Ultimate Marvel

Ya'll done burning that strawman yet, Grigor? Seriously, someone says they don't like the Ultimate Universe because it contains bigoted content and you start screaming about censorship. No one said the comic should be censored, we said it sucked.

No one is accusing Millar or any of the other Ultimate writers of crimes; no one seriously thinks that, say, writing about domestic abuse and actually committing domestic abuse are in any way equivalent.

What ‘’is’’ being said is that those kinds of topics are be written in a tasteless manner that undermines any attempts at a serious discussion, and thus makes for a bad work. Stuff like domestic abuse has to be handled with care, since it has affected many people’s lives. The Ultimaes do not exist in a vacuum - you can’t just write whatever you want and expect people to accept it without critique.

Plus, I must admit, I’m curious - what exactly is gained from using beloved characters (even if these are alternate versions of them) for this? I mean, did people ‘’really’’ want to see Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch in an incestuous relationship?

edited 20th Jan '18 4:22:23 PM by KarkatTheDalek

What was it so "tasteless" about the scene? That it was brutal? Well, yes - it had to be!. Domestic abuse is brutal, and it has to be shown that way. Specially if it is in a superhero comic book. Us readers are used to enjoy characters fighting among themselves in the typical Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny. The comic had to be clear that this wasn't one of those times, that we did not have to "enjoy" it. And then, the aftermath. We comic book readers are also used to see superheroes beat each other to a pulp, then say some contrived words, and then everything is forgiven and they are all friends again. Pym was not Easily Forgiven for this, he was kicked out of the team, and treated like dirt by everyone else from them on.

Was it handled in a similar way to the infamous Brenda episode on Family Guy?

Why don't you find out for yourself?

Turning a heroic character into a wifebeater is tasteless. Turning an empowered woman into an abused wreck is tasteless. Depicting it the way it was artistically depicted is tasteless. Having the solution to the problem be another stronger man beating up the abuser is tasteless.

The same goes for so much else in the Ultimate Universe. Having a repeat statutory rapist among the heroes is tasteless. Derailing Captain America into Captain Jingo is tasteless. Turning the Red Skull into Cap's son is tasteless. Including an incest storyline for the sake of shock value is tasteless.

And frankly, accusing people of wanting to censor comics because they don't like a tasteless work is also pretty tasteless.

Speaking of tasteless...I didn't respond to this one before because I was a little busy dealing with the "Ambar wants to censor muh comics" strawman, but this trope is inherently tasteless, and the best that can be said for any work that uses it is that it manages to be good in spite of the trope's presence.

Congrats on missing the entire point of Wonder Woman though. I mean, seriously, the fact that Ares isn't responsible for WWI (Word War I, mind you, not World War II, which is what We Didn't Start the Führer is about) is the entire point of the film and is established when he denies responsibility while holding the Lasso of Truth, but hey, if you're going to misrepresent the points of the people who are talking to you I guess you might as well misrepresent the point of a movie.

This, the entire point of Ares in Wonder Woman movie is subverting the classic "this war was started for a god/alien/super skilled manipulator/conspiracy". He did not start it, he is just trying to continue it because Humans Are Bastards.

And yeah, the Ultimate Marvel universe is tasteless, there dark writing, there edgy writing, and there is just disgusting things.

edited 21st Jan '18 6:16:27 AM by KazuyaProta

Anti-Hero's are a thing. And once again, it is also not like these people have been assholes from start to finish. They had actual character developement, they went from these emotionally unstable, bigoted men to actual heroes. That goes for Ultimate Cap, that goes for Ultimate Iron Man, that goes for Ultimate Hank Pym. Why do people always ignore that?

Two of these men actually pulled a Heroic Sacrifice. And no, the early stories of the UU are still held in high regard. It's the Jeph Loeb stuff that signaled the UU's fall from grace. But now that it is back it can hopefully become great again.

Also, I don't see what is so much more offensive about there being a Man Behind the Man for Hitler than stories related to Nazi germany in general. I find THIS at least far better than some goofy clothed goons trying to create a 'Fourth Reich'.

Well I find it tasteless to dictate people what is tasteless and what not, so yeah. Can't we all just agree to disagree?

@ 103 Agreed, I think the domestic abuse case of UU Hank Pym and its actual consequences was one of the most chillingly realistic depictions of the stuff in comics.

