe it.) A movie about Sentry wouldn't well perceived by the most progresive radical and vocal sector of fandom(?) and it would be difficult to sell among all the discourse of diversity than many entertaiment bussiness are selling, including Marvel/Disney. That paradigm put him down in the list of options to bring to the silverscreen. And not, I don't think than to appeal to Sentry's mental health can be considered as an inclusion argument, because the topic of the Sentry is he is dangerous because he is a man with mental health/addiction problems and omega-level superpowers. Having mental health problems it what make him the least idoneous character to have superpowers. The guy is a time bomb. Unless, as I wrote before, you play that element for laughs or directly , minimizing it and make Sentry an even more Superman clone or parody.

The best way to put Sentry in a movie and conserve him in essence the closest to his comic version, would be as the next villian to be defeated by the next generation of Avengers, after Thanos. But I don't think than put a kind of classical archetype superhero as the villian to fight against a line-up of a more diversity oriented Avengers (as is rumoured they could be after Avengers 4) would not transmit the most apropiated message. Sentry is already a divisive character in the comics and it would not help him to become a divisive character in the movies too.

[ENTRYS]

Other problem is the fact than Sentry is a straight caucasian male. (Yes, I'm going there, I can't believe it.) A movie about Sentry wouldn't well perceived by the most progresive radical and vocal sector of fandom(?) and it would be difficult to sell among all the discourse of diversity than many entertaiment bussiness are selling, including Marvel/Disney. That paradigm put him down in the list of options to bring to the silverscreen.

How is that line of thinking working out for Star Wars? Spoiler: It isn't.

People on the far left aren't pushing any sales whatsoever. We see it in Marvel comics with the continuous low sales and cancellations of diversity books.
Same with Star Wars. 'The Last Jedi' is incredibly controversial among the fandom with the "The Force is Female" approach. 'Solo' has tanked incredibly hard considering it's a Star Wars movie.
Trust me, Sentry being a straight caucasian male is the last thing that would cause any problems for the success of such a movie.

And you have negated it, but I personally think that people with mental health issues are not only incredibly under-represented in media, but also that when they do appear it often has a very negative feel to it. I've seen movies about schizophrenics, where it always ends up in them hearing voices and killing a bunch of people.
You imply that we need characters with different skin tones, sexualities, religions and so on, for some people to identify with them... Why can't the same apply to mental illnesses? I think that there are many people with mental issues, who would like to identify themselves with some characters. I personally am far more likely to identify with someone like the Sentry than with someone like Superman.

[Tendrin]

As usual, it must be stated that so-called 'diversity titles' failing is blamed because of their 'diversity', while Moon Knight has gotten /how/ many titles and nobody says a damn word?

Come on, Enz. This isn't a helpful argument.

[numberthirty]

As usual, it must be stated that so-called 'diversity titles' failing is blamed because of their 'diversity', while Moon Knight has gotten /how/ many titles and nobody says a damn word?

Come on, Enz. This isn't a helpful argument.

Titles just have a tough time in the current market. Not much more to it than that.

Trying to work out the actual "Why" of things failing or working out might not be the best use of one's time. Way to many potential reasons.

[ENTRYS]

As usual, it must be stated that so-called 'diversity titles' failing is blamed because of their 'diversity', while Moon Knight has gotten /how/ many titles and nobody says a damn word?

Come on, Enz. This isn't a helpful argument.

Tendrin, if it sounds like a duck and looks like a duck, then it most likely is a duck.

I don't mind diverse character. What I do mind is when Marvel tackles the establishment and popularization of these characters the wrong way. The way Marvel does it now they're destined to fail. You would have to approach that topic in a whole different way.

Moon Knight has been around for decades. He is an established Marvel character, like him or not. And as I often tend to say: Moon Knight suffers from a mental illness, which makes him appealing to a certain reader demographic. So Moon Knight appeals to a minority.
If you want America Chavez to appeal to a minority, you still have to put in the effort and talent in order to establish her as a good character. Gabby Rivera did no such thing in my opinion. Give me access to America Chavez and I'll turn her into an amazing character. Give any person, who is passionate about Marvel comics and superheroes in general access to America Chavez and they'll do something amazing with her. Will she sell as good as Spider-Man? No. Never. Will she easily sustain her own books? Not necessarily, but I'm sure that she will do better than she did until now.

[ENTRYS]

Titles just have a tough time in the current market. Not much more to it than that.
Trying to work out the actual "Why" of things failing or working out might not be the best use of one's time. Way to many potential reasons.

There are many reasons why comics have a hard time. Badly executed diversity pushes are one of the last reasons I would name. But they are a reason.

1. It's super easy to pirate comics online. It doesn't even take you 30 seconds to get the exact comic you want to read. You don't have to pay money for it and you don't have to walk to a comic book store. That kills the sales.

2. The generation nowdays seems to prefer manga and anime over superhero comics. Kids nowdays know only that Spider-Man has spider-like powers and that his Uncle Ben died. That's it. But they'll be able to tell you everything about Naruto and Ichigo. And they don't even pay for the manga, because these are translated from Japanese to English and uploaded to fan sites. Again, kills the sales.

3. Comics are way too expensive. 4-5$ on an almost weekly basis. You really have to pick and choose which comics you buy. And if you have the choice between Scott Snyders Justice League and Batman and Gabby Riveras America... it's easy to tell where the majority of readers will put their money in. Again, kills the sales for less popular characters.

4. Too many events and crossovers. Back in the day you would buy Venom 1 until Venom whatever and you would get a complete story. Nowdays you start reading Venom and Venom 4 ends with a cliffhanger, while Venom 5 starts with a brand new story. Venom 4 got concluded in a bunch of other comics, which focus on other characters (from Spider-Man to even X-Men). Again, that kills the sales. I don't care about the X-Men, I care about Venom.

5. Badly executed diversity pushes. They pick characters like America Chavez and put "writers" with agendas to write those. Gabby Rivera was never qualified to write a Marvel superhero comic book. That showed in the book. The dialogue was very questionable and so were the political tones. Superhero comics are not about in your face politics. If they contain politics, then it's in the form of metaphors like for example with the X-Men. You read them, don't think much about it, but then one day you realize: "Oh... Oh, that's what they had in mind."

Not sure how digital sales factor into all of these things. But if a book like Ms. Marvel ships (not sells) 13.500 copies in a land where millions and millions of people live, you can imagine that the digital sales aren't much better.