lokiofmidgaard's forum posts

#1 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, I found "some find it dubious" to be insufficient, when "some" are Marvel, and specifically include Mark Gruenwald, Roger Stern and Stan Lee, and where "find it dubious" is "have stated clearly multiple times that it never happened." That's a clear retcon. As for finding what I wrote too one-sided, I simply stated the facts, but Powerherc wants it to include his personal requirements for accepting it, despite requirements such as "they need to explain how Manhattan got restored to its proper place" having already been covered.

And : I've not modified the page since this discussion started, except after discussing it with a moderator. I've only ever stated the evidence, and then made changes requested by a moderator, unlike Powerherc. I've wanted these changes moderated since the outset of this discussion, because it is clear Powerherc won't compromise. I agree that the event was depicted, and did "happen" (in as much as any story in a comic does), but I also recognise that Marvel has subsequently retconned this out of continuity. That's all I ever wanted to have the page reflect, but Powerherc originally wanted it to only include the original version, and now, after overwhelming evidence that there has been a retcon, he's still only willing to go with "but it's not been retconned to my satisfaction, so that retcon doesn't count." That flies in the face of Roger Stern's statement on the panel, which makes it clear that a retcon happened

"Yes, the reference in Incredible Hulk #241 is the explanation for what really happened in Marvel Team-Up #28.

Hercules never towed Manhattan back into place because it had never been torn loose from bedrock. He had, instead, saved the city -- with a little help from Spider-Man's scientific direction -- in the manner revealed in the Hulk story.

....

The whole mess was recounted in the Marvel No-Prize Book.

If anyone believed that Marvel Team-Up #28 was the true story ... well ... both Geology and Geography (not to mention, Physics) says they're wrong."

#2 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

@PowerHerc said:

@lokiofmidgaard @RazzaTazz:

You just can't get over it, can you? Despite what RazzaTazz suggested, your revised explanation was one-sided (no surprise there) and therefor insufficient.

I have edited it to reflect both of our views.

It's not my view. It is Marvel's. That's the whole point. You are, by your own admission, a biased Hercules fan. I am not, despite your inability to grasp it, anti-Hercules.

Marvel has not outright retconned it. If they had the feat would've been shown clearly happening differently on panel. It hasn't.

Marvel editorial made statements years later to apparently retcon it. That is far from outright. Get it straight.

I have it straight; you don't. Marvel has outright retconned it. There's no "apparent" to it. The panel in the Hulk refers to the scene in question, as confirmed by the writer of said Hulk issue. Then, to make it more explicit, Marvel listed that MTU panel amongst their "biggest mistakes" in the No-Prize book, and very clearly and outrightly said in multiple Indexes and handbooks that this event never happened. There's no need for them to revisit it just to satisfy you. There's no need for them to provide an explanation for how Manhattan got back to its proper place, because they've said it never left it in the first place.

#3 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

@pikahyper said:

@lokiofmidgaard: much better, the subject is closed.

You might think so, Powerherc disagrees. He's modified the page again, changing what I added to try and cast doubt on Marvel's stance, to whit adding

though Manhattan Island being restored to it's proper place has never been explained or shown to be accomplished differently nor has Hercules ever been shown boasting about it.

Aside from the bad grammar (it should be its, not it's), Manhattan being restored to its proper place has been explained, in as much as they've said it was never removed from its proper place (something the Incredible Hulk panel and Index quote both make clear), and they don't need to show it being accomplished differently. That they've not shown it to Powerherc's personal level of satisfaction does not mean they haven't retconned it.

#4 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

@pikahyper said:

@lokiofmidgaard: so you've only included it as an overly long caption to an image? it should be included at the end of the Superhuman Strength section and explained there, the image if kept should have a basic caption and be near the section added.

Okay, I've amended it. Lenghty caption removed, replaced with a much shorter

Hercules towing Manhattan, from MTU #28

and image now placed at the end of the strength section alongside a new paragraph

In Marvel Team-Up #28 Hercules was seen to pull a floating Manhattan island, which weighs over 100,000 tons, after it was broken free from its bedrock. However, Marvel has since retconned this event not to have actually happened, writing it off as a boast on Hercules' part.

#5 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

@pikahyper said:

@lokiofmidgaard: It was retconned out, describe what happened and that it is no longer in continuity, that "feat" doesn't need much space so show both sides in no more then one paragraph with a maximum of one image, once done put it to bed.

Done. Based on your comments about no more than one paragraph, I've removed it from his list of strength feats in the text (otherwise the clarification about the retcon would need to be listed twice, once at each place that discusses / shows the feat). I've amended the text under the picture to say

Hercules pulling a floating Manhattan Island in Marvel Team-Up #28. Later titles have retconned this out of continuity, writing it off as Hercules' boast.

which I hope covers the facts fully but as briefly as possible.

#6 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

@pikahyper said:

why is this still going?

Because no resolution has been reached. The current "solution" PowerHerc has gone for doesn't accurately report the situation. "Some people" don't "think it dubious" - Marvel has outright retconned it, and confirmed same multiple times. The panel and mention of same don't need to be on Herc's page, because they add very little of relevance to it, but if they are going to be included, then a proper note about the retcon needs to be included. Otherwise the page is misleading, and at this point knowingly and deliberately so.

#7 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

@X35 said:

@lokiofmidgaard: And Bucky was never dead!

The thing is, what Powerherc wants is the equivalent of modifying Winter Soldier / Bucky's page to say

"Bucky died. Some people think he might have survived."

Bucky died. Later it was retconned to reveal he didn't die. The page in question rightly reflects this, as his death was a major plot point for the character (and Captain America), as is his survival and return. Hercules pulling Manhattan was a single panel in a single comic, not that important to Hercules in the grand scheme of his history. It doesn't need to be included on his page. But if it is included, then it is entirely appropriate to also note that the scene has been retconned to no longer have happened as originally depicted.

