|
TNG posted:I kinda hated it, and it sort of encapsulates a lot of what I hate about Hickman's version of Tony Stark. I really like his run, and I feel that it's had a lot of strong and interesting characterizations, but Iron Man is not one of them. His Iron Man is either 1)Getting verbally destroyed, 2)Getting beaten up by someone, 3)Both. He's sorta been this big stupid straw man that Hickman keeps wanting to take down a peg every time he's on page. It's made the character really one note. Blah blah Tony you suck, blah blah I'm going to beat you up to show you how much you suck, blah blah Please dumb it down for a dummie like me, Reed. Just chiming in to say I agree 100%.
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:47 |
|
|
Gavok posted:So what you're saying is: It takes a lot to make a stew. The true creators of the incursions: Beast Rebels Of The Hellscape.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
TNG posted:I kinda hated it, and it sort of encapsulates a lot of what I hate about Hickman's version of Tony Stark. I really like his run, and I feel that it's had a lot of strong and interesting characterizations, but Iron Man is not one of them. His Iron Man is either 1)Getting verbally destroyed, 2)Getting beaten up by someone, 3)Both. He's sorta been this big stupid straw man that Hickman keeps wanting to take down a peg every time he's on page. It's made the character really one note. Blah blah Tony you suck, blah blah I'm going to beat you up to show you how much you suck, blah blah Please dumb it down for a dummie like me, Reed. As someone who is a newish reader, who hasn't had time to get sick of Tony, I actually liked his character in that - I think the problem with Tony Stark is people keep writing these 'redemption' stories, and then immediately after some other author writes him doing something super evil, so he has to be sorry all over again so people can forgive him enough to still be a hero. It's gunna happen after this too, when he has to make amends for Superior Tony's actions. If they want him to stay a hero, let him actually have development that sticks, or just make him go full bad for real - however cheap that would feel after his countless apparently sincere regrets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
I think a lot of the Tony being the antagonist will move away as we get closer to finding out what/who is causing the death of the mutliverse. But up until now, Tony and the Illuminati are pretty much the antagonists in this story, if not the outright villains.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:I think a lot of the Tony being the antagonist will move away as we get closer to finding out what/who is causing the death of the mutliverse. But up until now, Tony and the Illuminati are pretty much the antagonists in this story, if not the outright villains. Gonna be hilarious if the destroyer is Tony from another universe just to keep making GBS threads on the character. But in reality, it's going to be a Richards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
One point Hickman hammered constantly in FF was that Richards needed his family to stay good. A Reed without a family pretty much always goes bad. It looks like that idea has expanded to all super-geniuses. Tony needs Steve, not because Steve is always right but because Steve is his emotional anchor, the thing that keeps him grounded. When Tony pushes Steve away he loses that and makes bad decisions. It's an idea that could easily be extended to other characters like Banner too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Well Marvel has played around with "Evil Tony" or more accurately "Tony Stark behaving badly" in various ways over the years. The genesis is probably around the start of the Demon in a Bottle, where the alcoholism comes from. That was a perfectly fine story, probably one of Iron Man's best, but y'know it was written in the late 70s. Denny O'Neil fleshed it out A LOT in his run, and I felt that was natural. Demon, for all its positives, was a Top of the Mountain to the bottom story. Tony gets the drinking problem and goes back to relatively normal in about 8 issues. A little cheap when talking about alcoholism. O'Neil has Iron Man descent into a drunken stupor he doesn't really emerge from for 20 issues, and then only really "suits up" as the true Iron Man again 18 issues later. So that's about 3 years of Tony having a legitimate character arc of being a complete and total failure as a hero, businessman, and person and then climbing his way back to the "sorta" top. But Marvel isn't really done there. Armor Wars, another seminal IM story, has Iron Man GOING ROGUE to get back his stolen technology. He goes so far as to fight and disable Captain America in his myopic and arrogant quest. Pretty cool stuff. But Marvel kinda lets him get away with it. The IM that did all of this stuff "dies", and a NEW Iron Man who completely didn't do any of that awful stuff takes his place. Everyone sorta forgets that poo poo and goes off to fight Secret Wars II or something. But it's kind of the start of this weird trend where Tony does bad things and then everyone kind of just stops mentioning it after a while. I mean sure these are serial comics and different editorial and creator