Marvel Comics/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions

work->creator
m (cleanup categories)
(work->creator)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{workcreator}}
For Marvel 'verse comics and characters that don't have their own [[Just Bugs Me]] entry.
 
Line 5:
** Atlanteans are more advanced than humans. I can't think of any instance where they were portrayed as being stone age level, but the tech level does vary pretty wildly. Part of that is just inconsistent writing, but given that Atlantean settlements are constantly being blown up or disassembled or whatever, it may just be that they don't get to stick around in one place long enough to build anything significant.
* It's well established that the [[Iron Man]] armor makes the otherwise non-superpowered Tony Stark a heavy hitter among Marvel superheroes. It's also established that Tony has built hundreds of different armors throughout the years, and keeps on building new ones. Why, then, doesn't he give other superheroes similar armors to his own? Surely many of the non-powered heroes would appreciate the huge power boost the armor would give them? It seems that so far Tony has given an armor only to two of his closest friends, James Rhodes and Pepper Potts. Of course you could say it's a matter of trust, but surely Tony trusts his old superhero pals like Captain America or Hawkeye? And even if were to give an armor to someone he doesn't know as well as those two, surely he could put a backdoor system to the armors that would allow him to deactivate them if they are used for something he doesn't approve? (It's true that after the events of [[Secret Invasion]] Tony has fallen from grace, but before that he would've had years and years to do this.)
** Well, in [[Civil War]] he does give [[Spider-Man]] armor. It's possible some of the others might not want a full-scale suit- Hawkeye, [[Captain America (comics)]], [[Black Panther]] and others use fighting styles that require a certain amount of grace- they might not want to be at the whim of the armor's power supply. And it's certainly possible that Pym particles might have anadverse affect of his tech-that would leav Han Pym, etc. out. He's also been shown to be very careful with his tech, moreso in recent years- yeah, he may trust these folks, but maybe not quite that much.
** I like to think of Iron Man as Marvel's nearest equivalent to Batman. Anyway, have you read Armor Wars? Or the early stuff in his first solo series with the Guardsman turning kinda bad? That probably has something to do with the whole "I won't give you any of my damn armor" business, because when he does it usually leads to unnecessary deaths. And in Armor Wars, because armor designs of his had been stolen and used by criminals, he went around disabling each and every armor, including those used by "good guys" like SHIELD. He could've gone about the whole Armor Wars thing better, instead of basically causing multiple villains to escape from the Vault, but for the most part he was in the right.
*** Both these replies note that Stark ''has'' to be careful with his technology, since it's fallen into the wrong hands more than once. And again, other characters wouldn't need or even want suits of armor-[[The Mighty Thor]] would probably consider using human technology to be beneath him as a warrior of Asgard, while [[The Incredible Hulk]] obviously wouldn't think he'd need a stinking suit of armor when he's already the strongest being on the planet. Other heroes would have similar problems-[[Sleepwalker]] would disappear whenever Rick Sheridan woke up, and the armor would be left behind for anyone who wanted to scavenge it. Could the [[Ghost Rider]] make use of a suit, or even transform while his human host was wearing something like that? And then there's [[Wolverine]], who'd probably be weighed down by the armor more than anything else.
**** This still does not explain why many of the other brilliant scientists in Marvel don't equip people with human level durability and strength with at least some form of non-magnetic powered armor. Certainly Cyclops would be a lot more useful if a guy with a baseball bat couldn't kill him.
***** When all else fails, chalk it up to [[Cut Lex Luthor a Check]] Syndrome-many of Marvel's scientists simply aren't interested in it, or would rather keep their technology to themselves.
*** Isn't Stark Enterprises the company that mass-produces those suits of Guardsman armor for the government to use for the guards at its superhuman prisons? Or is that another company? So in some respects, Stark actually ''does'' distribute his armor technology on a large scale, namely to governments that can use it to even the odds against super-powered villains or aliens.
