MrCipher

OK so now we're up to 10 ways that the character has changed in 2 books, 2 out of 2 books that have been released. Anyone taking bets that it will be another 5 ways he's changed in the next book and how long it will take before the character has changed so drastically that he will be completely unrecognizable?

@THEBlaqueBasterd: @THEBlaqueBasterd said:

@MrCipher: " Sam Jackson was sort of expected in this "token non-white politically correct" society we have nowadays so that's no surprise."

wtf are u even talkin about? Ultimate Nick Fury was BASED ON Samuel Jackson.. They even asked his permission to do so...smfh

Check out the wiki link here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Nick_Fury The original incarnation of Ultimate Nick Fury was NOT Sam Jackson. It was only until later that Jackson contacted Marvel and gave his permission after a second redesign on the character. There was no original initial collaboration between the actor and the character when Ultimates were first introduced. In fact, if you look at the picture posted at the link under Publication History, the character's redesign looks more like Chiwetel Ejifor's character "The Operative" from the movie Serenity although I don't believe there's a connection.

Kinda wishing they had called this Ultimate Avengers just so the die-hards could keep that straight. Little details like Hawkeye without a costume matter. Having Sam Jackson playing himself, er I mean Mace Windu, er I mean Punisher, er "The Angry Black Dude" I mean who the hell is he supposed to be? (Yea that's a poke at his marvelous and unending range of character ability) Sam Jackson was sort of expected in this "token non-white politically correct" society we have nowadays so that's no surprise.

Out of all the pics I've seen offered I still keep going back to the one mystery that keeps nagging me and I hope is on everyone's mind too; "where exactly IS the chin on the guy playing Hawkeye"? I've been looking and looking and looking and I have had no luck in locating it...maybe someone can find it for me?

@Wattup said:

I love reading the comments after someone posts on-set photos of a superhero film, especially if it's costume-related. Everyone gets so angry!

Chill out, dudes...you know you're seeing the movie no matter how vehemently you complain about it!

If I do see it, because you know we all need ANOTHER Supes reboot/origin story like the country needs a triple-dip recession, if I DO see it, you will have to call me Man of Steal because there is no way in hell I'm paying to see this...

The hair is nothing special - its his every day look. It looks like him at some convention with a half-assed plastic look. Very underwhelming. THIS is the what we're going to get? So far every thing I have seen about this looks sub-par. ALL the costumes have a plastic quality and none of the actors except for Amy Adams look terrible for their roles.

OK Nolan chose the wrong leading lady...again. Maggie Gyllenhal should have played the Joker in the last movie and now we have a dumpy, fat leg, big @$$ cat woman who looks like a thousand and one "cat girl" costumes on a wide variety of online games (actually some of those costumes are better than this). She pretty much looks like a pear in skin-tight leather.

Why can't he find a woman who has Michelle Pfieffer's sexiness and acting ability (probably because few if any actresses can come close to her now).

Umm... how about some superpowers that don't suck or don't mimic a much better aquatic hero (once a great villain)

OR a super strength cyanide pill (tell him it's aspirin) and then we can start all over with a better character who doesn't require a bazillion rewrites and much back pedaling to make him seem cool?

@Wingfoot said:

Hi !

Will Wolverine disappear one day forever ? Or at least, becoming again the (real) character I knew 25 years ago, recently seen again in Whedon's Astonishing X-men or in Craig/Yost's X-force ?
I don't think so.

"Wolverine... can either be a bloodthirsty killer... or a caring father-like figure to young and impressionable mutants." Seriously, it's not even a contradiction, it's an aberration and, in some way, dangerously stupid considering comic books are read by young people.

Maybe, some day, Marvel's writers will grow up, read books et become mature. I don't think so...

Hihane washte.

Great statement. Whatever happened to that anti-hero that I loved in the 80s? What's up with his ridiculous popularity and resulting attitude alteration? The writers in the 80s would have NEVER put him into a "father-figure" roll.

First having Johns give readers reasons to BUY the new 52 is the same as having ANY EXECUTIVE tell you way you should BUY their product - regardless of what that product is.

Also, the only way to make Aquaman cool is to NOT envision and develop a character who's main feature is his ability to carry on a conversation with a flounder. Fish are not worth speaking to, they are stupid. Case in point: almost anyone can put bait on a hook and trick a fish out of its natural element where it can no longer breathe, it dies, and then is cooked and consumed. As soon as some alien tricks a human with a baited hook and then yanks it out of earth's atmosphere, I will maintain fish are too stupid to talk to and Aquaman is stupid for trying. Namor is the better character.

I think a much better idea for Aquaman would be someone who can assume the physical capabilities of ocean creatures (jellyfish poison, electric ell shock, whale strength, dolphin speed etc.). Sort of a male version of Vixen that can only work with sea creatures - derivative maybe, but a lot better than the original.

Cap's head look weird like it is trying to squeeze out of his mask. Hawkeye looks hands down stupid and horrible - how about an actual costume there bub?
Scarlett looks a little chunky in that Widow costume. And Helmsworth looks like he's wearing a plastic get-up.
 
Yuck!