I am a New Avenger

But Batman and Superman have gotten their fair share, which is the point. They might not be getting it right now, but they took their lumps.

Well if anybody wants perspective on how Steve Rodgers feals about Wolverine's killing and such, they should pick up Wolverine Weapon X #11. Great book and actually adresses that issue.

Jewel is back.

I was hoping for somebody outside of last run's inner circle but Im glad to see Jewel as a New Avenger.

Guess it's alright to see her back in costume, but again, not really a surprise to anyone since she's been becoming more and more active in the current NA run.

Nothing surprising yet, but it's nice seeing Jessica Jones (finally) back in costume.

So far we have:
Luke Cage
Spider-Man
Wolverine
Jewel/Jessica

Next up we'll probably have Ms. Marvel, with possibly Brother Voodoo, Echo, and Iron Fist. It doesn't look like Sentry will be surviving Seige, so I won't put him on the list.

LordD3r3k wrote:

Batman25JM wrote:I just don't get why Marvel gets crap for having multiple titles in the same franchise, or for having a character appear in multiple books, yet DC doesn't get the same crap. There are 3 Batman books (4 if you count Detective when it stars Bats, and 6 if you count Batgirl and Red Robin which are in the Bat-Family, and now 7 with Birds of Prey starting up), and he appears in JLA, yet that doesn't seem to mind to people. Also, DC is starting up another book in the Green Lantern franchise, but that doesn't get the crap either. I just don't understand.

Is this a serious comment?

You've never heard someone complain about all the Bat-books, or the Supes-books? Or is this just a case of selective reading?

In all seriousness, DC has gotten plenty of flack if there's even a peep of a new Bat-book. Any character/group with seemingly excessive titles is going to be a target at some point.

It was a serious comment. Superman and Batman may have gotten crap in the past, but since I've been actively reading comics I haven't seen it. There are a ton of Batman ongoings, but I hardly heard one complaint about them, and yet I CONSTANTLY hear people bitching about Wolverine (and now Deadpool). Seriously, I don't get it. I don't care if they have 600 ongoings, I don't have to buy them. And Wolvie has been "overexposed" for quite some time, so you'd think the bitching would subside, but it hasn't.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:

Batman25JM aka Batman25JM wrote:^I will say one other thing, I don't think that Wolverine's actions or reputation has been much of a problem for the New Avengers. They've spent about two thirds of their series as outlaws. I mean, when you have a team of fugitives does it really matter if one is a killer? And before that, I can see Cap's blessing for him going a long way. If the public believes in Cap and he says that Wolvie is okay, then I can kinda buy it that it wasn't that big of a deal (and also at that time X-Force didn't exist).

And yet they took issue with the idea of killing Osborn, esepcially Spidey. The issue here is this: Logan is essentially a hitman, taking assigments from Cyclops. he may not fit the exact mold of one but he comes pretty close. They have an issue with Hawkeye killing Osborn but have no problem with Wolvie killing the number of people he does? And that somehow makes sense because they are all fugitives? Ignoring the fact that they are fugitives due to a law they see as unjust, forgetting that they are fugitives in a system presumably corrupt and run by Osborn? They consider themselves fugitives but still righteous in the sense. So I sincerely doubt they would be okay with Wolverine killing scores of people. Wolverine is going to be an Avenger and he kills scores of people at the direction of Cyclops in his spare time. And this will be okay with every single Avenger because Cap asked him to join the team at a time he was not aware of such things because Wolverine was not doing such things at the time. Again, none of it makes sense. We see Cap get on Punisher's case for killing criminals. We see Cap get on X-23's case for killing people. We see Cap get on half the Avenger's case for killing the Supreme Intelligence. But he won't have an issue with Wolverine killing scores of people under Cyclop's discretion. Yeah, no. The whole thing doesn't make sense. Understand, I'm not trying to give you a hard time or attack you or anything. People will have their own views which is cool. I'm just, more or less, kicking this move by Marvel repeatedly in the ribs since it seems silly to me. It makes sense from a business aspect but not much else, hence why I find it funny overall.