EDIT: I just read through the threat. Did somebody actually state "Ultimate Captain America is worse than Hydra Cap."? Geez. This is the kind of unfunded hate I'm talking about. I mean....really.

edited 21st Jan '18 9:20:13 AM by Forenperser

Speaking of the whole domestic abuse story, it was handled better in the 616 Universe during Roger Stern run of the Avengers.

Like Millar’s Ultimates story, it does a pretty realistic take on domestic abuse and people’s reaction to the whole thing. Unlike the Millar take, the Stern take on the issue actually treats the characters as real people instead of charictures you would find in some kind of drama by Lifetime.

Wasp,the victim in the story, was verbally abused by Hank and was eventually struck (yes I know that’s not what the author wanted to go with in the scene) her when she tried to stop Hank from unleashing a killer robot . . . it makes sense in context. But in said story she didn’t have to rely on another hero to get her out of this relationship and she was the one who came to realize its better that her and Hank go their seperate ways. Hell, she was the one to defeat the unstoppable killer robot after Hank hit her and eventually ended up leading the team. In short, Wasp in the 616 canon was more empowered than her Ultimate counterpart.

Hank Pym, the abuser, has been shown to be violent in both words and action. But instead of saying that he’s a fucking irredeamable action, they address that he has some mental inferioty complex. In an interesting expansion to his origin, a comic address how Hank’s constant change in super hero persona is fueled mostly in creating an identity that can match the likes of his more stronger allies (Iron Man, Thor, Hulk) and a drive to prove that he isn’t a useless Avenger. Hank in said story arc (after getting thrown in jail for, well, lets just say shit happens) didn’t tried to excuse his own actions being due to his mental health and seeks to atone for what he has done but not in any of his personas. Basically this story arc made Hank into a very complex and unique character in Avengers book (especially in West Coast Avengers) as he work to prove himself that the team can rely on him and earn their trust after his fall from grace; unlike the Ultimate Pym whose Heel Face Turn isn’t impactful or earned as he still come off as a dirtbag after everything.

Then theres Captain America who is a complete White Knight in the Ultimates. Which is pretty different from the 616 one who basically went after Hank due to the latters loose cannon behavior in missions, that leads to Cap to have Hank court martialed and kick off because he was too violent to have on the team. And inspite of all that, he didn’t do that because he hates the guy and want to protect Janet, rather he was thinking about the well being of the team as not only was Hank ruining the team image/dynamic/morale but also because Hank is getting way to personal in going on mission and clearly needed help. Hell, unlike the Ultimate universe they didn’t completely abandon Hank in his crisis and tried to give him the necessary help to get his life together since after all they were close allies. Also amusingly, not only did Cap did not try take Janet as his girlfriend by the end of the comic but also called out Tony for doing so even though he knew his heart was in the right place for trying to comfort Jan (which leads to Stark not only breaking up with Janet in the issue, but also reveal his identity as Iron Man).

In short, the Roger Stern take on the abuse story was much better IMO since it treats the situation relistically and with good taste, made all participants in the event look good as we gained a stronger more independent Janet and a complex atoner Hank, and in the end it was a story about how friendship can overcome the darkest of times, especially when a friend has fallen on a darker path . . . ah shit, that story line is the Water 7 of Avengers comics, is it?

Already talked about it up here. It was still tasteless once we compare the two stories.

edited 21st Jan '18 4:56:53 PM by BigK1337

"Turning a heroic character into a wifebeater is tasteless". In case you didn't know, Henry Pym was already the poster boy of Never Live It Down in comics, for the time he commited domestic abuse, long before the Ultimate universe even started, and he's still treated that way nowadays (check secret empire). Deserved or undeserved, that's another discussion and YMMV, but the fact of life is that such reputation exists, and predates the Ultimates. When I first saw that scene, back in the original publication date, I did not think "what the hell is going on?", I thought "oh, they are including an adaptation of that".

Big K, I understand that comparing this story with the original one may be appropiate, but if we are going to talk about tasteful depictions of domestic abuse, we should aim a little higher and compare it with the standards set by actual dramas, devoid of super powers or science fiction stuff. Stern's comic book may have been Fair for Its Day, but in those modern series, the abuses are always something serious and brutal, and the abuser is always seen as a despicable man (not as a poor misunderstood soul that may get redemption).