** Apparently the "Armor Wars" story made Tony unbelievably paranoid about spreading his armor tech around. Tony wants total control over how his armor technology is used and that means not giving it to any ''person'' he can't control. No matter how much he trusts Captain America, Tony doesn't control him and would have no say in how he used the armor.
*** Supporting the above, there was a comic (Invincible Iron Man #1 from 2010 for the curious) in which Tony lists his 5 greatest fears and 3 are that Iron Man (the suit) becomes easily replicable, that the suits start getting piloted by someone besides himself and Jim Rhodes (War Machine) and that it would become disposable, as in cheap and replaceable. It's also shown that he tracks all the other powered armors that are in the world, just because they're similar to Iron Man (this is while he's director of SHIELD). The 1st listed is that he lapses back into alcoholism, and the last is that it's not him that makes the armor fit any of the other 3. I'd say he's pretty paranoid about who gets to use it.
Line 38:
** If memory serves, and it has been a while since I read WWH: Frontline, a lot of those people simply refused to leave their homes. Which also happened during Katrina. I mean, yea, technically the superheros(or the army, for that matter) could have forced them to leave, but they didn't.
*** Its also worth noting in the Initiative tie-in, they distinctively mention that they were completely stretched thin building a parameter around the entire city. Yeah, Hulk wanted everyone out, but the heroes themselves were also pretty concerned about keeping him in, lest it become a literal World War Hulk. Anyone who wasn't part of the parameter was on the front line. It's important to remember that this was not a complete comparison to the hurricane in the sense that this wasn't purely a rescue and clean up deal, there was a battle going on. They were not going to let the Hulk thing slide or spread, any rescues taking place were happening completely on the fly, if any occured after the initial evacuation at all (they sent a covert ops team to rescue some POW's, but even then it was only because they didnt want said POW's defiance of orders to leak and worsen their already bad post-stamford reputation). Wherever you agree with their decision to focus so heavily on the battle itself, they very well had a valid reason to do so. It got to the point where the Punisher of all people came to rescue those who were left behind, and even then he still had to fight his way through the task.
* So, in Secret Invasion: Frontline, Spidey crashes into a guy's taxi, which will come out of his paycheck, and the driver's boss said they could get compensation if Spiderman were registered. I think that's daft, but it isn't my point. Peter WAS registered. He defected to the anti-reg side afterwards.
** While Spidey is technically registered, he was also an outlaw and actively working against SHIELD and the Registration movement. So he probably didn't get those work benefits anymore.
** Why on Earth-616 would a New York cab company in Marvel's New York not be insured against damages caused by superhumans?
*** Exactly. What, did all the property damage that supervillains caused in every prior comic never get paid for by any insurance company ever? After all, villains don't register!
* In the first ''[[Fantastic Four]]'' movie, Reed squeezed his hand under Ben's locked door to open it from the inside; what happens to his bones when he does something like that?
** He either deson't have any or they're rubbery like the rest of his body.
Line 47 ⟶ 48:
*** In the first and second versions of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, his entry says "How his respiratory and circulatory systems can function at these distorted extremes is at yet unknown." In other words, "We have no idea how this would be possible, so please, don't ask."
**** I sometimes wonder about Reads power being about warping the molecular structure of his body(Reality warping limited to his own structure). Internally nothing changes but externally his bodies relation to the outside world changes. It would go a long way towards explaining Franklin's powers.
**** His respiratory and circulatory systems can function at those distorted extremes for the same reason that his skin and muscles function that way, because his physiology was mutated by the cosmic rays to enable them to do that. Seriously, why is this so hard to understand?
 
* As one of the people who isn't bugged by [[Squirrel Girl]]'s ''absolute'' power level, I still can't help but think her ''relative'' power level seems a bit overplayed. More specifically, why isn't [[Spider-Man]] considered more powerful than her, given that they're both very strong, very fast, and capable of taking [[The Grim Reaper|Thanos]] in a fair fight, and that Spiderman's web-shooters have a greater reach and more potential applications than Squirrel Girl's claws and, er, squirrels? Is Peter Parker just that much of a loser?