I completely agree with Bigtymin, Wolverine kills in a fight if he has too, but he doesn't just assassinate people, let alone the top cop in the land.

When I mentioned them being fugitives and having a killer be on the team not mattering, I wasn't talking internally, I was talking about how the media would view them.

And with Cap, I meant he'd vouch for Wolverine's past killings and behavior and that would go a long way. When I mentioned X-Force not being around yet, I didn't mean that Cap was vouching for the actions of that team, just that it hadn't been around yet so it couldn't cause problems then. And to be technical, Wolverine was a member of the New Avengers before he was the leader of X-Force, so really I don't think Bendis should be getting all the flack for this. It should be Joe Q or Kyle and Yost.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:
In any case, the reason why I keep comenting on this is because it seems fairly clear to me (and not to Marvel, lawl) what sort of issues having black-ops killer can do for a public team not known for such things. I mean, to put it bluntly, if there was no problem and no one had any issue, then why throw a fit with Osborn? Why throw a fit with Bullseye? Why hide Bullseye's actions? Why hide his identity if the public have no issue with a guy that kills scores of people because he was ordered to? Why spend any time and effort covering it up? Why do the same for Daken? If we sit down and truly compare, there hasn't been that much difference between Wolvie's actions and those of Bullseye. None of it really adds up. All we can go on is that they don't know. But X-Force is hardly a secret to agencies like SHIELD, SWORD, or the various intellgence agencies of various countries. And how soon do you think this will come back to nip the Avengers then when Logan is a famous Avenger? The whole move doesn't make sense in the end and is a recipe for all kinds of trouble. Again, not trying to be a dick, just saying and justifying my loud guffawing of this choice. I'm still laughing at Luke Cage: Avenger, head of the thunderbolts, and father. It's plausible but interestingly odd to me.

Again, Wolverine is completely different than Osborn and Bullsye. Obsorn and Bullseye are homicidal maniacs. They kill for pleasure, not out of necessity.

Bigtymin504 wrote:Lol yes quite wordy Wade.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:And yet they took issue with the idea of killing Osborn, esepcially Spidey. The issue here is this: Logan is essentially a hitman, taking assigments from Cyclops. he may not fit the exact mold of one but he comes pretty close. They have an issue with Hawkeye killing Osborn but have no problem with Wolvie killing the number of people he does? And that somehow makes sense because they are all fugitives? Ignoring the fact that they are fugitives due to a law they see as unjust, forgetting that they are fugitives in a system presumably corrupt and run by Osborn? They consider themselves fugitives but still righteous in the sense. So I sincerely doubt they would be okay with Wolverine killing scores of people. Wolverine is going to be an Avenger and he kills scores of people at the direction of Cyclops in his spare time. And this will be okay with every single Avenger because Cap asked him to join the team at a time he was not aware of such things because Wolverine was not doing such things at the time. Again, none of it makes sense. We see Cap get on Punisher's case for killing criminals. We see Cap get on X-23's case for killing people. We see Cap get on half the Avenger's case for killing the Supreme Intelligence. But he won't have an issue with Wolverine killing scores of people under Cyclop's discretion. Yeah, no. The whole thing doesn't make sense.

What Hawkeye wanted to do was straight up assassinate a public official in cold blood, even if it is Osborn I don't see the Avengers ever sanctioning that. What they know about Logan is, he kills if he has to in a fight, but he's not a cold blooded murderer. There is a subtle difference. And if you think about it, the Avengers didn't seem to have a problem with people killing Skrulls during the big fights in Secret Invasion. If you cut a Skrull, does it not bleed?