staffs come and go, but rather than forgetting that one time Peter Parker used to be a teacher or that Hawkeye spent a bunch of time as Giant Man, it became somewhat of a recurring theme in Iron Man's stories over the years. Also, The Crossing. Marvel went "gently caress it" and just made Tony a full on crazy 90s Super villain. The return of Tony Stark from this complete and utter mess is another super spergy post altogether, but it follows the old hat of Tony doing bad stuff and then going back to his own book and Avengers doing whatever it is he does in those books. But, eventually, another thing came up with this. And it's not totally a new thing, the redemption story for those actions. As Wolpertinger said, people keep writing the redemption story. IM does bad stuff, then THE REDEMPTION, normal for about 10 issues, repeat. And it's not totally out of place either. It's sort of key to his origin story, and his past status as a war profiteer. And thinking about it, it probably won't change in any way until they get rid of the whole "Weapon Designer" thing entirely. But I digress. There have been good ones and bad ones, but it's basically the same story either way. The most famous one in recent memory would of course be Matt Fraction's post Civil War work in Invincible Iron Man. There are A LOT of problems with Fraction's run, but probably the biggest is that he turns Tony into this mopey Peter Parker. Always paralyzed with indecision, fearing everything jumping out behind him, and a Tony Stark that feels guilty he's Tony Stark and has to go around apologizing, and failing, for that fact. There are some good things to the run, but it's a Tony that isn't really the most competent guy in the room. It's a Tony that isn't confident. It's a ball-less Tony. And sure, that works for some characters, but goddammit it shouldn't be that way for IM. I think one of the reasons that RDJ Tony is so popular is that he has confidence, and actually backs it up. IM3 in some ways was about How Stark got his groove back. And it made for an interesting watch. And after all that verbal diarrhea, it comes back to Hickman's Iron Man, which is basically Fraction's without any of the heroism or intelligence. Oh yeah, and a lot more Jobbing. Kaleidoscope posted:One point Hickman hammered constantly in FF was that Richards needed his family to stay good. A Reed without a family pretty much always goes bad. It looks like that idea has expanded to all super-geniuses. Tony needs Steve, not because Steve is always right but because Steve is his emotional anchor, the thing that keeps him grounded. When Tony pushes Steve away he loses that and makes bad decisions. It's an idea that could easily be extended to other characters like Banner too. Yeah, but at least Evil Reed always manages to do something with himself. Throughout New Avengers, Tony's major contributions seems to be building a bunch of maguffins, getting beaten up, or getting talked down to by Reed and T'Challa. And there was that one time he tried to commit suicide while surrounded by a bunch of alcohol. And good lord, I wish another Republican would get elected president so Steve would go away again. Steve Rogers will never be as critical a part of Tony's stories as the rest of the FF are to Reed's. Because they're inherently antagonistic to one another at every end of the spectrum. They don't so much balance each other as cancel each other out. Steve is always a gimmick in the Tony Behaving Badly stories, in IM's own book at least, where he shows up for a bit, tells Tony he's being bad, and then just kinda fucks off. Y'know, it's fine to pit them against one another, but at least make it fair. Hickman makes such a big deal about how the Illuminati, I guess Tony included, are SO much smarter than him that he has to bring overwhelming force to bear. At least depict Tony in a way that makes that warranted, since it seems to me like he could beat Iron Man himself, as an old man. TL;DR: Jonathan Hickman sucks at writing Iron Man. TNG fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
I don't think The Cabal capturing Tony is "jobbing Tony." It's a team that includes Thanos, who's usually a job for all of the Avengers, Namor is probably the (physically) weakest on the team and if Namor can get Tony underwater, it's easily Namor's fight. And in the previous New Avengers Reed spent a lot of time talking about how important it is they get a hold of Tony's research, so I bet he's going to play an important part.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
