seekquaze's forum posts

#1 Edited by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

Which writer had your favorite take on the character in the original Hellblazer series? Which take on the character do you prefer? For example, Ennis seemed to write him as more of an sob compared to say Jenkins so I lean toward the latter.

#2 Posted by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

Since two Hercules films came out this year, I began to wonder more about the possibility of a live-action Hercules film and realized any such film has four major problems it would have to overcome.

1. He would have to separate himself from his mythological counterpart.

Marvel's Hercules is closer to his mythological counterpart than Thor. Thor has blonde hair, space armor, and a futuristic city. Hercules is dressed sort of what the general public thinks ancient Greece was like and Olympus is all Greek temples. The Olympians are also considered more as "gods" in popular culture than the Asgardians. So any film would have to somehow balance between keeping true to the source material while not having Herc be mythological Hercules. He would have be uniquely Marvel.

2. Hercules would have to be separated from Steve Reeves.

Marvel's Hercules look-wise is almost identical to Steve Reeves. He is still one of the most famous versions of Hercules. Any Marvel Hercules' film would have to separate itself from Steve Reeves without feeling like it was either a knock off, parody, or any other way related to it.

3. He would have to be something other than a second-string strongman.

Comic Hercules has sometimes suffered from being a second-string strongman behind Thor and Hulk. Each is about as strong as he is and uniquely Marvel. Each has established themselves in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Hercules has to fit into the films universe, or any other with those two, without coming off as redundant.

4. The greatest challenge...overcome the string of b-grade Hercules films that have tainted his image in the past.

Films based on Greek myth and Hercules specifically have suffered from being either b-grade or badly written. The original Steve Reeves' films are not too bad, but many of the follow ups leave something to be desired. Lou Ferrigno starred in a couple of incredibly cheesy, yet surprisingly watchable, films in the eighties. Hercules: TLJ was fun, but again campy. The Hercules character has appeared in a few minor roles in other questionable films ranging from made for t.v. specials or new classics (extreme sarcasm) like Immortals. This year saw two Hercules films. The heavily negatively reviewed film The Legend of Hercules and the better received yet still Hercules, which is one of the better if not Hercules film since the Steve Reeves original. While Marvel's Hercules sometimes plays the part of the buffoon and a film can be a comedy I don't think it would be a good idea for it to be too much of a comedy because people would not want to go to see it. B-films tend to have mixed results at the box office.

thoughts?

#3 Posted by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio
@westy206 said:

Within the Marvel Universe maybe what is regarded as "God" or "Gods" differs from what I or you believe what it is to be a God.

They all seem to be magically enhanced beyond science or any mortal understanding.

A problem with the word "god" is it is a loaded word where people come with their preconceived notions. Some people reject the concept of a god or God all together and they would never accept anything as a "god." Only as something like an alien at best. For others, nearly anything worshipped can be considered a god. Often, you have to go with a culture or fantasy universe's definition. On the t.v. show Supernatural, the pagan gods are little different from the standard monsters the heroes fight. Supposedly, they were once much more powerful when humans made sacrifices to them, but by modern times they are barely above humans and virtually all the myths about them are wrong. There is nothing remotely divine or awe inspiring about them. The fact nearly all of them are petty, cruel and literally eat humans does not help matters.

In Marvel, the gods are at least awe inspiring, or used to be with, and are far beyond humans. Some writers have actually bothered to try and set them apart. By making them creatures of story combine with some connection of their worshippers make them "gods" by most polytheistic and fantasy definitions. It also sets them apart from other superpowered beings. I think that is enough to make them rightly considered gods and maybe even divine.

#4 Edited by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

@jsav777: Ares is the weak link. If Hercules is serious he can defeat Ares in short order. That leaves Thor to deal with Hercules and Loki on his own. Thor can potentially defeat them if he uses his full power, but he won't which is why he loses.

#5 Edited by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

One thing that bothers me at times is how a character can be considered so good at planning that no matter what happens they have a plan for it and said plan works flawlessly. At its worst the character is basically omniscient. I am not saying prep is worthless or can never work out, but when it is taken to a ridiculous degree. Perhaps the most glaring example is the Bat-God. Batman, a supposedly human character, being one of the best scientists on the planet, best fighters, runs a huge business, maintains a secret identity, can reverse engineer advanced alien tech with no problem, etc...yet still has trouble with guys like Two-Face.

Does the Black Panther have times where he is like the Bat-God? Is that a normal characterization or would you say it is the exception? Other thoughts in general about it?

