• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

fantastic_four

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    45,539

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by fantastic_four

  1. fantastic_four
    I could see either way happening, depending on what Feige wants the MCU story to be concerning both. But I'd rather see them as friends than foes to make it interesting. To loop back to the topic--many Krakoans call Scarlet Witch "The Pretender" because she told people she was a mutant when it was later revealed she was a mutate created by High Evolutionary during Ike Perlman's 2014 ret-con of Wanda and Pietro to no longer be mutants in his effort to starve all of the properties Fox owned the film rights to. That's actually an un-ret-conning of the 1970s ret-con of them both being mutants and Magneto being their father, because Stan Lee's story had Wanda and Pietro being mutated by High Evolutionary after they were born. Even though it happened at birth many Krakoan mutants look down on her for what to them was a lie, hence the derogatory nickname. THAT'S what I would expect based upon the way humans look at genetic differences in real society, and I think it's a fine idea by Hickman.
  2. fantastic_four
    It's enlightened, and I think ideal...but in my experience at minimum half of people aren't so enlightened, and I think I'm being generous and it's more around two-thirds to three-quarters who aren't. I find it more likely that homosuperior in general would shun mutates. In "House of X" Xavier and Magneto only allow mutants and mutates to live on Krakoa. If a human wants to live there they have to intentionally become a mutate somehow.
  3. fantastic_four
    Or he could be written to not see them as kin because they didn't suffer the same indignities he did. I suspect the majority of homosuperior would reject mutates because they're posers/wannabes. Human society tends in that direction, so I would expect the same from homosuperior.
  4. fantastic_four
    I'm not sure if you want to go down this rabbit hole on a comic book forum. I anticipate I'd have to ignore 80% of the potential responses to any discussion around the idea, but I can't see at all that it isn't an identical parallel to mutates versus mutants.
  5. fantastic_four
    For most of my life Chris Claremont has been my favorite X-Men author, but the current X-Men storyline by Jonathan Hickman is probably the finest writing the team has ever had. In it Xavier uses the mutant Krakoa--the living island from Giant-Size X-Men #1--to establish a new country for mutantkind to live in so that they aren't scorned by human society. Xavier accepts mutates onto Krakoa. I thought perhaps Magneto wouldn't, but I believe Hickman had Magneto accept them, too. I haven't read whether or not he did it all along or was later convinced to, but the ideas are extremely compelling. I'm really loving the House of X/Powers of X storyline, possibly even more than anything in Claremont's run, but for now I just like them both and am unsure which is the better X-author.
  6. fantastic_four
    Thanks. It is a little tricky. But I can see how comic book writers would distinguish between the two paths - but potentially merging the two over time as the same societal standing. Let's relate it to real society. Are you familiar with Rachel Dolezal, the white lady who made her skin as dark as she could and identified as African-American, telling people she was one when she wasn't? She actually got to the point where she was the leader of an NAACP chapter before the press outed her nationally. Let's go with the hypothetical that she actually altered her genetic structure to make it 99.999% similar to the average genome of an African, but she did it as an adult after she had avoided growing up as an African-American. How accepted by American society do you anticipate she would be?
  7. fantastic_four
    That's the ret-con I referred to earlier relating to the Eternals we'll likely see more of after that film gets released. I really like the ret-con myself because the idea of powers emerging from evolution is a stretch, so injecting fantasy into the mix fixes the problems.
  8. fantastic_four
    They settled on him being a mutate.
  9. fantastic_four
    A mutate. The primary distinction is that mutants grow up feared and hated, whereas mutates get to grow up human then get their powers later after they grew up in a relatively normal way. Mutants feel entirely more separate from human culture and civilization than mutates.
  10. fantastic_four
    Black Widow. Agnes Agatha is really her secret commie lover. If you go under the premise that every commercial is one of the big bads taunting Wanda then the HYDRA references are digs at her being a member of it for most of her life.
  11. fantastic_four
    In the comics he's an Eternal. I don't know anything about the Eternals but I assume they're fantasy-based. I'm guessing it'll be the same in the MCU and Josh Brolin will pop up in the credits once the film is released.
  12. fantastic_four
    Agreed, sorta. It feels either personal, or the output of someone who is just entirely sadistic by nature. If it's personal the only character I can think of from the MCU we've been shown who may carry a grudge against her and can pull off a significant portion of what we're seeing is Ultron. But he couldn't do it alone, he would have to be working with one of the magical characters hinted at. If it's not personal which one of the potential big bads is purely sadistic enough to enjoy taunting her with those commercials? DEFINITELY not Immortus. Mephisto fits that profile entirely. I have no idea how twisted and sadistic Chthon or Nightmare are, but if someone knows please do share. That's Feige's modus operandi to date, so given the mixed bag of hints for different big bads I tend to agree. You could have any of the ones we're speculating on pop up at the end, and then in Doctor Strange 3 we find that guy was the puppet or accomplice of another.
  13. fantastic_four
    That's one of the first ideas that pops into my mind, too. You can't fully explain mutants with science either, though, because they require you to abandon the first law of thermodynamics. There's no way most mutants could generate enough energy to power their abilities, or explain how Storm can control physically separate parts of her body like weather--which coincidentally Stan Lee agreed with, he frequently commented how he hated Storm's design for that reason. I think that's why Marvel ret-conned Eternals fantasy elements in with mutants to explain the unexplainable parts of how they work, although I'm not sure of it because I haven't read those stories. I think I first heard about them being linked to the origin of mutants in the comics when they first announced the Eternals movie a few years ago, although it's possible I heard it a few years before that.