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:In any case, the reason why I keep comenting on this is because it seems fairly clear to me what sort of issues having black-ops killer can do for a public team not known for such things. I mean, to put it bluntly, if there was no problem and no one had any issue, then why throw a fit with Osborn? Why throw a fit with Bullseye? Why hide Bullseye's actions? Why hide his identity if the public have no issue with a guy that kills scores of people because he was ordered to? Why spend any time and effort covering it up? Why do the same for Daken? If we sit down and truly compare, there hasn't been that much difference between Wolvie's actions and those of Bullseye. None of it really adds up. All we can go on is that they don't know. But X-Force is hardly a secret to agencies like SHIELD, SWORD, or the various intellgence agencies of various countries. And how soon do you think this will come back to nip the Avengers then when Logan is a famous Avenger? The whole move doesn't make sense in the end and is a recipe for all kinds of trouble.

What's the difference between Wolverine and Bullseye?!? Well for one, Wolverine doesn't murder innocent men, women, and children to satisfy his psychotic bloodlust lol. Seriously, there's no comparison between the two. Bullseye just recently murdered a building full of like a hundred people, including children, just to fuck with Daredevil. The dude is sick.

X-Force on the other hand is a black-ops team that targets enemies that have specifically tried to kill the X-Men or all of mutantkind. They go in to stop them and kill them if it comes to it, but not necessarily murder them in cold blood. And that's not to say Logan hasn't done some really bad stuff in his day, but most of its been in his checkered past. For the most part, he's straightened out as a more traditional hero since then, but he does still kill if he has to.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:What's the difference between what Punisher is doing? They're both pre-emptive strikes at people deemed threats?Punisher picks out the targets while Cyclops picks out the targets for Logan. And I'm not saying people on the Avengers know about his involvement with X-Force now. I'm saying they will find out since various agencies are taking notice of their actions. And having Logan in such a public position, since one can assume that the Avengers won't be fugitives anymore and very much in the public eye, how prudent is it to have him part of the Avengers while doing what he does in X-Force? The two don't correlate.

Well like I said, there is a subtle but important difference between what X-Force does and what somebody like Punisher does. Punisher just flat out murders whoever he deems a low-life criminal. Cap kicked his ass in Civil War because he shot up two supposed villains that were just trying to join Cap's underground resistance. They were unarmed and not posing any threat and Punisher murdered them in cold blood. X-Force doesn't partake in stuff like that. Sure they kill if they have to, but they set out more to look for fights and finish them rather than to simply go out and gut unarmed foes.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:I think the reason why people complain less about the DC books is due to how seperated in continuity they tend to be from each other. Usually 2-3 books is how much overlap there is, unless some special storyline is being put together. Alot of times, the stories take place in a continuity seperate from everything and are rarely mentioned in continuity books. This tends to be the case with Batman. Wolverine, alot of his stories seem to be part of continuity, making for some confusion. His appearances other people's books also add for some confusion as for what the timeline is. The fact that Marvel is often viewed as the "continuity strong" brand played into people expecting and then getting confused by Wolvie's appearances. It's like trying to make sense of all the Deadpool titles and creating a consistent timeline out of those. I think that's the issue people have with it. Personally, I just laugh at all of it when they do stuff like this, knowing they're just trying to cash in on the character's fame.

I dunno I don't buy that. Batman does his fair share of jumping around various different places and showing up in various different books. I'd say its the same kind of "continuity" thing as Wolverine. And at least Logan has a healing factor to recover from all that traveling.

Completely agree with everything you said Bigtymin.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:
I know Bullseye is sick and such. But in their actions and roles under Dark Reign, there has been very little difference. Bullseye has functionally been acting like Norm's personal hitman, much like how Wolvie has been acting like Cyclop's personal hitman. Bullseye is given an order to kill a bunch of agents in his own Dark reign miniseries. How is this different than the fanatics Wolvie was asked to kill? In function and action they are more or less the same at the end of the day with intent being the only thing. And we all know how important intent is to the Marvel public (Dark Avengers and Norman vs. the Secret Avengers). That said, being part of any black ops assassination squad won't sit well with any group, especially if you keep black ops killing while in that group. The public won't think to highly of it (since it amounts to murder regardless of the reason really). I don't see how one can be reconciled here.

I think the fact that Bullseye blew up a building full of innocent people makes him different than Wolverine.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty aka Fat Honking Loving wrote:
I think Batman's is different. Even now, we have stories that feature Dickbat and ones that feature Brucebat, with the added note that the Brucebat stories occurred before he died and that's it. With Wolverine, you can't do that. Before he died, the stories were treated the same way, but instead, these side stories were never tied into continuity. A good deal of Wolvie's stories seem to, especially his appearances in other books which tend to be substantial. Batman usually shows up and makes a comment or two before going or his role limited unless he is the star of the title.

Yeah, but there are 3 ongoings that feature the Dick Grayson Batman as well as him being a member of the JLA. For the most part the Bruce Wayne stories are limited out of continuity books, so I don't really count those.

Batman25JM wrote:I completely agree with Bigtymin, Wolverine kills in a fight if he has too, but he doesn't just assassinate people, let alone the top cop in the land.

When I mentioned them being fugitives and having a killer be on the team not mattering, I wasn't talking internally, I was talking about how the media would view them.

Then why didn't Norman reveal the identities of his Avengers? If the public has no issue with criminals, then why not let everyone know it's Bullseye being Hawkeye? Saying "he's crazy" doesn't cut it because Norman is just as crazy and the public has accepted him. How about Moonstone? Again, she's crazy doesn't cut it since she was leader of the Thunderbolts and they were favorably viewed overall by the media due to their efforts in Secret Invasion. The same for Venom as well, yet they maksed all that and tried to hide their true identities. Add in mutant hysteria it's a wonder that Wolverine is not lambasted by the press everyday. That said, this is not even my point, my point being: a new team of Avengers will be formed. Wolverine will be on it. AT THE SAME TIME, Wolverine will be on X-Force. How can that be reconciled, especially when it is only a matter of time before Wolverine is found out, since SHEILD and opther agencies not only know of X-Force but are aware of it's actions and so forth. How soon does this come back to the other superheroes and how do you think the other heroes will take it. Spidey freaked when Jessica Drew wanted to kill some low-life criminals. It's safe to say that the other superheroes share this viewpoint. Then how can one excuse Wolverine for killing a number of people while Jessica Drew is not allowed to kill some low lifes? it doesn't make sense nor does it correlate.

Batman25JM wrote:
And with Cap, I meant he'd vouch for Wolverine's past killings and behavior and that would go a long way. When I mentioned X-Force not being around yet, I didn't mean that Cap was vouching for the actions of that team, just that it hadn't been around yet so it couldn't cause problems then. And to be technical, Wolverine was a member of the New Avengers before he was the leader of X-Force, so really I don't think Bendis should be getting all the flack for this. It should be Joe Q or Kyle and Yost.

I made the comment on Bendis because the Avengers have killed in the past, like when they killed Supreme Intelligence (half the team did while half (including Cap) was against it). Iron Man was leading the way on that one. Not much has made him change his stance on killing. Again, heroes have shown reluctance to kill when it comes to aliens so Secret Invasion and the killing of skrulls was also an odd thing, given what we have seen time in and time out. And I blame Joe Q for everything. I'm not sure how Kyle and Yost can be blamed for anything. They have done a good job and even shown how people are beginning to become aware of X-Force, maybe not in name but know that something like it exists.

Batman25JM wrote:
Again, Wolverine is completely different than Osborn and Bullsye. Obsorn and Bullseye are homicidal maniacs. They kill for pleasure, not out of necessity.