Even though the stories with his weird city weren't the best, I do like the whole idea of Tony deciding to aggressively do good and improve the world in ways unrelated to superheroics that don't end up backfiring in some world-shattering way as some demonstration of the hubris of trying to use superscience on anything but blowing up supervillains. I like the Iron Man character (though i'm unfairly biased by having my real first experiences being the movies and RDJ) and it always seems to me like a lot of his stupidest moments are just a writer making him do something evil/stupid for cheap shocks to try and grab people's attention enough to sell a few more comics, which is stepping on an otherwise entertaining character. Some people could argue that Tony IS an irredeemable unlikeable rear end in a top hat due to stuff he's done in the past, but since it's a comic book and they can just aggressively pretend things didn't happen, it'd be better of they keep taking cues from the movie Iron Man everyone likes instead, honestly. It's okay if he does stupid things occasionally but he shouldn't just be the default guy they turn to to cause some inter-avenger squabble in every single story, and to pretty much always end up being proven in the wrong. I'm hoping the whole Incursion storyline doesn't end with the Illuminati and Tony being outright proven as completely and utterly wrong, and that there was some magic fix that would have fallen into their laps if they fawned sufficiently enough upon perfect and saintly Steve Rogers who is always in the right about everything. As someone who the major part of his experience with Cap is through the Hickman comics, he's beginning to seriously get on my nerves. Wolpertinger fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Wolpertinger posted:Even though the stories with his weird city weren't the best, I do like the whole idea of Tony deciding to aggressively do good and improve the world in ways unrelated to superheroics that don't end up backfiring in some world-shattering way as some demonstration of the hubris of trying to use superscience on anything but blowing up supervillains. The problem is short of inventing imaginary problems the Marvel U simply can't let the super genius heroes fix everything. It's a theme that gets explored a bunch in indie comics and self contained books but it'll just never happen in the main universes because they want them to stay identifiable with the real world. Wolpertinger posted:I'm hoping the whole Incursion storyline doesn't end with the Illuminati and Tony being outright proven as completely and utterly wrong, and that there was some magic fix that would have fallen into their laps if they fawned sufficiently enough upon perfect and saintly Steve Rogers who is always in the right about everything. There's pretty much 0 chance of this happening though, fortunately. It's not Hickman's style. I would like to see what happens when someone just like our cap meets someone just like the great society. That would have been a decent bridge watching issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I don't think The Cabal capturing Tony is "jobbing Tony." It's a team that includes Thanos, who's usually a job for all of the Avengers, Namor is probably the (physically) weakest on the team and if Namor can get Tony underwater, it's easily Namor's fight. And in the previous New Avengers Reed spent a lot of time talking about how important it is they get a hold of Tony's research, so I bet he's going to play an important part. I don't think it is either. He got taken down by alternate Terrax, who's a Herald of Galactus. I think it's just kind of lame to lock Tony in a cell and have a bunch of people poo poo talk him when he could actually be doing something in the story other than lose fights and get sick nasty burns dropped on him by the likes of Hawkeye and Spider-Woman. And again, Tony's major role in New Avengers, if not Avengers as a whole, has been to provide a bunch of hyped up mcguffins. It's kind of frustrating story telling when you keep getting told about all these ominous things like Sol's Hammer and the however many weapons the Illuminati just got their hands on, when the character who made them barely has any agency within the story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
TNG posted:TL;DR: Jonathan Hickman sucks at writing Iron Man. Wasn't Stan Lee's vision of Tony Stark and Iron Man to create an extremely unlikable hero in the first place? I thought I read that. quote:I think I gave myself a dare. It was the height of the Cold War. The readers, the young readers, if there was one thing they hated, it was war, it was the military....So I got a hero who represented that to the hundredth degree. He was a weapons manufacturer, he was providing weapons for the Army, he was rich, he was an industrialist....I thought it would be fun to take the kind of character that nobody would like, none of our readers would like, and shove him down their throats and make them like him....And he became very popular.[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:The problem is short of inventing imaginary problems the Marvel U simply can't let the super genius heroes fix everything. It's a theme that gets explored a bunch in indie comics and self contained books but it'll just never happen in the main universes because they want them to stay identifiable with the real world. They don't have to turn it into Star Trek, but giving the world some small sci-fi touches that don't completely change the general look and feel of the world would be a good thing, I think, considering how much ridiculously amazing tech is practically standard issue for SHIELD and AIM and whatnot. It's easy enough to handwave cure-alls or flying cars as too expensive or too dangerous to mass produce, but the smaller things would be nice. They should cure goddamn cancer by now though, considering how often it's overused as a tragic disease for the friend/love interest/family to die from or to cause drama. I'm sure they can come up with some other disease, real or not, that would be harder to cure with nanotechnology and sorcery and genetic modification and microscopic surgeons. Gatts posted:Wasn't Stan Lee's vision of Tony Stark and Iron Man to create an extremely unlikable hero in the first place? I thought I read that. I read that not so much that he was supposed to be an unlikeable hero, but to create a likeable hero despite representing a whole lot of stuff that his readers very much did not like. I think Punisher fits more in the mold of the deliberately extremely unlikeable 'hero' than Iron Man. Wolpertinger fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