  14. fantastic_four
    Clarke's Law "Any sufficiently advanced technology will be indistinguishable from magic." OK, let's assume the powers of Asgardians are pure science but we just don't know how they're achieved. Why is Thor the only one with his powers? If it's science shouldn't the power of Thor be attributable to multiple Asgardians? Why didn't Odin have those powers? If Loki's illusions are science why don't Thor, Heimdall, Sif, or whoever carry around their own illusion generators? Even assuming it's all science every time I've tried to play out the science angle I can't make it work in any logically explainable way.
  15. fantastic_four
    I was HUGELY compelled by this idea when I saw it in the trailers for Thor. But after watching the movie once and re-watching it half a dozen times since then...I don't see that Branagh actually merged magic and science together, at least not in any way that he actually explained on-screen well enough for anyone to understand. What's the science behind Thor? Various Asgardians just have these power sets that are largely unexplained other than they're "gods." I spent at LEAST 10-20 hours imagining what this statement meant during multiple re-watches of the film. For the first few viewings I held out hope the ideas were there and I was just overlooking them, but at this point it feels like wishful thinking. Thor is super-tough, super-strong, and can generate lightning, but if there's a scientific explanation for why he can do all of that I haven't been able to dig it out of any of the Thor films. If anyone else pieced it together please do share.
  16. fantastic_four
    I don't either in the case of the content this show covers. I've been a Marvel fan for 40+ years, but for most of that time I've been turned off by the magic stuff. I actually love fiction about magic such as Lord of the Rings or Dungeons and Dragons, and World of Warcraft has been my main game since it released. But I always found mixing in magic fantasy with the science-based superheroes bizarre. Same with Thor and Asgard, mixing in religion with science felt equally bizarre. I didn't start to appreciate Thor and Strange as a part of the Marvel Universe until the past decade. But I've been taking alternative media for Marvel characters as an opportunity to explore stories I hadn't in the past for several years now. I collect action figures in addition to comics, and when an action figure for a character from a story I've never read before comes out and looks cool, I'll read the story they came from. Same for the movies; if a movie is covering characters I haven't read before, I'll read up on the back stories. In the case of Wandavision I read all of the Vision and Scarlet Witch limited series in the 1980s, so I've long had an attachment to the characters. I much prefer the mutant aspects of Wanda to the magic-based elements, so I'm unfamiliar with these magic enemies like Mephisto, Chthon, Immortus, Nightmare, etc. But I've enjoyed learning about them.
  17. fantastic_four
    Puzzles that piece together into one image are fine, but if I open up the box and the manufacturer has thrown four or five puzzles together into the same box, then yes, that's dumb. And once I realize that has happened I can't imagine feeling motivated to sort those pieces out from each other.
  18. fantastic_four
    I'm a bit burned out on solving the Wandavision mystery. If the clues were pointed in one direction I'd still be engaged, but at this point I feel like they're throwing in so much misdirection that I'm burned out by it. There's enough decent evidence for Chthon, Immortus, and Mephisto that I won't be surprised if it's one or several of those. If it isn't and Nightmare rises up from nowhere as the solitary bad with little or no evidence that it's him I'm going to probably be absolutely pissed that they threw out all of the false flags unless they tie up how he could be doing all of this yet still remotely tied to his powers and limitations from the comics with the most elaborate bow I can imagine.
  19. fantastic_four
    Disney Plus was a no-brainer for me. Even if they hadn't bought my favorite two properties in Lucasfilm and Marvel I'd probably still be subscribing since I have young kids, but the combo of their cartoons AND all of my favorite stuff means I'm hooked for life.
  20. fantastic_four
    Ughh. Why would Sony get into this game? Their content library is SO meager if they charge any more than $5 a month they're delusional, and I wouldn't even pay $5 for what they have. I'd consider it at $1.99/month, but I don't even think I'd pay that.
  21. fantastic_four
    Disney would have to pony up quite a bit for that to happen. As long as TNT/TBS, FX, SciFy, etc are willing to pay more to show Marvel films Sony will keep selling to them.
  22. fantastic_four
    He's only ever appeared in this series. Your screenshot is from volume 2 released in 1985, but he first appeared in volume 1 issue 1 released in 1982. That image HighVoltage posted is from issue #1. I looked at every page in both issues and you never see the cover of the book in either.
  23. fantastic_four
    OK, apparently this character has only ever appeared in the Vision and Scarlet Witch series in the 1980s. I just browsed the issues he's in, and I couldn't find any panels showing the cover of the book; the book gets opened to an interior page and he appears from there. So I don't see how we can say that's what the book was. Also the symbols on the cover of the book in the show are VERY different than anything I'd associate with druids, this goat-looking guy, or the Gaelic holiday of Samhain which shares this guy's name. I can't tell what's on the cover, but it looks vaguely like two skulls, one right-side-up and one upside-down. It looks quite evil. However, there is an image of a goat's head on the wall to the right of the two symbols. Maybe that's a reference to Samhain, but it could be one of the dozens of easter eggs there that at this point almost seem designed to mislead us. Until we see MANY references to a character over and over I don't buy the ones where it's just one passing reference. I'm surprised nobody has identified the symbols on the walls or on the book yet. Surely someone has, think I'll look around and see.
  24. fantastic_four
    I googled "druidhic tome" and found nothing. Did you mis-spell whatever you were referring to?
  25. fantastic_four
    I'll go first--I'm finding solving the puzzle fun, but overall the show is enjoyable but not great. The main re-watchability factor with it will be to go back and look for puzzle pieces I missed after we see the finished product, but I doubt I'll re-watch it because it's such an enjoyable ride like I do most MCU films. There's also nothing so far that I'd watch Youtube clips of, and I do that for major scenes in most MCU films all the time.