Worst comic book superfight ever

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Except the part about the Avengers' date=' which is what I meant to address. The Avengers did have a larger role in the storyline than that of Spidey's cheerleading squad, as you put it.[/quote']

 

No, they had a Firelord storyline of their own immediately following Spidey's storyline, 'cause Spidey was completely not in theirs.

 

Their sole sole in Spider-Man-vs-Firelord was at the end, as Spidey's cheering section. 'Firelord makes his peace with the Avengers, especially his old acquaitnance Hercules', was something separate from Spidey-vs-Firelord. 'Cause Spider-Man, you know, completely not involved in it anywhere. The exact same comic could have been written if the Avengers, or the Fantastic Four, or Forbush-Man, or anybody besides Spidey had flattened Firelord last issue, they'd only have had to change one or two words of dialogue. (add) And maybe four panels of artwork.

 

And now we really argue semantics.

 

CBikle -- As for what I do for a living -- come on, don't be shy, say it flat-out. "Chuckg has no life!" Honestly, the only thing /worse/ than being openly insulting is trying to be cute about it. If you can't be reasonable and you can't be civil, then the least you can be is straightforward.

 

I freely admit to the character flaw of stubbornness. Of course, nobody else who's still on this thread has any room to talk about /that/, 'cause I'm not the /only/ person still up past midnight (CST) tryin' to pick a nit. Seeing as how, you know, there are still lots of posts on this topic that aren't mine.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

That last page of ASM 270 is pretty definitive. If Firelord woke up later (which presumably he would sometime, him not being dead or anything), it was /enough/ later to count as a clean KO for Spidey, not merely a 'dazed'. I mean, you have Cap flat-out *saying* to Spidey that Firelord is "out cold", while the Avengers all form a cheering section, what more do you need?

 

(edit) Found my copy of Avengers 258. Firelord is out cold the entire time that the Avengers are talking to Spidey. He's still out cold when Spidey leaves the scene. He doesn't wake up until the narrative has shifted to the medical bay in Avengers Mansion, and the caption specifically says "Later..."

 

'Dazed' my comics-reading butt. What I said was *entirely* true, one hundred point zero zero percent, and the reason I'm not calling you a liar along with Agent X is because you haven't tried to call *me* one on this issue. (I'm accepting 'not exactly true' as a statement of alleged inaccuracy, not alleged malicious intent.) So from you, I'm willing to accept it was an honest mistake. Him? He throws around stuff like 'misleading' and 'straw man' when I'm actually the one telling it straight and he's getting it all backwards... aggggh!

 

At any rate, it's *entirely* true.

I think this is one hazard of putting someone on Ignore and calling someone a liar - you miss their retraction and their explanation. Maybe someone should tell him he ought to retract calling me a liar before someone reports him for breaking the rules... again.

 

Is he still banned from the NGD?

[CBikle]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

CBikle -- As for what I do for a living -- come on' date=' don't be shy, say it flat-out. "Chuckg has no life!" [/quote']

 

Hey, your words. And a new quote for me !

[McCoy]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Except the part about the Avengers' date=' which is what I meant to address. The Avengers did have a larger role in the storyline than that of Spidey's cheerleading squad, as you put it. They had an issue centered on it.[/quote']

They may have. But in AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #270, the issue under discussion, they showed up on the last page, and stood there for six panels, with Firelord out so cold they didn't bother to put the cuffs on him. No where did they say "We'll take over now," so the entire "taking Firelord int custody" took place off panel. They arrived, they stood there. Calling them Spider-man's cheerleading squad is being generous.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

They may have. But in AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #270' date=' the issue under discussion, they showed up on the last page, and stood there for six panels, with Firelord out so cold they didn't bother to put the cuffs on him. No where did they say "We'll take over now," so the entire "taking Firelord int custody" took place off panel. They arrived, they stood there. Calling them Spider-man's cheerleading squad is being generous.[/quote']

 

Oh, shut up you big liar.

[Blue]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Wow, I just clicked over to here from somewhwere around post #70 and it seems folks are STILL talking about Spidey V. Firelord. Congratulations!

 

Yes, the horse was dead when you started beating it, but it still gives me that uneasy "animal cruelty" feeling. Poor horse. Just ship it off to the glue factory, like you should have done 100 posts ago.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Mary Jane vs Felicia Hardy ....mmm? Oh, that's a fight I want to see in the worst way. Probably not really on topic.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Yes' date=' the horse was dead when you started beating it, but it still gives me that uneasy "animal cruelty" feeling. Poor horse. Just ship it off to the glue factory, like you should have done 100 posts ago.[/quote']I think this thread may be an experiment to see if consumers can bypass the glue companies by simply beating the dead horse into a fine paste themselves.

 

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Mary Jane vs Felicia Hardy ....mmm? Oh' date=' that's a fight I want to see in the worst way. Probably not really on topic.[/quote']

 

No, but it's very pleasant to think about.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

If the writer had gone even more stupid than he did, you mean?

 

Kyle's ring only works for Kyle. Period. To anyone else, its about as effective a weapon as a crackerjack toy. The writer conveniently forgot that established fact in his rush to a) make Deathstroke look tougher than he should and make the JLA look like a bunch of first graders.

 

At what point did Deathstroke actually SUCCEED in using the ring? He grappled with Kyle for a second or two, but he did not, in fact, get the ring to work for him. You have read Green Lantern, and know the ring will work only for him. I doubt Deathstroke has the full run in a longbox in his basement.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Oh' date=' he got the standard introduction of a typical weighty super and then over time appeared less powerful.[/quote']

 

This is a fairly common thing with Supers, especially villains, isn't it? When they first appear, they are hugely powerful (disintigrates beings Thor and Hercules have negligible impact on), then they move to more of an equals level (battles Thor to a standstill, with neither gaining an advantage) and then decline further until the street level characters take them to the cleaners.

 

For the Heralds in particular, maybe the Herald Process is less a one time thing and more an ongoing process. Once Galactus stops feeding them cosmic boosts, their power starts to trail off. The Surfer was in Galactus' service for much longer, so his power isn't trailing off (or maybe just isn't trailing off as fast), but Firelord didn't have much tenure, so he declines faster.

 

In any event, KA said it right a few pages back.

 

Spiderman beat Firelord' date=' and I still only see four lights.[/quote']

 

Spidey did beat him, so obviously he could beat him. I don't decide which stories are Marvel Canon, nor does anyone else on this thread. Marvel does, and the Spidey vs Firelord story remains un-retconned. If Spidey did beat him, clearly he could beat him.

 

By the way, it seems to me that every Herald seems indestructible to environmental effects (skimming through the sun and flying through the depths of space), and space battles, but when they land planetside, Supers can injure them. Terrax, for example, can also fly through the corona of a sun and navigate the depths of space, yet he was defeated when the Human Torch burst a pipe of supercoolant over his head in his very first outing.

 

Maybe their powers work far better when they're out in space doing their jobs (ie looking for new meal tickets) than when they're laying around planetside slacking off. [Kind of the cosmic equivalent of not being allowed to use the company car for personal driving - or the company internet to post on the Hero boards ]

[Starlord]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Wow.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

At what point did Deathstroke actually SUCCEED in using the ring? He grappled with Kyle for a second or two' date=' but he did not, in fact, get the ring to work for him.[/quote']

 

Overpowering Kyle's will with his own is how Deathstroke supposedly overcome the defenses of the GL ring -- seeing as how Kyle's forcefield, when it's *up*, has literally withstood nuclear detonations and exploding suns. Deathstroke supposedly slapped his hand on Kyle's hand and commanded the ring (against Kyle's will) to make the screens go down.

 

(The alternative, that Deathstroke crushed Kyle's hand and forced him to his knees with the ring aura still up, is even *more* ridiculous -- because that would require Deathstroke to be stronger than Superman, as even the Big S is demonstrably incapable of punching through a GL forcefield without having to take repeated blows.)

 

The problem lies in the fact, of course, that it wouldn't matter if it was Victor von Doom trying to overpower Kyle's control of the ring with his own willpower -- *that* ring simply won't be *listening*. It has nothing to do with Kyle's willpower or the willpower of the other dude, it simply has to do with the fact that Kyle's ring has a really *****in' firewall.

 

To use a networking analogy, the wireless port on Kyle's ring is set to MAC address authentication only, so any incoming packets that aren't coming from Kyle's brain are discarded without even being read.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Well, okay. I was misled.

 

It's a tad harsh to accuse someone of lying don't you think?

 

Wow, Firelord out for the count for a prolonged period of time. Didn't know Spidey had it in him.

 

Sorry, Agent X - my recollection was also "down for a moment", not "down for the count".

 

And it's interesting that Chuck "misremembers" while everyone else "misrepresents".

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

And you are entitled to your opinion. We are, after all, argueing about a fictional character. It just strained my suspension of disbelief until it broke.

