I said rogue, not evil, or betraying. One of the definitions of the adjective form sums up my thoughts perfectly: "Operating outside of normal or desirable controls."
TheManWithoutFear said:
Anyway Giant-Man Vs. Widow argument. Hank is not the most likely suspect at all. I'd like other people's input on this too. I, personally, do not feel Hank is an evil person. I think Hank's trying to redeem himself or is going to try to redeem himself with the Defenders. The whole Ultron thing, if Ultimate Ultron turns evil, is going to be an innocent mistake on Hank's part. His intentions are good. Does anyone else feel this way about him or is it just me?
He's most definitely got some sort of psychological problem, probably one of the varieties of bipolar disorder. As a person of experience about behavior in that corner, I can honestly say that when I'm in a manic episode, the good or evil, the right or wrong, of my actions doesn't matter. He wouldn't see anything wrong with keeping the Ultron plans because his brain simply recognizes them as 'mine', and doesn't go complex enough to think about the legalities behind what he's doing. The same goes for hitting Janet, it's not "she's a woman, I love her, etc.", once the fight started, it's just "must win". Going back to Ultron at least (I'm not touching on if the Defenders is a legal thing), stealing plans from the US government to continue work on your own qualifies as "operating outside of normal or desirable controls", no? One rogue Ultimate.
TheManWithoutFear said:
Bruce Banner did not betray the Ultimates. He tried to help them save face with really ugly results.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but he took the Hulk serum of his own initiative, caused a huge mess, and (supposedly) got put down like a dog for the 800+ deaths he caused. That fits with "outside normal or desirable controls", no? That's two rogue Ultimates.
TheManWithoutFear said:
Thor is not betraying the Ultimates at all. If you think or feel that he is you're reading the title in the wrong context. Thor's one of the good guys he's being set up by Loki.
Rather than stay with the Ultimates and try and reasonably work out his issues with Fury and the US government, he takes off, and starts working to try and turn public opinion against the use of American super-soldiers in any kind of military capacity. From Fury's POV, that's definitely "operating outside normal or desirable controls". Three rogue Ultimates.
TheManWithoutFear said:
There's a difference between reading a story where they're pointing fingers at the wrong man and a story that has them getting robbed right from under their noses. The latter being what Widow is doing to them, I think.
And yet again, we'd have a fourth rogue Ultimate, and unless you've totally missed out on the SOP of the Ultimates, doing something like that gets you chased and smacked down. Or well, an attempted smack down if the cover of U2 #5 is any indication. Why would readers want to see the exact same thing as the Thor hunting arc spread out over six or seven issues of 'Grand Theft America'?
TheManWithoutFear said:
The Question I have is, In the solicitations does it say that whoever is leaking the information out is going to be outed by the end of this arc. I don't remember them saying anything so maybe this whole Thor/Loki thing won't even have to do with the leak and that's just what Thor is assuming Loki is up to. I could see the Thor/Loki conflict being resolved and the informant not being caught... leading into GTA.
Loki definitely appears, but if he's not the source of the leak, I can't believe they'd let it ride going into GTA. The fact that they've announced it as two distinct arcs makes me think that if everything was interconnected, it just would have been Ultimates 2, no special names. Then again... I got into it after U1 was already completely out... did they announce it as two arcs or one?
TheManWithoutFear said:
I think my thought/theory on this is pretty well thought out. So JTG, if you don't like it which I know you don't or if you don't have anymore to comment on the new things I've added to it, don't go all on the offensive with me. I don't feel like mods tellin' me to chill because I can't express my views. Thanks.
Honestly, it's not that well thought out. That's why when I brought my opinion against yours the FIRST time this came up, people pointed out that my rebuttals to your comments were good points, and you dropped it. Did we really need to do this a second time?