** To the fans, no. To [[Executive Meddling|others]], yes. [[Deus Angst Machina|any happiness he obtains will be undone or destroyed before it becomes the status quo.]] [[Cosmic Retcon|And even that won't stop them some times.]]
** And Squirrel Girl's alleged power level is entirely intended for comedic value. Remember that she defeated Doom and MODOK by simply siccing squirrels on them, and defeated Thanos off-panel as a [[Take That]] for having the Doom she fought retconned to be a robot. When the joke started, she wasn't supposed to be very powerful, just clever, resourceful, and lucky (actually, it was supposed to be funny to see villains being beaten by squirrels, but the clever etc. is how it's explained in-story). Eventually some a writer who [[Completely Missing the Point|may not have entirely gotten the joke]] had her S.H.I.E.L.D. file say she may be one of the most powerful mutants alive, but she's [[Informed Attribute|never actually displayed that power level]].
** Yeah, like a lot of [[Rule of Funny]] SG's powers work a lot better the less people try to justify it in-universe. Personally this troper always thought the best way to make her not totally OP would be to have her likelihood of winning be proportionate to how badly someone needs to get made to look like a chump. So you'd have her pull up more or less even against Spider-Man or Beast, because nobody really needs to see Beast catch a beating, but then she'll beat the tar out of Thanos / Deadpool / Namor because hey, if anyone in the MU needs to get the tar beaten out of him by someone whose superpower is "squirrels", it's Namor.
* How the hell is Norman Osborne able to get away with what he does? I know it applies to pretty much all of ''Dark Reign'' (is there no investigative media or congressional oversight?). But specifically, in siege he is attacking Asgard against presidential orders and, apparently, the commander in chief has no way to communicate with anyone at HAMMER to order that Osborne and, for that matter Hand be relieved of command and arrested.
** In the Marvel-verse, you could be a mass murdering supervillan that kicks puppies down stairs, but if you do one remotely "good deed" or can cater to the masses, you get a pass.
** I think the point of siege is how its all gonna come crashing down on him.
Line 63 ⟶ 64:
** "Why would a goddess who concerned herself with the rape of one teenage girl make the same girl take an oath that would almost certainly insure that she'd risk being raped again?" Doesn't it make more sense that the oath is a test of Sonja's resolve to stay committed to [[The Quest]] rather than giving up the warrior's path for the pleasures of the flesh or a family?
** An alternative explanation is that the goddess in question didn't want her avenging angel to lose all her powers just because a man beat her and forced her to have sex. Without the "unless he beats you in a fight" clause, then [[Red Sonja]] would be put in a position where -- in the middle of her quest to avenge wrongs done to women -- she gets raped and consequently loses her power, which would be hideously unfair.
*** Having never actually read the Red Sonja comics, wasn't a clause of it that it had to be a fair fight? Presumably someone intending on raping her wouldn't fight fair.
**** IIRC, the clause was that it had to be a ''serious'' fight -- in other words, that she wasn't allowed to just spar with someone and then take a dive, if she wanted to have sex. She actually had to fight to the best of her ability and still lose. But it didn't necessarily have to be fair or honorable.
* The behavior of people in the Marvel universe perplexes me sometimes. On the one hand there is a massive dislike for mutants, specifically the X-Men who had done nothing but saved lives and such and the hatred seems to stem from the fact that they're mutants, they have powers and they're different. Yet in the same universe there were adoration and admiration for groups like the Avengers and the Fantastic Four, who weren't mutants per se but they still had friggin powers much like the X-Men. Why such polarizing opinions of these very similar groups?
* Because an immortal prokaryosentience has been manipulating the populace into mindless paranioa against metas and, in particular, mutants.
** It's somewhat of a [[Fantastic Racism]] thing, similar to, honestly, something like miscegenation or even immigration. They view them as another race that could eventually become the majority on the planet. Other heroes who got their powers on accident or are more supernatural by birth aren't as plentiful.
