Ultimate Marvel - Page 6

NolanSpalter · 10-17-2005, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElfLad

Um... two, maybe three story arcs?

What I really want to see is at least one thing that's a polar opposite to the normal Marvelverse. I mean, if it's an alternate retelling, how come EVERYBODY has almost the exact same personality? I'd love to see, say, Ultimate X-men have at least one character that is a villain rather than hero, or human rather than mutant. That would be pretty neat.

I personally would love to see a heroic panda named Onslaught.

EDIT:

Seriously.

Elmer J. · 10-17-2005, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElfLad

Um... two, maybe three story arcs?

What I really want to see is at least one thing that's a polar opposite to the normal Marvelverse. I mean, if it's an alternate retelling, how come EVERYBODY has almost the exact same personality? I'd love to see, say, Ultimate X-men have at least one character that is a villain rather than hero, or human rather than mutant. That would be pretty neat.

Well, it's not THAT alternate, but a mirrorverse would be kind of funny.
But then between Apocalypse and Galactus the universe would be a Utopia.
I guess Franklin Richards and Nate Grey would be quite a thorn in their sides...

Fifthfiend · 10-17-2005, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElfLad

Um... two, maybe three story arcs?

What I really want to see is at least one thing that's a polar opposite to the normal Marvelverse. I mean, if it's an alternate retelling, how come EVERYBODY has almost the exact same personality? I'd love to see, say, Ultimate X-men have at least one character that is a villain rather than hero, or human rather than mutant. That would be pretty neat.

I'd rather they didn't, if only because the two examples I've come up with of alternate realities with character roles reversed - Jimmy Olsen in The Nail and Dick Grayson in Dark Knight Strikes Again - were the most painfully godawful anything in all of comics ever.

EDIT: Although Exiles (eXiles?) does that sort of thing all the time and that book is official Hot Shit, so maybe it could work.

NolanSpalter · 10-18-2005, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fifthfiend

EDIT: Although Exiles (eXiles?) does that sort of thing all the time and that book is official Hot Shit, so maybe it could work.

It is? I couldn't tell by looking at it. Came across more as published fanfiction to me. Onslaught, the heroic panda would fit right into that thing.

Fifthfiend · 10-18-2005, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NolanSpalter

It is? I couldn't tell by looking at it. Came across more as published fanfiction to me. Onslaught, the heroic panda would fit right into that thing.

It is pretty much total fanservice, but it is totally awesome fan-service.

Let me put it like this - is the prospect of Holocaust, Nuclear-Powered Spawn of Apocalypse facing off against Hyperion, Unstoppable Sun-Fueled Super-Menace, who proceeds to crack Holocaust open and snort him like a drug the sort of thing you would like to read about in a comic book?

If that is the case then Exiles is very distinctly the comic book that you should read.

... and yes, were Onslaught the Champion Panda to somehow make his way into the pages of that comic book - an event that would be not at all out of place were it to occur - then it would indeed be totally sweet.

Wetflame · 10-24-2005, 06:47 PM

Gwen Stacy's death was one of the most ridiculously stupid things ever. It's one of those scenarios, much like two certain X-men, that I wouldn't mind a resurrection story.

Instead, they waste resurrection points on General Ross and Betsy Braddock(Who is cool, but not really a main enough character). They can only do so much before they get criticised for going down the 616 route of "Too many come-backs!!!"

It makes sense for Stacy to come back in some form because she wasn't so much killed as absorbed. The Carnage "Symbiote" works by absorbing people's life into itself rather than permanently relying on another lifeform for sustainance and proper mobility. So if the first Carnage survived the fire (After all, who says it would be affected by it just because Venom was..?) there's a chance Gwen could come back as some kind of weird symbiote character.

Personally, I'd love that, a female symbiote has never been a "Regular" character. Though I kind of like Gewn being a "Normal" character.

As for Ultimate X-men and (spoiler if you don't know)Beast and Gambit both being crushed by buildings in two of the most pathetic death scenes ever, I have no idea. Their MUTANTNESS can bring them back.

I don't think Bendis and Co. get what makes a death so meaningful, and that killing off a character "you'll never run out of stories about" doesn't make it impactful. The best way is to make people care about a character that doesn't impact the story so much, but is generally around.

But the main thing with death is, we won't care unless we have enough time to get to know them, and in between that and the proper time lies Gwen Stacy and some of the other deaths, where we're just plain pissed off rather than saddened.

I don't know how they're going to fix this mess, but it's a HUGE marr on the Ultimate Universe, I believe. Just because it's dark doesn't mean you kill off all the main characters. Deaths are some of the hardest things to do, really... I actually think Black Belt was one of the better deaths I've ever read, and I wouldn't mind if he didn't come back, even though I feel the character should have been given a lot more before he died, while the death was handled well the character felt a bit too "Well, we have to kill someone off... who do people care about the least!".

Fifthfiend · 10-25-2005, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wetflame

As for Ultimate X-men and (spoiler if you don't know)Beast and Gambit both being crushed by buildings in two of the most pathetic death scenes ever, I have no idea. Their MUTANTNESS can bring them back.

I don't think Bendis and Co. get what makes a death so meaningful, and that killing off a character "you'll never run out of stories about" doesn't make it impactful. The best way is to make people care about a character that doesn't impact the story so much, but is generally around.

When the fuck did Gambit die? Was that recent or did I just miss that entirely?

More generally, I've always thought if you're going to kill some character completely at random, it should have to be, like, Wolverine or something. And he should have to die so it sticks (or at least sticks for comics, so figure he stays dead for five years). If it's so important to the story that someone bites it, it's important enough to kill your big-name marquee marketing powerhouse. Otherwise you're just jerking around to jerk around.

Noober · 10-25-2005, 08:41 AM

What I don't like about Ultimate Marvel is that it's only been around for a few years and it's already got really rubbish continuity like Pete still being in the same grade after a comic year has passes, the Fantastic Four's appearence in team-up contradicting their appearence in their own comic, etc.

Wetflame · 10-25-2005, 09:25 AM

Quote:

When the fuck did Gambit die? Was that recent or did I just miss that entirely?

More generally, I've always thought if you're going to kill some character completely at random, it should have to be, like, Wolverine or something. And he should have to die so it sticks (or at least sticks for comics, so figure he stays dead for five years). If it's so important to the story that someone bites it, it's important enough to kill your big-name marquee marketing powerhouse. Otherwise you're just jerking around to jerk around.

Gambit died the same pathetic way Beast did, a building fell on him. It's in the Ultimate X-men annual.

Really, Gambit is nearly as popular as Wolverine, yet they'd still never kill off Wolverine because he's so much the "main" character. It was a very stupid move, two of my favourite X-men(well, Gambit was more of a childhood like) are now dead.

Not only that, Dazzler died in a recent issue. This is absolutely ridiculous. 64 issues in, and three X-men, two of which are HUGE names, and one of which was a great reinvention of an older character, have bit the dust?

Since they seem to be refusing to invent new characters, where is the new blood going to come from? Crappy minor characters? If the comic continues at this rate, all the current X-men will die at some point in the run, and not come back.

nd if they bring them back, the fans will bitch. Do the writers even know what they're doing anymore...? It's like they're thinking along the lines of "Reinvent said Marvel classic in the scope of 100 issues", in X-men anyway, and more along the lines of 120 issues in Spiderman(most of the big names have been used alread), which is a terrible way of doing it. The Ultimate universe is good enough to last even longer than the originals as it has far more depth.

But it's a perfectly valid observation, they're claiming "Nothing's saaacred!" yet Mary Jane or Spiderman still isn't going to be touched; just like they won't kill off Wolverine or Professor X. They'll kill of the next most popular character who doesn't have such a big impact on continuity, and we all know who that was.

Fifthfiend · 10-25-2005, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wetflame

Gambit died the same pathetic way Beast did, a building fell on him. It's in the Ultimate X-men annual.

...

Not only that, Dazzler died in a recent issue. This is absolutely ridiculous. 64 issues in, and three X-men, two of which are HUGE names, and one of which was a great reinvention of an older character, have bit the dust?

Wow I've fallen behind. Yeah it's starting to sound like they're hell-bent on killing off anybody interesting or likeable. I mean Beast was the best character they had. And Dazzler was right up there.

Ultimate Gambit was only in like 3 issues but come on, it's Gambit.

Quote:

But it's a perfectly valid observation, they're claiming "Nothing's saaacred!" yet Mary Jane or Spiderman still isn't going to be touched; just like they won't kill off Wolverine or Professor X. They'll kill of the next most popular character who doesn't have such a big impact on continuity, and we all know who that was.

Yeah that's pretty much what I was getting at. That "nothing's sacred" schtick rings pretty hollow until you kill off something that's actually sacred.

...

So long as I'm complaining, it kinda seems like a lot of modern comics is pretty much the same as old comics, minus the part that made it good. Like, in X-Men 15 years ago, they'd be all "OMG a building is about to fall on Beast!" and then you'd see the rubble fall on him... and then in the next panel Beast would be standing there being all "Oh ho, did you really think a mutant with superhuman speed, agility and intellect was going to get crushed by a falling building? Now let us sally forth and show Magneto what-for!" Whereas now, it looks like a building's going to fall on Beast... and it falls on him and he's dead. Hooray. Or to go outside the Ultmoverse, 25 years ago they would have done a story where Gwen Stacy secretly bangs Norman Osborne and pops out two quick-grow Goblinbabies that decide to kill Spider-Man... and then Spider-Man would be all "Wait a minute... Gwen Stacy wasn't a total whore! This can't be real!" and then someone would cackle and be all "That's right Spider-Man - you've fallen prey to the maniacal macinations of Mysterio!!! And now it's just like, Gwen Stacy bangs Norman Osborn, and Spider-Man's all, "Well, I guess my girlfriend was screwing a psychotic serial killer who's obsessed with torturing me. Eh, that'll happen."

I mean I don't mean to go off on too much of a tangent, I'm just saying there's a line between 'realism' and 'turning all your characters into miserable morons'.

10-25-2005, 08:41 AM	#58
Noober Troopa Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 37	What I don't like about Ultimate Marvel is that it's only been around for a few years and it's already got really rubbish continuity like Pete still being in the same grade after a comic year has passes, the Fantastic Four's appearence in team-up contradicting their appearence in their own comic, etc.