Again, intent means nothing in this discussion because I'm not arguing about that. The law is being broken. Cyclops and Wolvie are taking the law into their own hands. I can't go and kill a bunch of KKK members and say they were a threat to my existence. No one would buy that. The same applies here. The defense "they were out to kill mutants so I killed them before they could kill me" does not apply if they are chilling in their base not doing anything. It's pre-meditated murder and nothing more. How would the public view the Avengers team if they knew Wolverine took orders from Cyclops to kill people? How would the team take it? How would Spidey take it? That's the issue here, so intent means nothing at the end of the day. Wolvie is breaking the law and taking the law into his own hands by doing the killings that he is doing in X-Force. How defensible is that? And how smart is it to be a public figure and carry out these type of activities. As part of the Avengers, Wolverine will be essentially a celebrity (he alreay is in the Marvel U). It does not make sense for a celebrity to be engaging in illegal activites that extensive especially when a number of people are aware of his actions.

Batman25JM wrote:

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:
I know Bullseye is sick and such. But in their actions and roles under Dark Reign, there has been very little difference. Bullseye has functionally been acting like Norm's personal hitman, much like how Wolvie has been acting like Cyclop's personal hitman. Bullseye is given an order to kill a bunch of agents in his own Dark reign miniseries. How is this different than the fanatics Wolvie was asked to kill? In function and action they are more or less the same at the end of the day with intent being the only thing. And we all know how important intent is to the Marvel public (Dark Avengers and Norman vs. the Secret Avengers). That said, being part of any black ops assassination squad won't sit well with any group, especially if you keep black ops killing while in that group. The public won't think to highly of it (since it amounts to murder regardless of the reason really). I don't see how one can be reconciled here.

I think the fact that Bullseye blew up a building full of innocent people makes him different than Wolverine.

Both killed people and did so in a manner that was not sanctioned by law. No matter how you look at it, it ends up being the same thing at the end of the day. I, as an FBI agent or an agent of SHIELD or as a responsible superhero, simply cannot just ignore that much carnage, regardless of the reason or if the people were innocent or not. The world, especially in comics, does not work that way. If I start saying "but they were guilty and deserved it", then you have Punisher instead.

Everyone here keeps thinking intent means anything to most heroes, when at the end of the day it doesn't. If so, they would not be so hard on Punisher for what he does. The law and the general rule of "superheroes don't kill" tends to. Again, there is no difference at the end of the day in Moon Knight or Punisher killing criminals and Cyclops ordering Wolverine to kill people because all of them are tkaing the law into their own hands, denying their enemies due process and so forth. And this is what the public will see. This is why superheroes, if they do care about public opinion, hide themselves and covertly kill and make an effort to cover it up. If not, if people, if no one would have an issue with superheroes killing, then why hide? Why would Cyclops need X-Force to act in secret anyways? Why would the X-men make it a secret that they kill? Why would Norman make it a secret that he kills? Why would Norman hide the fact that he has crazy killers on his team when he himself is one and can easily spin their stories like he did his? Seriously going through all these questions, you'll see how silly it is to have a person on your team that is activly breaking the law by killing people (and no, waltzing up to their place of business and killing them is not self-defense in the eyes of the law) and be part of a very public team. AFTER SIEGE, the Avengers will be a public team. AFTER SEIGE, X-Force will still exist. And before anyone talks about time machines and seeing the future, these things are obvious so it can be safely said as much as a New Avengers series will exist. That said, if Wolvie is on both teams, well...that's an issue since that means, in the eyes of the law, Wolvie is a mass murderer along the lines of Punisher and is an Avenger. And with various agencies aware of Wolvie's actions and superheroes having more contact with these agencies since the heroes are no longer fugitives after Seige, this will prove problematic, or at least should.


I'm not trying to be a jerk but these are the things that ran through my mind when it was announced Wolvie would be on the team. I also acknowledged it was just to cash in on Logan and also thought how ugly his costume was.

Wade, you're absolutely right. But Marvel stopped trying to make sense a long time ago.

Dr. Wade Fucking McNasty wrote:That said, this is not even my point, my point being: a new team of Avengers will be formed. Wolverine will be on it. AT THE SAME TIME, Wolverine will be on X-Force.

Well we don't know whether X-Force will even be around after Second Coming, which starts this month. So you can't say for sure that he'll be on both at the same time.