*** Even if it's [[Fantastic Racism]], how do regular people even know which superheroes are mutants, and which ones are just "normal" superpowered beings? It's not like the difference is obvious in any way to a random observer. In an early issue of [[X Factor]] J. Jonah Jameson hired the X-Factor to hunt down [[Spider-Man]], using the very logical excuse that he could be a mutant under his suit. Yet the X-Factor seemed to intuitively know that Spider-Man is not a mutant, despite the fact that none of them knew who he was or what he looked like under the costume. It makes sense that superheroes like the [[Fantastic Four]], whose identity and origin are known to the public, are not hated the way mutants are. But what about all the heroes with a secret identity? How does the public know which ones are mutants and which ones aren't?
*** Same way people "know" which celebrities are gay. Sometimes they're open about it, sometimes they're "outed," sometimes people just assume (and sometimes they're wrong). There are probably people in the Marvel Universe who insist that their [[Gaydar|"mutantdar"]] is never wrong. Some assume all superhumans are mutants until proven otherwise (and what constitutes "proof" varies from person to person - some probably assume that if you join the Avengers, you must be "okay") some assume they're all non-mutants until proven otherwise (joining the X-Men is a dead giveaway). If it helps, think of it like skin color - a white supremacist hates black people, but doesn't (at least on racial grounds) hate white people with dark suntans. In their mind, it's okay to ''have'' brown skin, just not to be ''born'' with brown skin.
**** I guess the above explanation would make sense if the people in Marvel universe were shown acting that way, but most of the time they aren't. The "common people" in the mutant comics just seem to be completely different from the "common people" in other Marvel superhero comics.
*** For the record, X-Factor were the original X-Men in disguise; they'd met and worked with Spider-Man many, many times and even invited him to join the team back in the [[Silver Age]]. He's point-blank told them he's not a mutant, which Professor X could easily confirm. Plus, he's on good terms with them - they wouldn't want to hassle him one way or the other, and if they did he'd probably have recognized them and blown their cover (he'd recognized Cyclops in his civilian ID before).
** The people of the [[Marvel Universe]] are the most easily suckered idiots to ever exist. A guy who just started a brand new religion based on worshiping him says the Avengers are bastards? Who gives a fuck that they've saved us countless times, we believe him! The guy who unleashed killer robots on Congress and the general population and couldn't control them is still trying to foster mutant hatred despite his own fuckups? Hell, yeah, he's right, mutants suck! The guy who bombed his own arraignment hearing wants to have all aliens booted off the planet? Get those offworld freeloaders outta here! I don't know why any villains even bother with mind control anymore. It's not like they'd ''need'' it, as stupid as the general population is.
** Why do people hate black people, even though they have powers and abilities that are the same as those of white people? Racism wouldn't be racism if it made sense.
*** No. Just No. It's not "White people hate black people even though they can do the same as white people" (where the problem is, precisely, that you're not white), it's "Normal people hate people with super powers even though they can do the same as other people with super powers". If you lived in the Marvel Universe, you just wouldn't be able to know why Cyclops is a mutant but Mr. Fantastic isn't, yet Cyclops would be hated and Mr. Fantastic would be a celebrity. You could argue that, for some reason, they hate mutants for being born with their powers instead of getting them later (which is completely ridiculous) and if that were the problem, all mutants could just make up some weird backstory to explain how they got their super powers. I mean, it's the Marvel Universe, you could probably just say that you just were hit by lightning and suddenly you could manipulate the weather.
*** The thing is, mutants are ''mutants''. That's what you're overlooking. These people are, by definition, freaks of nature, and that's an easy kind of fellow to be prejudiced against. Someone who's gained super-speed when lightning caused a chemical explosion has just been in an accident, and that could have happened to anyone. He wasn't born a genetic variation of an ordinary human being, like racist people think those of the "inferior" races are. (Of course, that could happen to anyone too, but that's prejudice for you.) A man whose face is deformed because of a car crash is never as likely to be shunned by his peers as a man who was born with such a face.