Gatts posted:Wasn't Stan Lee's vision of Tony Stark and Iron Man to create an extremely unlikable hero in the first place? I thought I read that. Yeah, but there's a difference between being unlikable and being not entertaining. As the quote says, he became very popular even if he was a guy who designed weapons and profited off Uncle Sam killing people. Really, Tony Stark is a Randian nightmare. But even if your character is this huge bastard, writing a story where he's this punching bag that doesn't really do anything all that important isn't entertaining. In fact I would say it's really goddamn boring, at least whenever that character is saying or doing anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Wolpertinger posted:They don't have to turn it into Star Trek, but giving the world some small sci-fi touches that don't completely change the general look and feel of the world would be a good thing, I think, considering how much ridiculously amazing tech is practically standard issue for SHIELD and AIM and whatnot. It's easy enough to handwave cure-alls or flying cars as too expensive or too dangerous to mass produce, but the smaller things would be nice. But whenever you do that, it makes 616 a bit more unrealistic. Yes there are superheroes and space gods and all, but it is overall supposed to be our world. While on the grander scale of Avengers and intergalactic threats curing cancer seems like a great story, that eliminates the kind of stories you can tell in solo books that deal with civilian cast as well. If cancer is cured, Waid couldn't have written this great Foggy story that is going on in Daredevil right now. T'Challa's Dad actually mentions this in New Avengers that Wakanda has closed boarders and keeps their science and medicinal research to themselves so that Wakanda can survive and prosper even though doing so means hungry and ill people outside of their boarders will die. I think some past FF writer (maybe Waid? or JMS?) said Reed has a deal with a lot of the tech and medical and pharmaceutical companies that they'll fund his foundations as long as he doesn't release inventions that could cause them to go bankrupt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Reed has at least once designed a solution for world hunger, building it would have cost a third of the world's resources and would feed the planet for a thousand years at projected population growth rate. The collective governments of the world refused to fund it and several sent agents to destroy the plans. One of Reed's infinite energy machines almost sparked world war three when literally every county tried to steal it and keep it from one another.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
That's what I love about Reed. He fucks everything up by simply existing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I don't think The Cabal capturing Tony is "jobbing Tony." It's a team that includes Thanos, who's usually a job for all of the Avengers, Namor is probably the (physically) weakest on the team and if Namor can get Tony underwater, it's easily Namor's fight. And in the previous New Avengers Reed spent a lot of time talking about how important it is they get a hold of Tony's research, so I bet he's going to play an important part. I think Namor is probably stronger than Black Swan and is certainly stronger than Maximus. It's funny that someone brought up Iron Man getting somewhat poo poo on by Hickman (so far) because I was starting to feel that way about Hulk. Less so Banner because Banner got to work out that the Illuminati were operating again before the majority of characters knew but Hulk has always seemed ineffective in his various appearances. I'm not going to pretend to be the world's biggest Hulk expert or anything but a lot of his past successes/moments seem to come from punching stuff hard and being the "strongest there is", this approach hasn't really worked out for him in Avengers/New Avengers. In the first arc he gets mind controlled by Abyss and fights his own team, during Infinity he is easily taken down by Proxima and Corvus and then in the fight with The Great Society he loses his strongest there is contest with Sun God. I suppose it doesn't really matter unless you're the sort of person who loves those "who would win in a fight?" questions and always insist the answer is Hulk but it happened enough times for me to notice. Maybe Hulk will have more success as Doc Green now he can contribute more than fists to a problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