Case in point, while I was writing this I was also watching Cable Girls: the evil husband took her wife, took her away from a party and started to beat and kick her for daring to talk with her friends, against his orders. She was crying while he kicked her with all his fury, and she whispered that she would prefer to be dead. Her friends show up, attack him to defend her, and kill him by accident.Then it turns into a thing of hiding the body and keeping things out of notice from the police. But, as in the ultimates, it was a brutal scene, and it does not end well for the abuser (Pym at least should be grateful that he got out of his fight with Cap alive).

"Big K, I understand that comparing this story with the original one may be appropiate, but if we are going to talk about tasteful depictions of domestic abuse, we should aim a little higher and compare it with the standards set by actual dramas, devoid of super powers or science fiction stuff." >implying super hero comics can't showcase the same standards of story telling as actual dramas

"Stern's comic book may have been Fair for Its Day, but in those modern series, the abuses are always something serious and brutal," >implying that the abuse wasn't serious in the Stern comic and not hard watch for the viewer

"and the abuser is always seen as a despicable man (not as a poor misunderstood soul that may get redemption)." >implying that the abuser in these stories can't have a freudian excuse for his/her action and should ALWAYS be an unsympathetic villain no matter what mental condition they have

I know that domestic abuse is a serious topic and it is pretty damn tricky to make the abuser a sympathetic character. However, my point was basically to express my thoughts as to how this kind of story was handle between the Avengers and the Ultimates; to which I say the Avengers did it better as it not only attempts at doing it but also succeed at it. Especially seeing how after said story, Main Universe Hank is seen as the Ensemble Darkhorse to the series while Ultimate Universe Hank is more of a scrappy who really didn't help out in the perception of the Ultimate Universe having nothing but Jerkasses.

"Oh its fair for its day", well so is the Mark Grunewald run of Captain America, I find those books more relevant today than the current ones; the same can be said for many other 80s Marvel Comics including the previously mention Avengers story we are talking about.

Well, yes, all those implications are correct. This may go a bit off-topic (the thread is about the Ultimate Universe), but I will explain.

• "implying super hero comics can't showcase the same standards of story telling as actual dramas". That's not my perception, that's the perception of society as a whole. Comic book industry (all of it) is just a niche market, and it does not have the sales and revenue of the film, television video game and music industry, or even the high reputation of literature and theater. Don't hate me for saying so, you know this is true. Yes, the medium can still produce pieces of fine art... on rare times, years between each other. For each time that the comic book industry produces something like Watchmen or Ultimates, there are years and years of comic books whose plots are just basic excuses to pit strange creatures and people with weird clothings and weird powers against each other. Even the Ultimates themselves were hit by this: from Ultimates 3 onwards, there were good and bad Ultimates comics, but all of them just standard superhero flicks. And no, the boom of superhero films did not change this a bit: most of the audience of those films have never read a superhero comic in their lives, and consider them just a piece of trivia in relation to the films. Not an opinion, just check the sales. Luke Cage's Netflix series is an acclaimed one, but that did not save his comic book from being cancelled recently for low sales.
• "implying that the abuse wasn't serious in the Stern comic and not hard watch for the viewer". No, it wasn't. Perhaps it was for someone who only consumes superhero comics, and suddenly finds a story much more dramatic than a villain wreaking havok in the streets. But that's a very low bar. If you are used to see actual dramas, Stern's attempt comes as too little.
• "implying that the abuser in these stories can't have a freudian excuse for his/her action and should ALWAYS be an unsympathetic villain no matter what mental condition they have". Correct, that's the way stories about domestic abuses are usually narrated. There's no such a thing as "it was only once" or redemption in those stories, as they could have unfortunate implications.
• " after said story, Main Universe Hank is seen as the Ensemble Darkhorse". Wrong. After that story, Main universe Hank is seen as the poster boy of Never Live It Down for this very incident.

Finally, some fans from the comic book niche market reject Millar's verion of Captain America and praise Mark Grunewald run instead. But if we stick to the facts... Millar gained a huge positive reputation for his work with the Ultimates, allowing him to create his own comic books, and then have those comic books turned into films, and then Netflix bought it. As for his Ultimates, they were used as a template for the initial films of the MCU. What about Mark Grunewald? What came from his run? Does someone from outside the comic book niche even know who he is?

edited 22nd Jan '18 8:19:15 AM by GrigorII

Also, to repeat one of my points from earlier: If you compare the 616-verse and the Ultimate verse and list all the racist/sexist/homophobic and whatever else questionable stuff, who do you think would really come out on top? Just on top of my head, there is the infamous Avengers Vol 200, which (in my opinion) is FAR more offensive than everything in the UU put together. Also, as for the UU 'taking heroes and turning them into jerks': They created an alternate version of it and ran with it. On the other hand, if you take events like Civil War or Avengers vs X-Men, THAT is ignoring characterization and turning heroes into jerks for the sake of shock value.