But Wade what's your main gripe here? I tried to answer some of your points, but seems like this conversations is going off on random tangents and I don't feel like going in circles. So just wondering what your main problem is.

LordD3r3k wrote:Wade, you're absolutely right. But Marvel stopped trying to make sense a long time ago.

That's just not fair.

@Wade (sorry, I don't feel like quoting everything):

When I said I was talking about how the media viewed them, I didn't mean that it didn't matter that Wolverine had killed people. I meant that the team was already viewed as fugitives, so having a killer on the team wasn't really tarnishing their image. It wasn't like the Avengers were squeaky clean and then Wolvie came along and ruined that image.

As for why Norman didn't reveal the true identities, for one wasn't he trying to say that the members of his team were the real deal, and others were fakes? I swear I remember that coming up. Also, why should he reveal it? It's unneeded scrutiny. The public obviously has a problem with criminals, but there are exceptions. And Norman has "battled his illness" and overcome it in the eyes of the world. America, whether it's good or not, does allow for second chances. Also, he convinced people that there was someone else in the costume when Green Goblin did a lot of his crimes.

I have to say that intention does very much matter. If someone kills someone in self defense do you still think of them as a murderer? Or if someone kills someone in war to defend their country are they a murderer? I think it's a little wrong to basically say that murder is murder no matter what. Now, I'm not condoning killing all criminals (in real life), but there are differences between what Wolverine does and what people like Bullseye do.

Also, in between the heroes intention matters. First off, its not like Wolverine and Spidey had never met prior to New Avengers. They have worked together in the past, and he know full well that Wolverine had killed people. Then you have the X-Men. Historically the X-Men have been very anti-killing (hell, in Claremont's run Storm wouldn't shut up about it), but Wolverine has been a member for over 30 years. They obviously know he's killed people. Why is it such a problem for Wolverine to be on a the New Avengers with people who are anti killing, but not for him to be on the X-Men. I mean, Nightcrawler is one of his best friends, and he's very anti killing. They know that Wolverine doesn't just kill for the hell of it. He's a hero that uses lethal force.

Bigtymin504 wrote:

LordD3r3k wrote:Wade, you're absolutely right. But Marvel stopped trying to make sense a long time ago.

That's just not fair.

I agree, that's not fair. Statements like that kinda irk me. I'm not saying that there aren't problems that arise, but it's not like Marvel is the only company. There are many things at DC that don't make sense. I still don't get why everyone is fine that WW killed Maxwell Lord. It seems to have been brushed by, and is a non issue now.

Bigtymin504 wrote:That's just not fair.

Why not? It's a personal opinion and observation I came to after reading a number of their titles. I don't expect everyone to share it, and I'm sure most won't. But I have the right to judge the content I come across, don't I?

Batman25JM wrote: There are many things at DC that don't make sense. I still don't get why everyone is fine that WW killed Maxwell Lord. It seems to have been brushed by, and is a non issue now.

Are you referring to characters being fine, or readers being fine?

LordD3r3k wrote:

Bigtymin504 wrote:That's just not fair.

Why not? It's a personal opinion and observation I came to after reading a number of their titles. I don't expect everyone to share it, and I'm sure most won't. But I have the right to judge the content I come across, don't I?

I don't think it's fair because it is a blanket statement. To me, any time someone says a statement like that it comes across as that they won't like anything that that company puts out no matter what. That they are not going to like it just because it is that company. Now, if you had just said that I don't like the things that I've read, that's fine, but to say flat out that Marvel as a whole doesn't make sense is not fair.

There have been problems at DC, but I've seen you kind of gloss over them in the past. Now that is not to say you haven't called them out in the past, but if it is a company or a creator you like you can make excuses for them, or not let it bother you. I am not attacking you or anything, I've done it too.

I have found it time and again that if someone likes something or someone they are willing to accept things, even if it isn't logical to accept them, and when they hate something or someone they will pick it apart and criticize everything.

LordD3r3k wrote:

Batman25JM wrote: There are many things at DC that don't make sense. I still don't get why everyone is fine that WW killed Maxwell Lord. It seems to have been brushed by, and is a non issue now.

