another character-centric issue..
this week stark, next week strange?
another character-centric issue..
this week stark, next week strange?
Last edited by jackolover; 11-20-2014 at 03:25 AM.
Sound for me that Black Swan had something for him because she liked his alpha male behaviour but than he got to far and crawled under her skin with out her permission.
Simply saying that he loves her would been a much better option in this situation than this even if it is a lie.
So far I heard she has all she needs to make perfect clones. Its basically on the level of some sort of resurrection.
Can a perfect clone be called a resurrection ? This a huge philosophical discussion.
It start with can you differentiate between clone and original ? Is there a difference between them ? If not is this a form of rebirth?
Last edited by TakoM; 11-20-2014 at 04:02 AM.
If a perfect clone with the memories of the original is not rebirth, then the real Red Skull's been dead a while... I think the issue is not so much her ability to bring her family back in technical terms, or considering them really her family, but rather finding a world that she thinks stands a chance of surviving long enough for there to be a point to it.
It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Readers say they want the books to acknowledge each other, then complain when they do so.
I think the "need to know" mindset has really changed from when I first got into comics. When I was a kid, you just accepted that there were older stories or other books that had an impact on things, and you may not be able to read those other stories. There was no internet to research info or discuss with other readers, so you just accepted it. At best there was an editor's note with a * "see Captain America 299 to find out why Cap's so old now". Which didn't actually explain anything, it just pointed to where you could find out if you wanted to spend more money. So usually you just accepted it and moved on.
These days, people want to know everything NOW. And they seem to think they actually need to know it all to understand the story.
But it doesn't even really matter that much. Hickman's story acknowledges the changes, but does nothing to explain them or elaborate on them. And that's fine. The info is easily available for those that want it. I don't follow Thor's or Cap's books, but simply being on these boards I know enough about what's happened to them to simply accept it and then enjoy Hickman's story on its own merit.
Yeah, that's the nice thing about the internet. You don't need to actually buy other books to understand what's going on, or even Byrne steal them. It's all out there if you need it.
Which doesn't necessarily mean that a writer should assume they can Google the info and not bother giving readers the minimum of what they need, but it's nice that the net is out there as a safety net for when writers maybe don't do as good a job as they should.
I imagine anyone not reading Axis is going to find Mighty Avengers pretty confusing for example. Sometimes certain gaps do need to be filled.
There are definitely times when some explanation is necessary. I stopped reading Axis and don't read Mighty, but I can imagine when things are closely tied like that, you may need additional exposition about it.
For Hickman's story, I don't feel like I really need anything more than what's obvious. Thor lost his hammer and thinks of himself as unworthy....that's all I need to know, and that's pretty clear in the writing. He's obviously looking for either redemption or a glorious death in search of redemption. It's clear to me.
For Cap, I don't follow the solo, so all I know is it had something to do with some guy called the Iron Nail. But it's happened before, actually, and I know Cap is chronologically old as dirt, so I'm good. I think his age seems to have only heightened his anger and righteousness, so that works for me.
With Stark, I could just as easily attribute his rantings to his imprisonment and everything else that's happened. No need at all to go into the Inversion thing at this point. That will likely change, but I'm sure we'll get enough to go on.
It reminds me of Civil War in a way....the Daredevil at the time of that story was actually Iron Fist dressed up as Daredevil. If you knew, the story worked fine, if you didn't know, the story worked fine. That isn't always the case, but when it can be pulled off, I think that's the best approach.
I don't feel the need to read any other books than these, and to me, that's the biggest factor.
Agreed.
The funny thing is the recap page (which frankly most of us don't read anymore) actually clarifies some of these things. Granted, the reader has every right to know exactly why said character is the way he/she is but for me, it doesn't add or take away from the stories I'm reading.
Continuity is important but I don't need all the timelines of the various titles to line up. With the nature of story telling today, it's not going to be possible anymore.
Well the X-Nation thing hasn't happened yet, I don't think, but yeah, as much as it uses the characters as they are in their own books, it is self contained. As much as I may not understand exactly what happened to Thor or Steve, I'm also aware that it happened in their own books, and the why of it isn't integral to Hickman's story.
I don't read the X-books these days, except the occasional thumb through at the shop, but I will say the few pages of Cyclops in this issue was the best I've seen from the character since Whedon. As I said, that's admittedly not a ton of stories....I really find militant Cyke to be awful, and I think it's because writers who followed Whedon misinterpreted what he did with the character....but this little glimpse made me not hate the character anymore.
Probably more a by-product of Hickman's characterization, though.
Which is kind of ironic when one takes into consideration the fact that T'Challa himself is supposed to be an Apex master strategist/stealth warrior from one of the most technologically advanced nations in the 616 MU.
It's like Hickman showcases other characters uber-qualities whilst reducing T'Challa (and the rest of the Illuminati) to the level of a innefectual tactical moron totally bereft of the signature characteristics that have been part of his repetoire right from the characters very inception. :smh: