Most stirring moments in comics

[jerrygoodman]

Figured I'd start up a thread where people can post something they've seen in a comic book that has really stuck with them over time.

Here's one to start things off, from New Avengers #50:

Edited September 9, 2011 by jerrygoodman

[durendal]

Ooh, I remember that. Just can't remember what happened next. I'm sure Osborn or somebody else was pissed about that.

I do have a few moments in comics that I find to have a big impact. Like Wolverine remembering everything. Or Captain America being held down by the local government agencies at the end of Civil War.

Is pointing them out enough or would you require that we post images as well? I'll have to rummage through my old collection to get those though. I think it is best if we post images as it will also give everyone an idea of how you felt when you saw it.

I take it that this thread is going to have a lot of spoilt posters?

[jerrygoodman]

You can point them out, or post pics. It's all good.

I personally like this one, mainly because I thought Clint had some real guts getting up and spitting in Osborn's eye like that. If he'd been around for the Civil War, I wonder how differently things would have turned out.

*on another note, I wish that someone would do something like this in the Guyver-verse...*

[jerrygoodman]

Here's another one, from Amazing Spider-Man #537:

[Salkafar]

The heartbreaking thing was that the idea he was defending was that he only answers to his own conscience, and all costumed heroes should be extended the same courtesy. Which is a very interesting ideal for a man who only has super-powers because he enlisted, or tried to. As a soldier. In the US army.

Which is the reason for my avatar.

A great moment in comics... well, I got into comics for real around the time Superman died. That was pretty big.

Everybody knew it wouldn't last (No, actually, not everybody did. One guy wrote into a comics magazine disgusted - and they pretty much had to explain to him that he wouldn't stay dead because in comics, nobody does). But it was still... pretty shocking.

[durendal]

(No, actually, not everybody did. One guy wrote into a comics magazine disgusted - and they pretty much had to explain to him that he wouldn't stay dead because in comics, nobody does). But it was still... pretty shocking.

I find that statement to be humorous. So far, Bucky was already removed from the list of characters to stay dead. So the only one remaining is Uncle Ben. Unless Marvel wants to disprove this theory once again like they did to Bucky.

Also, I'm interested in how you two will view things since both your avatars are of different opinions.

[jerrygoodman]

Speaking of deaths, here's a scene from the graphic novel "The Death of Captain Marvel"...

I used this story as part of a thesis on graphic novels and how they appeal to younger readers.

[jerrygoodman]

And here's one from Marvel Fanfare #18:

"America doesn't hand you things on a silver platter. Sometimes all it offers is hope."

[jerrygoodman]

[Salkafar]

At the end of the Marvel Civil War, specifically in an issue of "Home Front", Sally Floyd propelled herself to the top of the ranks of despised comic book characters with one of the dumbest speeches ever to a defeated and imprisoned Captain America (who was portrayed very out-of-character throughout the Civil War anyway).

This is in fact famous.

But what almost nobody seems to remember is that she shafted Iron Man as badly.

In the same issue, she and Ben Urich visit Tony Stark and explain that they have figured out that he has been manipulating several key players and parties in the Civil War, ostensibly to make money, but as it turns out to save the country. Sally then literally applauds him for his efforts and all he can say is "Get out". After they leave, he starts to cry.

In "The confession", a sort of epilogue to 'Civil War', Tony explains his motivations to Captain America, step by step, cogently, and it becomes clear that, at the very least in his eyes, the whole thing was inevitable if much, much worse conflict was to be avoided. But he ends on "It wasn't worth this" and it is revealed he is talking to the corpse of Cap.

That was pretty moving to me. But I am an Iron Fan and never cared much for Captain America. Dressing in that flag seems to become less appropriate by the year.

[jerrygoodman]

On the contrary, Salkafar, I think Cap is still as relevant now, as he was when he started out...

Edited September 12, 2011 by jerrygoodman

[jerrygoodman]

From Thor #11, the God of Thunder speaks with the spirit of his then-deceased ally...

[jerrygoodman]

To which Cap responds, "I've lived my life by those sentiments. They're well worth dying for."

[Salkafar]

The world has become too small to be "a country". He seems to expect people to realize he represents the ideals that the United States was founded on, rather than the government, without having to explain it to them, although he is dressed in a flag.

He started out as a propaganda tool during wartime. In real life. His solution for complex situations somehow always boils down to punching people. You even have it in your sig. And yet: "I don't like bullies. I don't care where they're from." Hilarious. I notice he rarely walks in peace rallies, or ever protests against the actions of his own government. Was he for, or against the invasion in Iraq? How does he feel about secretly shipping terrorist suspects oversea to torture them? Any opinion on waterboarding, Cap?

Hmmm. Maybe he is still appropriate as a symbol for the USA...

Anyway. He's a soldier. Created by the US army. Wearing the US flag. It doesn't seem right to me.

He did occasionally break away from that role... as the Captain, and as Nomad (In that order?). He was still the same man, with the same ideals, he just no longer dressed as if he personally was the embodiment of the United States - or its ideals.

Which leads us to a question: What are the ideals of the United States, per se? As I recall they were laid down by the founding fathers - Liberty and justice, from a group of, as George Carlin put it, "White male slave-owners who didn't think anyone but them should be allowed to vote".

THAT'S what they should do - redefine "Captain America". What does he actually stand for? What does he base that on? And why doesn't he speak out more often against people in power who blatantly and with total impunity violate those ideals, which they are also supposed to represent?

Edited September 12, 2011 by Salkafar

[jerrygoodman]

For the record, not all of Cap's solutions boil down to punching people. And even though the army may have created him, he was never just a soldier.