** For most of their history (or [[Retcon]] when necessary; the "mutant-hating" stuff wasn't played up much at all in the original Lee/Kirby issues) the X-Men and other mutant groups have operated with a greater deal of secrecy than the FF, Avengers, or Spider-Man. Don't forget also that many mutant villains, as opposed to the standard "rob this bank" or "take over the world" motivations of regular villains, make "mutant supremacy" a standard part of the package.
* Whats with the [[Straw Political|"typical]] [[Acceptable Target|Christians"]] of the marvel universe also being mutant haters? I understand the analogy to racism and gay bashing [[Shallow Parody|(cough)]] but the correlation doesn't actually make any sense if applied realistically.
** It isn't a very shallow parody, far too often it is [[Truth in Television|Truth In Comicbooks]]. Currently the most vocal antagonists against Homosexuals in the United States are conservative Christians. The concept of Mutants being able to hide among the regular populace and people being closet mutants is an allegory for Homosexuality started in [[The Eighties]]. It is only logical to keep going with the narrative as written by real life. Also, Mutants are derived through Evolution, a topic of which conservative Churches are not very fond. No, it is not very fair. Really the best way for Christians to counteract the negative stereotype of Christians vocally denouncing gay rights is to create a large and vocal counter-movement of Christians supporting them.
*** Its not a realistic narrative though, its more of a poorly conceived [[Take That]] which isn't historically or theologically justified. In the case of anti-gay rights, though there is some debate among scholar's as to whether or not the [[Department of Redundancy Department|interpretation of the anti-homosexuality verses are properly interpreted on homosexuality]], its justifiable where that sentiment came from (Leviticus OT/ Romans NT). Racism is also somewhat justifiable (Genesis) though to a significantly lesser extent, and one must also apply the secular roots for that sentiment. Mutant hating though really makes no sense, if applied realistically. They seem to look at it more like this: "Christians have a history of hating people who are different so they'll [[Did Not Do the Research|probably]] hate mutants too."
**** As [[Shakespeare]] once wrote, "Even [[The Devil]] can cite scripture for his purpose." Someone who is duly motivated can find a scripture to oppose anything that he/she wants, and if such scripture cannot be found he/she is free to misinterpret anything else. Biblical verses have been used to justify slavery (like I Peter 2:18-21), to justify the persecution of the Jews (Matthew 27:22 and 25, John 7:1, Acts 7:51-52), to keep women from voting or being able to work (I Timothy 2:12-15, I Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:22-24, I Corinthians 14:34-35), to dictate hairstyles and clothing (I Corinthians 11:13-15, I Timothy 2:9-10), to justify child abuse (Proverbs 22;15, Proverbs 23:13-14), to justify discrimination against African Americans (Genesis 9:20-27, Jeremiah 13:22-25), to prevent interracial marriage (Genesis 11:8), and for the prohibition of Alcohol (Daniel 5:1, 3-4, Matthew 11:10). (People have also used Biblical verses to refute many of those things as well, but the kind of people who would trade in anti-mutant hysteria are not exactly reasonable.) Honestly, it is not a huge leap to go from any of those to anti-Mutant bias. Most likely (if the writers wanted to [[Shown Their Work|do the research]]), they would probably have the Mutant hating Christians use the argument that since there God created man in his image there cannot be evolution, therefor Mutants must be the work of the devil, then use I Timothy 6:20-21 to bash Science in general. It is not a "all Christians will hate Mutants" thing, it is more of a "bigots who hate Mutants and happen to be Christian will use anything at their disposal to justify their hatred including their religion" thing. As far as I remember, there are plenty of anti-mutant individuals who aren't Christians in the X-Men books as well.