 

I read it when it first came out, over 20 years ago, doubt that I have read it since then, but it still is the one that lept to mind when the subject was "Worst comic book superfight ever." From this thread, many have equally strong feelings about that issue.

 

Speaking for myself, although I liked the story and buy into it, I can certainly see this viewpoint as well. It all comes down to your level of suspension of disbelief.

 

And rep for that second line (if it will let me) - that's really the perspective this whole thing should be viewed in.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Yes' date=' the horse was dead when you started beating it, but it still gives me that uneasy "animal cruelty" feeling. Poor horse. Just ship it off to the glue factory, like you should have done 100 posts ago.[/quote']

 

**sigh** or at the end of that 25 page rantfest on the same subject (I linked to it somewhere, I think).

 

Unfortunately, once there's more than one stubborn poster, these things tend not to die (and we've got way more than that, the writer included).

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

And it's interesting that Chuck "misremembers" while everyone else "misrepresents".

 

And it's even more interesting that what you said is completely not true.

 

What I said was *entirely* true' date=' one hundred point zero zero percent, and the reason I'm not calling you a liar along with Agent X is because you haven't tried to call *me* one on this issue. (I'm accepting 'not exactly true' as a statement of alleged inaccuracy, not alleged malicious intent.) So from you, I'm willing to accept it was an honest mistake.[/quote']

 

There is only one person I have accused of lying in this thread -- Agent X. And that's because he's the only person who stooped so low as to try and call me a liar *first*. I notice that he's since edited the post in question to appear more innocent, but he was originally taking the tack that I was deliberately 'misleading' the room with the 'straw man' that Firelord was 'supposedly' KO'ed, when he was really 'only dazed'.

 

In short, Agent X did exactly what you and him are both claiming is so harsh and wrong -- jumped immediately to the conclusion that the other guy was lying instead of accepting it as an honest mistake.

 

Since I have this strange little habit of treating other people like they treat me, that's why Agent X had me unwilling to accept that his getting the events of ASM #270 completely ***-backwards was an honest mistake on his part, either.

 

Do you have any idea how galling it is to be accused of lying when you are telling the exact, 100%, literal truth, and your accuser is spouting total bull****? It's infuriating, and there's no way I should ever have to put up with it. If you consider that 'harsh', then a pox on both your houses.

 

PS -- given that your and Agent X's recollections of the issues in question have been so consistently inaccurate, maybe you should stop being so certain of your opinions as regarding those issues. Garbage In, Garbage Out.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Mary Jane vs Felicia Hardy ....mmm? Oh' date=' that's a fight I want to see in the worst way. Probably not really on topic.[/quote']

 

They'd pick one of those really crappy artists (like whoever butchered the Hulk Thing mini a while back; lots of others to choose from) and disappoint us all.

 

How 'bout Betty vs Veronica - at least there's some artistic consistency over at Archie Comics.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

They'd pick one of those really crappy artists (like whoever butchered the Hulk Thing mini a while back; lots of others to choose from) and disappoint us all.

 

How 'bout Betty vs Veronica - at least there's some artistic consistency over at Archie Comics.

*cough*Cherry Poptart*cough*

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

(The alternative' date=' that Deathstroke crushed Kyle's hand and forced him to his knees with the ring aura still up, is even *more* ridiculous -- because that would require Deathstroke to be stronger than [i']Superman[/i], as even the Big S is demonstrably incapable of punching through a GL forcefield without having to take repeated blows.)

 

The crushed hand is the one piece of that whole scene that really bugs me. Still, if Deathstroke had control of the ring, he would have used it for more than lowering Kyle's shields.

 

Now, the ring works on willpower and Kyle was working on a very basic and exhausted level (nothing else explains the "fly in and punch him" tactical decision), so maybe mustering his own focus is the problem here - but it wouldn't hurt to have that actually stated on panel...

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

The crushed hand is the one piece of that whole scene that really bugs me. Still, if Deathstroke had control of the ring, he would have used it for more than lowering Kyle's shields.

 

Now, the ring works on willpower and Kyle was working on a very basic and exhausted level (nothing else explains the "fly in and punch him" tactical decision), so maybe mustering his own focus is the problem here - but it wouldn't hurt to have that actually stated on panel...