Are you referring to characters being fine, or readers being fine?

Both. I don't remember ever hearing anything about the fans really being up in arms, and if they were they got over it damn quickly. As for the characters, I know that they did call her out on it a little, but again, they seemed to get over it quickly. I just don't see Superman being all fine and dandy with her after that, but I don't let it bother me.

Batman25JM wrote:Both. I don't remember ever hearing anything about the fans really being up in arms, and if they were they got over it damn quickly. As for the characters, I know that they did call her out on it a little, but again, they seemed to get over it quickly. I just don't see Superman being all fine and dandy with her after that, but I don't let it bother me.

I dont think fans got up in arms about it because they saw she was put in a life or death situation and could identify with her choice.

As for the characters, I'm not sure if you'll recall a story called Infinite Crisis, but a main reason Kal-L and Prime decided to step in was because of the rift that formed between Superman, Batman, and WW over her actions.

I made that "selective reading" comment earlier as a joke, but now I'm starting to wonder..

Batman25JM wrote:I don't think it's fair because it is a blanket statement. To me, any time someone says a statement like that it comes across as that they won't like anything that that company puts out no matter what. That they are not going to like it just because it is that company. Now, if you had just said that I don't like the things that I've read, that's fine, but to say flat out that Marvel as a whole doesn't make sense is not fair.

I've stated numerous times how much I enjoy the Stephen King titles. And I did enjoy the first Annihilation series. So no, I don't immediately dismiss the entire company.

But yes, recent events for Marvel's earthbound characters tend to make me do this more often than not.

LordD3r3k wrote:

Bigtymin504 wrote:That's just not fair.

Why not? It's a personal opinion and observation I came to after reading a number of their titles. I don't expect everyone to share it, and I'm sure most won't. But I have the right to judge the content I come across, don't I?

Its not fair because its a gross generalization. I'm pretty confident you don't read nearly enough Marvel books to make that kind of generalization about the whole company. If the stuff you've read makes you feel like that then that's fine, but I guess you should word it a little differently. Saying "Marvel doesn't care about making sense" is just way overboard and just not true. Somebody could find a handful of DC stuff that they think doesn't make sense and make a blanket statement about all DC books and I'd say that's totally unfair too.

LordD3r3k wrote:

Batman25JM wrote:Both. I don't remember ever hearing anything about the fans really being up in arms, and if they were they got over it damn quickly. As for the characters, I know that they did call her out on it a little, but again, they seemed to get over it quickly. I just don't see Superman being all fine and dandy with her after that, but I don't let it bother me.

I dont think fans got up in arms about it because they saw she was put in a life or death situation and could identify with her choice.

As for the characters, I'm not sure if you'll recall a story called Infinite Crisis, but a main reason Kal-L and Prime decided to step in was because of the rift that formed between Superman, Batman, and WW over her actions.

I made that "selective reading" comment earlier as a joke, but now I'm starting to wonder..

Yes, I read Infinite Crisis (though it's been a while, I should reread it), and I do remember Kal-L and Prime's reasons for doing what they did, but they were not her teammates or friends. Batman and Superman (and others) did not seem to have that big of a problem with it. Then there was the whole Identity Crisis thing. When it was revealed what had been done to Dr. Light it didn't seem like a HUGE deal. Sure, people had problems but they didn't seem super horrified. Now, this doesn't matter to me that much, but it bugs me when people call out Marvel for something similar, but don't seem to mind when DC does it.

LordD3r3k wrote:

Batman25JM wrote:I don't think it's fair because it is a blanket statement. To me, any time someone says a statement like that it comes across as that they won't like anything that that company puts out no matter what. That they are not going to like it just because it is that company. Now, if you had just said that I don't like the things that I've read, that's fine, but to say flat out that Marvel as a whole doesn't make sense is not fair.

I've stated numerous times how much I enjoy the Stephen King titles. And I did enjoy the first Annihilation series. So no, I don't immediately dismiss the entire company.