When the best you can do in defending the Ultimate Universe, a product of the 2000s, is to link to a comic from the 1990s, 1980s, or earlier, you might have not have an argument. It'd be like defending Frank Miller's depiction of the Persians by saying "look how DC portrayed Asians in the 1960s." The whole problem with the UU is that it uses outdated tropes and portrayals more reminiscent of the 80s, 70s, or 60s than any modern comic worth reading.

As for the Civil War comparison...again way to miss the point. Civil War is rightly reviled for taking everyone out of character. So how on earth do you expect people to like an entire 'verse that essentially inflicts characterization worthy of Civil War (or worse; Civil War didn't give us statutory rapist Wolverine) on its audience.

You know what else made lots of money and was turned into a film? Literature/{{Twilight. Using your logic it is clearly the greatest work of modern literature ever written.

It is not the 'best I can do' I've given other arguments as well, like (for the x-th time) that many of these characters weren't jerks from start to finish, that they gradually evolved into better persons and that most people choose to ignore that and just focus on certain things (like the infamous France line).

And you obviously missed what I tried to say, as my point was that the UU uses explicitly different versions of certain characters, meaning it doesn't 'turn beloved characters into jerks' as opposed to events (like Civil War) in the actual main timeline.

As for Wolverine, it's not like the mainstream Wolverine was a paragon of justice either, what with shooting Frank Simpsons nanny, driving his father into suicide and physically and mentally torturing the kid into becoming a homcidal maniac, just to name one thing. The sole difference between Ultimate and 616 Wolverine is that the latter became a better person earlier through mind wipe, while the former graduated into one slowly.

Ambar, let me remind you that the mods had already told to drop that whole "ultimate wolverine is a statutory rapist" thing (I don't think that being in another thread matters). So please do not insist with that.

Trying to have sex with a teen while you are a adult already turns you into a Statuory rapist.

Of course, a lot of males dont seems to be really bothered with that, mainly when they themselves are the adult or the rapist is a attractive woman, but still.

Well those males are either idiots or perverts themselves.

If a person is over the age of 18 especially way over then they have to keep their hands off anyone under the age of 18.

edited 22nd Jan '18 1:44:17 PM by slimcoder

x3

Except

y'know

he is

The first kind are perverts, the second too but they are idiot perverts instead of evil perverts.

If a person is over the age of 18 especially way over then they have to keep their hands off anyone under the age of 18.

Honestly, I think that 18 is a too low bar for those things, I think that 24-25 is the ideal age for relationships with people over 30. I mean, I have a 26-years-old friend that cant avoid but looking 19 years olds as childs and is had to deal that his 22-years-old girlfriend doesnt.

Well, depends where you live; plenty of places where the age is 16, I'd say it's more common than 18.

You are right my brotha.

Barely legal is an uncomfortable word.

Also true.

edited 22nd Jan '18 2:02:55 PM by slimcoder

In my country is 18, but cases vary. No one will judge a 16 years old guy for sleeping with a 15 years old girl, what is disturbing is that cases of 18 years old dating teachers is see as socially acceptable, weird but acceptable. Luckily, I never have met any case (for now...).

Also, there a thread for this? In On Topic or something? I dont want derail the thread.

Also, to come back to topic.

Ultimate Wolverine is a freaking rapist. Deal with it.

edited 22nd Jan '18 2:06:27 PM by KazuyaProta

I wad going to say Ultimate Wolverine is Wolverine if he didn’t developed a conscious and realize that the best there is at what he do isn’t very nice.

But yeah that works too.

Especially when we compare him to his Evolution counterpart who didn’t pursue in the usual Scott/Jean/Logan love triangle.

BTW, did I mention how much I find the Evolution portrayal of Logan to be the best one? He got all of the best qualities of Wolverine, good amount of limelight episode which sheds light on his character, and (best of all) doesn’t fucking steal the spotlight.