 

The first paragraph of your argument has you operating on the assumption that the writer was interested in logical consistency or plausible characterization, when virtually nothing in the entire IDENTITY CRISIS mini supports that conclusion. (add) I mean, 'the writer can't have done this because it wouldn't have made sense!' isn't really an argument so much as a contradiction, given that 'the writer wrote a nonsensical sack of crap, yes or no?' is the point of contention in the first place.

 

The second is still inaccurate -- even badly wounded and exhausted Green Lanterns have withstood at least a couple shots from (among other things) Mongul. There is no way Deathstroke should be able to penetrate a Green Lantern defensive barrier while it's up. (add) Not unless it's an old-school GL ring and he's using the yellow weakness. Of course, Kyle's ring 2.0 didn't /have/ that problem.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Spidey did beat him' date=' so obviously he could beat him. I don't decide which stories are Marvel Canon, nor does anyone else on this thread. Marvel does, and the Spidey vs Firelord story remains un-retconned. If Spidey did beat him, clearly he could beat him.[/quote']

 

This consistent misunderstanding seems almost deliberately obtuse.

 

Nobody is arguing that the story didn't exist. What they're arguing is that the story made no damn *sense*. That Spider-Man beat Firelord in Marvel 616 continuity, that is a fact. That the events of the story cannot be logically reconciled with the vast majority of either Spider-Man's or Firelord's appearances either before or afterwards, *also* a fact. One plus one equals "sloppy writing".

 

Again, you are taking the tack that simply because something was written, that means its validity is beyond question. The problem with that tack is that it completely ignores the possibility of sloppy, inconsistent, or just plain stupid writing -- when we all know that the history of comics has *lots* of that going around.

 

Marvel canon, as with the canon of virtually any other comic book company, is not perfectly consistent with itself. There always will be things that are inconsistent, and when there are, we have only two options -- to unthinkingly swallow whatever bull**** the writers scoop on our plates and pretend it's chocolate, or else to stand up and go 'This is crap!'

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

And it's even more interesting that what you said is completely not true.

 

There is only one person I have accused of lying in this thread -- Agent X.

 

I see. Let's look at the history, shall we? Back on page 13, Andrew Cermak dug up his copy of Secret Wars #8...

 

For one' date=' Spidey didn't have the symbiote. He got that at the end of the issue. He fought Titania in the middle, in his red and blues.[/quote']

 

He goes on to discuss the battle. Chuck replies.

 

Fair enough. I misremembered when Spidey got the symbiote. I apologize.

 

**pauses tape**There's that word, "misremembered", applied to Chuckg's statements. **restarts tape**

 

OTOH' date=' I'm not the *only* one who misrepresented a fact. And unlike me, you did it deliberately -- as you typed this *after* you'd read the comic.[/quote']

 

There's that word, "misrepresented", with the qualifier "deliberately". So I think what I said, and what you quoted and referred to as "completely not true", which was:

 

And it's interesting that Chuck "misremembers" while everyone else "misrepresents".

 

was fully accurate. Let's also remember that your post containing this "misremember/misrepresent" statement was last edited between 12 and 13 hours ago, at the time of this post. The rest of these posts refer to comic books 20+ years old. I think remembering what you did less than a day ago is a bit easier than recalling the specific details of a 20+ year old comic book.

 

And that's because he's the only person who stooped so low as to try and call me a liar *first*. I notice that he's since edited the post in question to appear more innocent' date=' but he was originally taking the tack that I was deliberately 'misleading' the room with the 'straw man' that Firelord was 'supposedly' KO'ed, when he was really 'only dazed'.[/quote']

 

Actually, if you continued to read Agent X's posts, he acknowledged the error and apologized. [Frankly, I think it was more my misrecollection than his, as I've stated.] Perhaps he edited the priopr post to rectify that error.

 

In short' date=' Agent X did exactly what you and him are both claiming is so harsh and wrong -- jumped immediately to the conclusion that the other guy was lying instead of accepting it as an honest mistake.[/quote']

 

IOW, he did exactly what you claim to be entitled to do based on your perception of his statements. Chuckg vs Agent X has been going on a long time, and I have no idea who first used the "liar" word, but I'm not prepared to colour you as the victimized innocent.