But yes, recent events for Marvel's earthbound characters tend to make me do this more often than not.

See it is perfectly fine with me to say that certain things don't work for you is fine. But have you read every single Marvel title? I'm willing to guess not, so to say that an entire company doesn't make sense, or isn't good, or whatever just seems wrong to me.

Batman25JM wrote:Yes, I read Infinite Crisis (though it's been a while, I should reread it), and I do remember Kal-L and Prime's reasons for doing what they did, but they were not her teammates or friends. Batman and Superman (and others) did not seem to have that big of a problem with it. Then there was the whole Identity Crisis thing. When it was revealed what had been done to Dr. Light it didn't seem like a HUGE deal. Sure, people had problems but they didn't seem super horrified. Now, this doesn't matter to me that much, but it bugs me when people call out Marvel for something similar, but don't seem to mind when DC does it.

Yeah heroes forgive/overlook other heroes actions a lot. Just like the JLA ultimately understood what Diana did with Max Lord, the Avenger have and will do the same with Logan.

Batman25JM wrote:
Yes, I read Infinite Crisis (though it's been a while, I should reread it), and I do remember Kal-L and Prime's reasons for doing what they did, but they were not her teammates or friends. Batman and Superman (and others) did not seem to have that big of a problem with it. Then there was the whole Identity Crisis thing. When it was revealed what had been done to Dr. Light it didn't seem like a HUGE deal. Sure, people had problems but they didn't seem super horrified. Now, this doesn't matter to me that much, but it bugs me when people call out Marvel for something similar, but don't seem to mind when DC does it.

I'm really not sure how to respond to this. First, a main reason Kal-L and Prime took action is because Batman & Superman turned on Diana. Second, these two scenarios you're talking about caused HUGE rifts between characters. I'm stunned you can actually sit there and say it didn't seem like a big deal. It broke apart the JLA, became the basis for many storylines that year, and ultimately sparked Infinite Crisis. How can you possibly say it was 'glossed over'?

LordD3r3k wrote:

Batman25JM wrote:
Yes, I read Infinite Crisis (though it's been a while, I should reread it), and I do remember Kal-L and Prime's reasons for doing what they did, but they were not her teammates or friends. Batman and Superman (and others) did not seem to have that big of a problem with it. Then there was the whole Identity Crisis thing. When it was revealed what had been done to Dr. Light it didn't seem like a HUGE deal. Sure, people had problems but they didn't seem super horrified. Now, this doesn't matter to me that much, but it bugs me when people call out Marvel for something similar, but don't seem to mind when DC does it.

I'm really not sure how to respond to this. First, a main reason Kal-L and Prime took action is because Batman & Superman turned on Diana. Second, these two scenarios you're talking about caused HUGE rifts between characters. I'm stunned you can actually sit there and say it didn't seem like a big deal. It broke apart the JLA, became the basis for many storylines that year, and ultimately sparked Infinite Crisis. How can you possibly say it was 'glossed over'?

I don't know, I know there were some repercussions, but they seemed to get over it damn quick. Now, granted, I didn't read EVER single book dealing with this, but I read a great deal of things, and I just didn't see any reason for them to make up like they did.

Batman25JM wrote:I don't know, I know there were some repercussions, but they seemed to get over it damn quick. Now, granted, I didn't read EVER single book dealing with this, but I read a great deal of things, and I just didn't see any reason for them to make up like they did.

Dude, they dealt with the fallout of those 2 stories for almost 2 years before IC.

Not to sound dickish, but you have a very thin argument here.

I guess I must have completely missed the stuff where they dealt with it. Still, in reality, I don't see any way for Superman to get over it. With his morals I just don't see him having an easy time forgiving her.

Batman25JM wrote:I guess I must have completely missed the stuff where they dealt with it. Still, in reality, I don't see any way for Superman to get over it. With his morals I just don't see him having an easy time forgiving her.

It wasn't.