TNG posted:Well Marvel has played around with "Evil Tony" or more accurately "Tony Stark behaving badly" in various ways over the years. The thing to remember about Iron Man, IMHO, is that Iron Man's arch-nemesis has never been the Mandarin or Justin Hammer or the Spymaster or Obadiah Stane or any of those dudes. Iron Man's arch-nemesis is Tony Stark. Armor Wars is a perfect example. Justin Hammer has stolen Stark's technology and Stark is determined to hunt down every example of it. That includes the Guardsmen units in the Vault. Let me reiterate - the prison guards in the prison for supervillains. And he goes and shuts them all down. Sure, it'll make it nigh-impossible to shut down any prison riots by the, y'know, supervillains... but hey, that doesn't matter as much as making sure Tony Stark's technology remains in the hands of Tony Stark, the only man responsible enough to use it, right? This pattern repeats again and again. Tony knows better, just ask him. And it's hard to say he shouldn't think that way, because ninety-nine times out of a hundred, he does know better. And when he fails, he fails big. That's his flaw, that's what makes him interesting; he's got a serious case of hubris. He becomes a hero by rising above that hubris, not by eliminating it; it's still a part of him, but when the chips are down he gets over it and does what he has to do. That's why I don't think I can agree with saying "Jonathan Hickman sucks at writing Iron Man," because we haven't gotten to the part where Tony rises above his hubris yet (if, admittedly, he ever does). Hickman's clearly got a grand story in mind, and we're still in act two, maybe the beginnings of act three.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:The thing to remember about Iron Man, IMHO, is that Iron Man's arch-nemesis has never been the Mandarin or Justin Hammer or the Spymaster or Obadiah Stane or any of those dudes. Iron Man's arch-nemesis is Tony Stark. Yep and usually Steve is the only one who can steer him away from himself, and why most of his biggest mistakes are when Steve is not around or they are pissed at each other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Is that supposed to be The Thing's hand taking up a whole bunch of space on the cover of Avengers 38? edit: Oh, it's Sunspot, I guess. It's awfully...orange and rocky. redbackground fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Where did Scott Summers & co. get a Phoenix egg, again? ... I don't know if I should ask this here or in the X-thread, but it was mentioned in Avengers so I guess this is close enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
The Hickman Avengers books are half a year or so ahead of the rest of 616 continuity so it hasn't happened yet in any of the X-Men books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Yep, the big old finish. I like Hickman's run, and definitely will be there to the end. But unlike Armor Wars where Tony actually affected the plot and then lived with those consequences(for a couple of months), Hickman has set up this ineffective buffoon that has so little of a role in the story he's finally just been put in a box until we get to the grande finale. I have no problem with Tony as a victim of his own, ironic, shortsightedness(other than it's been told a million goddamn times), which as you say is his biggest nemesis. I do have a problem with the incompetent boob that Hickman has sketched out over two years of comics. Iron Man's direct contribution to the plot is building things, and that's thematic, since he is an engineer. He built the Avengers Machine, which started this whole kooky thing in the first place. But other than that? What? Manned a turret with Reed while the Thanos pirates were attacking New York? Built a big Super Gun out of the sun and a bunch of other vague things that may or may not have a use in the big ending? Burned evil Jarvis' face really badly? Gave The Hulk a ride to the clubhouse when he figured it all out himself? It's kind of a whole lot of nothing, reserved for a bit player, not the one who's supposedly the other side of the coin in this whole story. New Avengers has been mostly the Black Panther and Namor show, guest starring Beast with narration by Mr Fantastic. Iron Man acts to offer some little quip here and there, and maybe ask Reed to explain how that thar doohicky works, but is ultimately a very minor member of the Illuminati. And putting aside the who would win bullshit, it doesn't really bother me that Iron Man gets beaten. What does bother me is that Hickman always has some character launch into a little speech about what a piece of poo poo Tony is. Ex Nihilo did it, Hawkeye did it, Boundless did it, etc, etc. People talk about The Hulk getting poo poo on by Hickman, but good lord. So ultimately, I feel that he "sucks at writing Tony Stark" because he's written a very ineffective Tony that doesn't deserve an ounce of the gravitas that he wants us to feel towards him. You can have a character be shown to fail without humiliating them at every turn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
To be fair, everyone should hate Tony, and the only reason they don't is comics. Because Tony is a big, big piece of poo poo, you see.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
