Izawwlgood wrote:I think you're incorrect about this; Cap'n is for all intents and purposes on the same strength range as Spiderman, Iron Man in suit, Wolverine, etc. The super soldier serum is 100% absolutely important to his origin, because without it, he's just a skinny dude with a good attitude.Tyndmyr wrote:Sort of. The superhuman serum definitely is replicated...but being at "peak physical condition" is...good, but not amazingly special in the Marvel Universe. Super-strength is a particularly common power. Cap's leadership skills are also not particularly serum derived. The serum is less important to Cap's origin than say, gamma radiation is to the hulk, or the spider bite is to spiderman, because he just isn't that ridiculously superpowered.
Cap'n America's super strength is NOT just 'can benchpress more than you're average human' it's 'Can wrestle with Thor'.
Nah. Marvel lists this sort of thing, because it's standard fare for arguing. Cap can indeed max bench press 1,200 lbs. Which is pretty impressive, yeah, but Spider-Man can do 20 tons, Iron Man can do 100 tons, Thor and Hulk are far beyond that(basically arbitrary).
In Marvel terms, Cap is strong, but that strength isn't particularly defining. Likewise, he's agile, sure...but against specialists in agility like, say, Quicksilver....it's hilariously disparate.
Cap is a leader. That's what makes him important. He's a leader and a symbol.
SecondTalon wrote:Basically, I'm saying that this is so incredibly common in comics and has been done long enough that complaining about it is kinda like complaining about the musical instrument strike in horror films when something nonthreatening happens to a character early in a film.
Oh, lazy writing and cheap shticks for viewership are indeed very, very old in comics. That doesn't make such complaints invalid, though. Mostly, it just makes them common. It's not surprising, but neither is it particularly laudable. Making "girl version of popular male superhero" isn't new, exciting or a particularly good point for equality. Especially when you know they're gonna be tossed aside in the inevitable reset later. Nothing about that is good.
No doubt the transformation will somehow also impair Thor's ability to wear non-revealing clothing, because comics.
mosc wrote:CorruptUser wrote:X-Men were always gay though. I mean, in terms of their origin. They discovered they were "mutants" at puberty, they hid and tried to "pass" among their "normal" classmates, their real enemies were never Magneto's group but arch-conservative Christians who wanted to either kill them all or use some sort of "reparative therapy" on them, they started dying of AIDS before it passed to non mutants, etc. Other minority issues were added in there as well, such as Malcolm X/Magneto vs Dr King/Xavier, angry genocide survivors, etc.
Minority in general I would say. I have a hard time stretching that to Gay. I think the mutant/non-mutant thing was orignally equal parts superhero/non-superhero and an american minority/majority cultural thing. The 70s x-men is trying to be very multicultural in a very overt way. I'm sorry but that reads a little tau of poo to me.
The Xmen are mostly one long metaphor for gay folks...at least, they've attempted this for quite some time. It's pretty overt, yeah. You have very obvious overt references like the "Have you tried not being a mutant" from the movies, but the subtext has been there for some time. Shit, Northstar was an x-man in the 70s. Not the most overt reference for a while, and sometimes references in comics were pretty...ugh(Aids, of course, can always be used as a stand-in for gay, right?) About par for the course for social activism in comics, though. At least a lot of the older stuff can be blamed on the Comic Code, mostly anyway.