 

Do you have any idea how galling it is to be accused of lying when you are telling the exact' date=' 100%, literal truth, and your accuser is spouting total bull****? It's infuriating, and there's no way I should ever have to put up with it. If you consider that 'harsh', then a pox on both your houses.[/quote']

 

Well, based on the above, that's a good description of your accusation against me, quoted at the top of the page, now isn't it. So I know how it feels to me. Frankly, it doesn't bug me all that much (but it makes a good excuse to avoid getting on with the work I should be doing). For myself, I don't take a lot of offense from internet discussion group "battles". My self-image isn't all that closely linked to my recollection of 20+ year old comic books, or whether my "stories liked/stories disliked" meter matches anyone else's. I hope the perception that yours does is just a misread caused by the difficulty in reading tone in written communication. I'm, sure I can be perceived the same way as I continue to flog the ground where the deadhorse has long since crumbled to dust and blown away.

 

There's also the little issue of level of offense at anyone's comments varying with level of respect I have for that individual - what you think of me has very little impact on my life, as (to my knowledge), we have never met and probably never will, other than these little internet squabbles. I would hope you're not too invested in what I think of you either, for the same reasons.

 

PS -- given that your and Agent X's recollections of the issues in question have been so consistently inaccurate' date=' maybe you should stop being so certain of your opinions as regarding those issues. Garbage In, Garbage Out.[/quote']

 

Regardless of the details, the simple facts remain:

 

- Marvel owns both characters.

- Marvel published the story in which Spidey defeated Firelord.

- Marvel has not retconned that storyline (and comic publishers are, as you know, fond of retcons)

 

So clearly Spidey could beat Firelord - he did so. Could he do it again? I wouldn't bet money on it. Could he win consistently? Not a prayer!

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Example -- in DC continuity (specifically, the classic QUESTION run, some flashbacks in Bat-comics, and the CRY OF THE HUNTRESS mini), it is an unquestioned fact that Richard Dragon is a 40+-year-old Zen master type dude who helped train the Question, Barbara Gordon (post-spinal-trauma), and most recently, the Huntress. Oh, and that the Bronze Tiger was this young guy he knew, back in the day.

 

It also unquestioned continuity, as of the most recent RICHARD DRAGON mini-series, that Richard Dragon is a young twentysomething martial arts prodigy with the style of a punk and the attitude of a gangsta, an arrogant macho jerkass who has not yet met the Question, Barbara Gordon, or the Huntress, and is about 15 years younger than the Bronze Tiger, who's one of *his* old teachers. (add -- and no, it's not a flashback... Connor Hawke showed up in the denouement of the mini-series, at the same age that he is in current comics, dating the mini-series quite firmly in the recent past of DC.)

 

And yet, the Question is still out there knowing the kung fu that old-school Dragon taught him. Babs still knows the escrima fighting and wheelchair martial arts that he taught her. Helena still has most of the mental balance that Richard Dragon and the Question helped her find... not to mention still being *alive*, because if the events of 'Cry of the Huntress' hadn't occurred, she'd have destroyed herself long since.

 

Both of these things are canon. None of them have been retconned yet. By your reasoning, we are not allowed to question it... it happened, it's on the page, therefore it's good.

 

By my reasoning, we are allowed to look at it and go 'WTF was the editor smoking?'

 

I much prefer my way.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

And it's even more interesting that what you said is completely not true.

 

 

 

There is only one person I have accused of lying in this thread -- Agent X. And that's because he's the only person who stooped so low as to try and call me a liar *first*. I notice that he's since edited the post in question to appear more innocent, but he was originally taking the tack that I was deliberately 'misleading' the room with the 'straw man' that Firelord was 'supposedly' KO'ed, when he was really 'only dazed'.

 

In short, Agent X did exactly what you and him are both claiming is so harsh and wrong -- jumped immediately to the conclusion that the other guy was lying instead of accepting it as an honest mistake.

 

Since I have this strange little habit of treating other people like they treat me, that's why Agent X had me unwilling to accept that his getting the events of ASM #270 completely ***-backwards was an honest mistake on his part, either.

 

Do you have any idea how galling it is to be accused of lying when you are telling the exact, 100%, literal truth, and your accuser is spouting total bull****? It's infuriating, and there's no way I should ever have to put up with it. If you consider that 'harsh', then a pox on both your houses.

 

PS -- given that your and Agent X's recollections of the issues in question have been so consistently inaccurate, maybe you should stop being so certain of your opinions as regarding those issues. Garbage In, Garbage Out.

For the audience, I never accused ChuckG of lying. I suggested he had built a straw man, I never presumed to establish a motive for why. Unlike ChuckG, I do not pretend to be a mind-reader. His defense of calling someone else a liar is built on as faulty a premise as his defense of not warning folks that he was going to bring up spoilers on a certain comic in the NGD thread.

 

Stubborness should have its limits as should sheer cynicism.