#8 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

“I have edited the entry and used the word "dubious" (which means doubtful, questioning or suspect) to describe the feat in both the caption of the image and in the body of the wiki text itself.

I hope that caveat will suffice.”

No, it won’t. You’ve put “Some find this dubious”. That’s an understatement if ever I saw one. Let’s just check who “some” are. Roger Stern, long-time Marvel writer. Mark Gruenwald, editor of the Marvel Index that stated the island-pulling didn’t happen, Marvel’s continuity expert and one-time editor in chief. Stan Lee, writer of the Marvel No-Prize Book. Marvel itself, which has stated now in multiple books that the incident didn’t happen and what was shown was a boast on Hercules’ part, even going so far as to include that specific panel in a book whose subtitle was “Mighty Marvel’s Most Massive Mistakes.” Yet you remained convinced that my attempt to get the page to reflect this is down to my “personal negativity” towards Hercules, a negativity that only exists in your mind. Or do you believe that Roger Stern, Mark Gruenwald, Stan Lee, etc, all also share this supposed “personal negativity”? You “contend the feat stands”; fine for you, but Marvel indisputably says otherwise. That you consider this a “stealth retcon” and that all of the evidence listed across multiple posts above and multiple titles published by Marvel is insufficient to convince you that this is Marvel’s official stance on the scene, is simply proof of your own admitted Hercules bias. The irony of this is that no one is attacking the character; the problems with the scene that led to it being retconned have nothing to do with whether or not Hercules is strong enough to have done the feat in question. He may very well be. It’s down to details such as the fact that Manhattan wouldn’t float if ripped from its bedrock. And we know Hercules boasts – we’ve seen it very firmly established in other stories.

“Many comic characters have had parts of their pasts retconned away yet their wiki pages still contain information about the characters from before the retcons. DC and Marvel have both completely rebooted their respective universes yet it would be ridiculous to do away with every feat each character performed previous to said retcons. Each character's past history is still his/her past history and it should be listed.”

Apart from the error in saying that Marvel has completely rebooted its universe, I agree with you. However, this scene is one such instance of something that has been retconned. “Some find it dubious” is not accurate; “Marvel has since retconned this to have not happened, with what was depicted in the issue now considered to be a boast on Hercules’ part” is entirely accurate.

“lokiofmidgaard has posted editorials backing his side of this argument. If the those editors want us to believe the feat never happened then why hasn't the story been shown to have happened differently.”

They’ve covered it in story, with the Incredible Hulk scene, and Roger Stern has confirmed that scene does indeed refer to the MTU panel in question; they’ve covered it in print in the Marvel No-Prize Book, Marvel Handbooks and Marvel Index. As far as they are concerned, they’ve done the retcon, they don’t need to keep revisiting it just to satisfy you.

“If the those editors want us to believe”

– there’s no “if” about it.

I propose that “some find this dubious” be changed to the factually accurate “Marvel has since retconned this to have not happened, with what was depicted in the issue now considered to be a boast on Hercules’ part”

#9 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

More evidence, as if it was needed. Here's a quote from Roger Stern, the writer of Hulk #241, regarding what that panel with Prince Rey is about

"Yes, the reference in Incredible Hulk #241 is the explanation for what really happened in Marvel Team-Up #28.

Hercules never towed Manhattan back into place because it had never been torn loose from bedrock. He had, instead, saved the city -- with a little help from Spider-Man's scientific direction -- in the manner revealed in the Hulk story.

Of course, that wasn't dramatic enough for Herc who padded his resume with a wildly exaggerated explanation. (As I recall, there was even a disclaimer to that effect at the end of the Team-Up story.)

There were a lot of problems with that Team-Up story, of course, the main one being that islands don't float. And even if there had been some outlandish explanation given for how it could float -- and there wasn't -- a loose-floating Manhattan would be too wide to fit through the Verrazano Narrows. Also, in the course of the story, Hercules somehow supposedly turned the island around so that he put it back with the NYC Battery facing north towards the Bronx. Mildly amusing, maybe ... but mainly ludicrous.

The whole mess was recounted in the Marvel No-Prize Book.

If anyone believed that Marvel Team-Up #28 was the true story ... well ... both Geology and Geography (not to mention, Physics) says they're wrong."

http://comixfan.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1574898&postcount=112

#10 Posted by lokiofmidgaard (332 posts) - - Show Bio

The problem is that currently, and what Powerherc wants, is for the wiki to simply say that Hercules pulled Manhattan island, with the image as evidence of said feat. When I tried to change it to say otherwise, he removed it. I added a comment that other comics have since confirmed that this was a boast on Hercules' part. Powerherc removed it. He only wants the version that says "Hercules pulled Manhattan" without any clarifiers.

We've got an editorial comment in the issue in question casting doubt on the event, we've got a statement in another story (Hulk #241) that Hercules protected Manhattan by absorbing the shockwaves aimed at its foundations (which means it wouldn't have needed to be towed back as that panel depicted) and noting that Hercules embellished by boasting about the events in MTU #28, we've got the Marvel Index and the Marvel handbooks (I checked them after a previous post and they say the same) saying across multiple years and multiple entries quite explicitly that Hercules boasted about pulling Manhattan and that he never actually did so, and we've got the Marvel No-Prize Book in both 1982 and 2007 specifically citing that panel of Hercules pulling Manhattan as being in error, noting that it couldn't have happened for several reasons. So it is entirely fair to say that other titles have said that the feat in question did not happen, and that what we saw in the panel was a boast that Hercules made.