I wouldn't count Tony out. I remember people (including myself) complaining about how easily Dr. Strange was taken out during Infinity, and what do you know, immediately after he ends up summoning Cthulhu to kill the Justice League.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Then Iron Man flashes him and he passes out or something. Jobbers jobbing jobbers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:The thing to remember about Iron Man, IMHO, is that Iron Man's arch-nemesis has never been the Mandarin or Justin Hammer or the Spymaster or Obadiah Stane or any of those dudes. Iron Man's arch-nemesis is Tony Stark. I like this post; you said what I was thinking in a way better way
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Senor Candle posted:Then Iron Man flashes him and he passes out or something. Jobbers jobbing jobbers. That's not jobbing, that's dealing with a threat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
I always thought that was a bit of an odd scene. poo poo, Dr. Strange has obtained crazy HP Lovecraft levels of power....better just zap him with a repulsor or something, which does the trick off panel, and go home. Gotta blow this place up and get on with the plot. It was also from a wrecked armor that Tony and Black Pather were jury rigging. Haha.
TNG fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Nov 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
It's just because they didn't have a disposable camera with a flash on it. Turns out Dr. Strange is just really shy and doesn't like having his picture taken.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:To be fair, everyone should hate Tony, and the only reason they don't is comics. Yeah. I like the character of Iron Man, who is a bad person, because he is just as much  America as Steve Rogers is. His whole character is bound up in a) always having an unassailable technological advantage and b) spreading that advantage wherever he thinks he has an interest. This is contradictory, but he can't change it without re-assessing a lot of his personality and goals. So he becomes Secretary of Defense or whatever the hell and builds Earth a big ol' defense net. But he can't actually tolerate Starktech existing outside of himself, so he ties it all in to his own systems such that it can be completely shut down when the Skrulls give him the space flu. Any engineer, much less a supergenius one, will tell you a single point of failure for a huge critical system like that is an awful idea. But Stark almost certainly has a very plausible reason for doing it anyway, because he can't not do it and still be Tony Stark.Like, we send our best unmanned drones into Iran. Oops, they brought one down and have reverse-engineered it and sold the designs on to China. We send M1 Abrams tanks to help what's left of the Iraqi military fight ISIS. Oops, ISIS stole all the tanks so now we're shipping more in to replace the ones that were stolen, and we'll probably have to ship more to replace those when they get stolen. Don't worry though, we blew up two more [formerly American] tanks than they stole from us this year! A net win for Uncle Sam! If there were a Total Stark Move instagram blog or whatever the kids have these days, a lot of American foreign policy would be on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 07:32
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:The Iron Man books states that he actively avoided having inversion undone. But if he was still inverted I don't know why he would climb into his new biggest armor ever and go try to stop the Cabal solo. It's one of those things where even timelines don't work, but he's probably not inverted. Well his inversion made him a douchebag, it didn't make him a nihilist that wanted to see worlds die.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:Well his inversion made him a douchebag, it didn't make him a nihilist that wanted to see worlds die. Yeah, I'm not reading Axis, but based on Superior Iron Man and Mighty Avengers, inverted heroes didn't become villains, they became assholes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Yeah, I'm not reading Axis, but based on Superior Iron Man and Mighty Avengers, inverted heroes didn't become villains, they became assholes. The inverted Avengers shrank all the other Avengers with Pym Particles. The X Men took over Manhattan and are about to commit genocide.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Web Jew.0 posted:The inverted Avengers shrank all the other Avengers with Pym Particles. The X Men took over Manhattan and are about to commit genocide. Stop trying to make me read Axis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Stop trying to make me read Axis. Axis is bad in broad strokes and good at the little moments.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 10:00
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Stop trying to make me read Axis. Old Steve Rogers just recruited Carnage and the other inverted villains to fight the Avengers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Spider-Man and Nova have a great bromance brewing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:47 |
|
|
Holy poo poo today's issue. The art is as bad as the issue is good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 15:30
|
|