*** That argument is still weak because if Christians in the Marvel universe hated Mutants because it [[They Just Didn't Care|"proves evolution"]] by that same strain of thought, [[Shown Their Work|if they REALLY did their research]] Christians in the marvel universe should have more issue with characters like [[Physical God|Thor or Ares]] or extraterrestrials like Mar-Vell, Silver Surfer or Hulkling who really "prove evolution" among other things, and [[Harry Potter|Doctor Strange (nuff said)]]. Mutants should be the least of their problems, even in the case of the non-christian bigots. As I've said before, I understand the analogy but its weak. It works as a [[Fantastic Aesop]] analogy of race and sexual orientation, but not for [[Truth in Television|realism]]. But it IS just a comic....
*** Furthermore, the above troper should really go out and ''talk to'' some of those "conservative Christians" and learn what they really think before judging them. Because I guarantee you, only a teeny-tiny, barely-even-visible minority of conservative Christians actually behave like the so-called "conservative Christians" portrayed in the 616 universe.
*** There was also at least one pro-mutant preacher, [http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/conoverwill.htm William Conover], who used his pulpit to drum up support for mutant rights. Naturally, he ended up being targeted by human bigot groups, although ironically enough it was the [[Punisher]] who ended up protecting him.
 
* How the hell can Marvel Zombies talk if some are just heads!? In fact, how can they pronounce words if they have no lips? Take Headpool for example, at one point in [[MZ 4]], he whistles. He would need lips, lungs, a windpipe, etc.
Line 94 ⟶ 96:
** In his early backstory, during his and Xavier's days in Israel, it was made fairly clear that Magneto doesn't consider himself beholden to human distinctions; he's not "Jewish", he's "Homo Superior".
** Well, after the "Acts of Vengeance" arc, in which he sided with the Red Skull, he remembered all this Nazi background and kidnappend him, left him in a hole in the ground with no food and just a little water. It didn't seem to last though.
** Should be noted that while the Skull was a Nazi, he was never directly involved with the Holocaust. He was in charge of espionage, terrorism, and occult activities. As much as Magneto hates the Nazi party, and as much as he may hate the Skull for every single aspect of his personality that makes him a detestable human being, he can't pin the blame for the everything the Nazis did on Red Skull's head. Magneto's never been the kind to personalize his issues like that; it's all part of a larger whole. Skull was a cog in a machine, and Magneto has bigger problems these days.
* What exactly did [[Time Abyss|Selene Gallio]] ultimately hope to accomplish in the recent "Necrosha" story arc/series crossover? What was her end-game{{spoiler|, besides "godhood" and bagillions of vampire-like followers}}? Admittedly, it's been a few years since I've steadily followed any series (the conclusion to "Civil War" was the last I read), and I probably haven't done the research necessary to understand the peripheral story buildup to the arc. Be that as it may, didn't she realize that she loses more than she wins with her plan? First of all, she was apparently in possession of immortality already?! Secondly, did she honestly think that the other long-lived baddies of the Marvel Universe would sit idly while she basically makes herself an in-universe female Expy of [[A God Am I|Apocalypse]]?
* In the 90s, Captain America lost his mighty shield at the bottom of the ocean. During the time before he (inevitably) got it back, he used an energy-shield which could also be adjusted into an energy sword and an energy force-blast, conveniently packed inside his glove. Now that Steve Rogers is no longer Captain America, having given the shield to his former sidekick, he's using the energy shield again. What doesn't make sense is -- why did he STOP using the energy shield? Sure, we all wanted him to have the classic shield back, but was there some sort of Avengers rule that says he couldn't have both? What if he dropped the metal shield? And was there never again going to be a situation where a sword or energy blast could come in handy?
** There is no in-universe reason, it's just that the metal shield was iconic, and the energy gauntlet not. If you really need to cope with it, mind that Cap has almost unlimited access to every technology in his universe, and never used it if his shield and a Swiss army knife are disposable. It's his mentality.
** The energy shield was destroyed by Ultron at some point, which was what led Cap to reacquire his original shield. Either the technology could not be reproduced or Cap just didn't think he needed anything more than his classic shield.
** You sure he didn't carry both? I believe there was in fact one story where, after being separated from his real shield, he clicked on the energy one. The technology's underneath the glove so it wouldn't be visible, and it really wouldn't come up in most circumstances.