#6 Edited by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, Thor is a god. In Marvel, gods are a specific type of being. In this case, they tend to be virtually immortal beings with physical abilities superior to "mortals" who use a type of magic/energy/power identified as divine and are often based more on stories and symbolism than scientific fact and were at some point worshipped. They generally share some other abilities like the capability to hear prayers regardless of distance or dimensions which separates them from telepaths to share some sort of connection to the culture that worshipps them however they are not dependent on worship for survival. These tend to be the traits all gods share that set them apart from other superpowered beings. I think the fact that gods across the universe generally recognize each other and several god-hunters tend to hunt them to the exclusion of other superpowered beings is testament to this.

So just being powerful or worshipped does not make you a god. It takes a number of other criteria.

#7 Posted by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

@nova_prime_: @seekquaze: @lol: @powerherc: hey can you guys tell me when Hercules became the sky father and Zeus was reborn as a child

And I have always thought Zeus and Odin were equal both pantheons originated at the same time and it's not really Zeus's thunderbolt compared to the Odin force it's more like the thunderbolt compared to odins lance gungir, it should a comparison of the skyfather hood compared to the odinforce it would most likley be a tie most people would say the Odin force because they have gone into the odinforce more than the skyfather but Zeus defeated the titans old times as a young god and also had a hand in creating man or mortals of earth so if u ask me I would say Zeus but it's most likely a tie.

Hercules became a skyfather, though in a sense much more than a skyfahter, at the very end of the Prince of Power mini series and lost it at the end of Chaos War. Zeus was reborn as a child about midway through the Incredible Hercule series.

Odin and Zeus are usually considered equals in pure power, but not necessarily other areas like fighting skills. Gungnir powers have been portrayed inconsistently with it being a regular spear that served as a channel for Odin's power to being a weapon as mighty as Mjolnir. Zeus defeated the Titans with the aid of his brothers, the Cyclopses and Hundred-handed ones, and the Thunderbolt. Zeus is rarely attributed as the creator of humanity. That is usually Prometheus' role. Odin is sometimes said to have created humanity as well.

@seekquaze: Are you saying that Zeus, Athena and Hera are weak?

Compared to who and at what time? Zeus is equal to Odin in overall power when in possession of the Thunderbolt. I don't know how powerful he is without it. Probable at least Thor level. Hera is more powerful than regular gods like Sif or the Warriors Three, but in destructive power weaker than Thor, Hercules, or her brothers Pluto, Zeus and Neptune. Her energy manipulation powers are below her brothers. With the Thunderbolt, she stalemated Iron Patriot aka Norman Osborn in a knock off Iron Man armor. So she would be weaker then Thor despite possession the Thunderbolt. To me that makes her weak. Same with Athena. Athena' energy powers and variety are greater than some other gods like Ares, but we don't know how powerful she truly is. She is weaker than Zeus and likely Thor. And again, when she possessed the Thunderbolt she never did anything that impressive to put her on a level with a full powered Zeus.

#8 Posted by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

This is a power I've read about on summaries about the character and mentioned a few times in the comics. I've heard that it allows John to reality warp circumstances to favor him. The role of the dice, getting the right taxi, meeting the correct person for the crisis at hand are all arranged by this. Some instances are activated on their own and other times John has some control over it.

Can someone tell me more about this? How much can John control it? Is it the reason John has survived so many situations where everyone else has died? John is credited as an invincible prepper, but how much of it is prep and how much is this ability warping the universe to suit John's needs?

#9 Posted by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

I can't really see him having a place in the "Heroic Age" or any team now. With Thor, Hercules, Hulk and Valkyrie back in the public's good graces any role he had would be already fulfilled. I think being a Dark Avengers would hang over him. There would be distrust with the other heroes. Power wise he contributes nothing that a number of other heroes do not surpass. He has no demonstrated tactical abilities to speak of. He is too much of a loose cannon to be entrusted to a team like Ross' Thunderbolts or the Secret Avengers or nearly any team that requires following orders, team work, and stealth.

At best, I could see a single story where he avenged the death of his son, realized his poor choices once again blew things, and then return to Olympus.

#10 Edited by seekquaze (617 posts) - - Show Bio

I would say no. I don't see him really pulling everyone's strings or manipulating events on a large scale. Emperor Palpatine had his finger in nearly every pie and everyone dancing to his strings who plans more or less generally succeeded.

With Thanos, so far there is no evidence that he connected to The Dark Elves, Kree-Nova War, Hydra or anything else. His plans so far have failed and his minions instead of loyally serving him have all turned on him. So I would say he is not off to a great start though he may get out of his chair and put his mind to something after the events in GOTG.