Edited September 13, 2011 by jerrygoodman

[jerrygoodman]

And Stark couldn't give a decent answer, until it was too late...

[Salkafar]

I interpreted his silence as "Seriously, Steve? Seriously? I started this? You still don't get what this is about? What the hell happened to you?"

What Captain America was fighting for was the freedom for super-people to fight for whatever they believed in, while keeping their true identity a secret and not answering to anyone. Apparently he didn't realize this covers HYDRA, too.

His refusal to accede to a law passed by the duly elected representatives of the country he is a citizen of and in whose army he served was a crime. You see, private citizens - which I think Captain America is, since he is no longer serving in the Army, oddly enough - are supposed to obey the law. There was a time when you could own as many guns as you wanted without a license or registration. Then, a law was passed making this compulsory, and people who refused to accede to this were deemed felons. If a citizen does not like a law and wants it changed, he or she can write to their congress member, to a newspaper, on the Net, organize a public rally or demonstration, or express their unhappiness by voting.

Doing so by ignoring the law they don't like, and actively opposing law enforcement officers who, well, officially enforce the law, is called a crime.

The main argument against registration was that the identities of heroes would be outed - that the registered identities, although not available to the public at large but only to the relevant legal authorities in case it became necessary, would fall into the hands of supervillains who could then attack the families and loved ones of these heroes.

The upshot of which is that these heroes would have a special position when compared to other public servants such as policemen and -women, who do not enjoy the privilege of keeping their identities secret to protect their families from criminals.

Never mind that Cap never even considered cooperating with the authorities. I have said it before and I'll say it again: if the Avengers had agreed to this, they would have run the show within the year, and Congress would, to their astonishment, find that superheroes now would be capable of exerting political power. Working together, the superheroes would have had Congress over the barrel. In fact, the more cooperative they were, the more subtle their demands, the more influence they could have exerted. Congress would have to choose between repealing the act or accepting that the Avengers were becoming a third party that might end up in power.

Hell, Captain America could have been president - something he has always refused, for whatever reason... it seems a bit irresponsible, considering who did get into office (Remember the Secret Empire?).

Instead, he did the one thing which ensured the optimal amount of damage. That has always made me wonder. Did someone mess with his head? They always said that that was not the case - these were decisions made by people who knew what they were doing. For Iron Man, at least, this was not true, in canon: he had undergone the Extremis process very shortly before the Stamford disaster, and it did affect the way he looked at things.

More alarming, right at the start of the War, Captain America 'lost' a few minutes - he blacked out - and it was never explained what that meant. Under normal circumstances I would have said it was Loki messing with the Avengers (Are you kidding me? This was exactly the sort of thing he loves), but he was dead at the time.

Anyway. Captain America and Iron Man - and several other people - were acting out of character during the Civil War. How much was considered for attribution to Skrull interference? I guess we'll never know.

But it is a fact that Captain America labors under the delusion that what he feels inside to be right is objectively right.

That's a dangerous misconception.

[jerrygoodman]

From my experience, Salkafar, the minute you get politics involved in *anything,* everything becomes needlessly complicated, even the simple stuff.

[Salkafar]

Then I'll let you in on a terrible, terrible secret: There is no such thing as simple stuff.

[jerrygoodman]

Sure there is. We just take it and make it complicated. I think Scotty said it best in Star Trek III..."The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

Take this scene from Captain America #50. Steve is sent in to interrogate a prisoner. He could have easily tortured the guy, but instead, he chose another way...

Steve found another way, a better way...and it worked.

[Salkafar]

Then we disagree.

[jerrygoodman]

Then we disagree.

At least we can agree on that.

[durendal]

If only Cap and Tony were that civil during the registration, then we wouldn't have the whole civil war mess. Even though it's a thing of the past, its still one of the moments in comic history that I find thought provoking. What would have happened if Cap didn't give up and still pulverized Tony at the end of the conflict. Cap may have broken the law, but that does not necessarily mean that the law is always right. There is always 2 sides of the argument. Like on modern times, there are laws passed that allows gay marriage. To some this is a good thing, but there are also those who will oppose this to the bitter end. This is quite similar to the SHRA. It's easy to make things complicated, but it's difficult to keep things simple, which is why a lot of things in life are complicated.

[Salkafar]

What would have happened if Cap didn't give up and still pulverized Tony at the end of the conflict.

That was such bollocks...

I am prepared to accept Cap's a great guy, but power-wise, he's a capucin monkey smacking a twig against a Leopard tank. But Iron Man's power is by necessity always underplayed, because otherwise he would dominate everyone he meets... except maybe Thor, whose power is unquantifiable.

It's Moore's law. Computing power doubles every eighteen months. Science marches on. But Cap doesn't get faster and stronger.

He does have an (almost) indestructible shield, but it's partly made of iron and magnetic!

Iron Man could actually use it against him.

Edited September 15, 2011 by Salkafar

[durendal]

Now I would have to contest that. Towards the end of Civil war, Cap was obviously tearing Iron Man apart. The only reason he let up was because the police, fire fighters, medics and the lot tried to restrain him and put him back into his own senses. Tony is calculating, but in terms of fighting experience and tactics, Cap is way above him. The only reason Tony managed to stun cap was because he caught Cap off guard. Cap has a whole lifetime worth of battle experience. I would believe Tony can beat Cap only if Tony is as paranoid as Bruce Wayne. But he's not Batman. He's just some guy in a hi-tech suit. Intelligent as Tony may be, he sometimes act stupid.