Really? Worse than Ultimatum and the Ultimate Hulk annual and Ultimate Power?
No, you're right. I completely overlooked those. But can you blame me for trying to forget?
It was frustratingly out of sync with the previously established Iron Man, but at least the story was coherent. The second one was also way worse than the first.
I never said the story wasn't coherent, I was just mystified at the idiotic need to turn Tony into a superbeing. It'd being giving Batman super-strength or some other insanity. Part of the charm of Tony as a character is that he's a regular guy. Granted, he's a super genius, but it's his intelligence which allows him to hang with the big boys through the abilities of his suit. You add regenerative properties and it robs him of what makes him special or unique by making him just another super powered individual.
For me he wasn't lovable. For me he was a giant emotionally void ******* who didn't learn from his mistakes or care about anything but himself.
This is my biggest gripe with you is that you rely on oversimplifying things you don't agree with, completely missing the intent of those things. For example:
Everyone was just a giant prick under Millar. Cap was a xenophobic bully and a mockery of the original character,
Ultimate Cap was a pastiche of the old timey, slightly xenophobic attitude of Americans from the 1940's who were worried about German and Japanese spies due to WWII. It completely makes sense given he's from that era. His attitude and outlook isn't going to change overnight. I explained this to you before: flawed characters are far more interesting than the one dimensional do-gooder Boy Scout approach you seem to prefer. Flaws allow a character to grow and evolve and overcome those flaws.
Bruce was a whiney and emo horndog,
Actually, Bruce was whiney (as someone pushed around his whole life and the focal point for the Hulk's rage, it makes sense), Hulk was a horndog.
Thor was a massive Liberal hippie,
One of the better changes Millar made. Ult Thor was awesome and far more interesting back then than what he became: one dimensional bruiser who hits stuff with his hammer, as shown in the last few years of Ultimate appearances.
Betty was an emotionally manipulative *****,
Aren't all women?
But again, Betty served as a way of directing the Hulk's rage. Perfectly apropos to the story and plot. Would you have preferred she stay the exact same as the 616 version? If so you're missing the point of the Ultimate universe.
Hank and Janet were fine until the issue with them just beating the hell out of each other,
Yes, because having super powers automatically makes the characters incapable of relationship problems and spousal abuse. Again, these are characters with super powers, but the same emotional frailties as regular people. Some regular folks are ticking time bombs who focus their anger, rage, depression, and lack of self confidence into physical abuse of those they supposedly love. That isn't condoning that behavior, it's acknowledging it's existence.
Black Widow and Hawkeye are introduced by slaughtering not only bad guys but innocent people,
Those were all Chitauri, as was established in the dialogue and shown in the artwork.
and Nick Fury was just kind of there. Ugh.
Right. He's only just there. And he happened to provide the influence for the MCU version which has become beloved by fans.
Is your problem not the power but that it goes against continuity? My belief is that continuity is there to serve a story and not the other way around. If Millar wanted to he could have squeezed it in.
It has nothing to do with continuity, it has to do with robbing the character of Tony Stark of what made him special: he's a regular human in a suit, albeit a super genius, he is physically just as vulnerable as anyone else when not in his armor. What Card did perverted the concept of Tony, and unnecessarily changed the character in an unnecessary and moronic way.
The idea was also inherently flawed. More brain matter (throughout the body) might have made him smarter, but that much brain matter would've made him a god. Also, apparently he's able to regenerate brain matter (something no one else can do) when his limbs are blown off. But even that doesn't make sense as the loss of the brain matter (even if it regrows) would presumably result in memory loss, or motor function loss, etc. He'd have to relearn some of his extensive knowledge any time he lost limb. That was never covered or addressed, because the entire idea was idiotic to begin with and half-assed by Card.
Why would Millar squeeze in an inherently flawed, unnecessary, and stupid change to a character largely adapted for the new universe? Screw that. I'm glad he retconned it and rightfully ridiculed it.
Instead he decided to not only make it a cartoon but then mock it. Regardless of how you feel about the story that's just not a cool thing to do.
Neither is completely altering the abilities and capabilities of a character created by other peoples work. If it had been a worthwhile retcon I wouldn't mind, but it wasn't. It was stupid. Millar called him on it.
I thought was a cool power (loved how his whole body was a brain) and it even got referenced in Ultimate Human.
That doesn't make it valid. Nor was it ever referenced again.
Yes, because drawing on the antics of Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian is always a great approach to super hero comics.
In the first two volumes they were obsessed with PR and a sex tape with not only two members but the fact that one of them was a traitor was just juicy. Then it was revealed to be Ultron behind it and it got juicier. I also loved his relationship with Carol Danvers. Really wish Jeph Loeb could have been able to continue with that. I really wish the original plans for Ultimatum happened (was originally MUCH smaller before Bendis decided that it should be an event) because as much as I loved New Ultimates The Ultimates 4 with Ed McGuinness and an actual story arc for Zarda would have been epic. I will say that I did not enjoy the second one that much. Everyone just sort of devolved into psychopaths.
You and I will never see eye to eye, but it's fun pointing out the flaws in the approach of Loeb and Card.
Just going to say this: Hawkeye and Widow didn't kill any innocents. Everyone in both buildings were alien sleeper agents.
I refuse to believe that a building in New York only had sleeper agents in it. That's unrealistic and silly. ESPECIALLY in a comic that focused on "realism". That's like saying no one died in the final act of Man of Steel.
This whole comment is silly. The most unrealistic thing about the book is that sleeper Chitauri were able to keep regular humans out of their building using security measures? You have a very strange view of reality.
Well sort of E Also 528 between two buildings? That seems really really low. Especially when Hawkeye is on the 38th floor and Black widow jumps across a street to land on the floor above him. Assuming she only lost a few floors due to gravity (but also assuming the cocktail on enhancements boost her strength), lets say she jumped from her 43rd floor. Assuming an even average number of agents per floor amongst the two buildings, that leaves 6.5 sleeper agents per floor. Hardly possible that was the entire building, not even taking into account we see them taking out an incredible number of people. I would be more apt to believe that they agents only had a couple of floors worth of real estate, but that is never mentioned, nor is that what is being stated by us. TL;DR, I have to give the point to wyokid and say that they may have killed some innocent civilians.
You're assuming every room in the building was full, which is a poor assumption to make and not backed up by anything in the comics. It's entirely possible to assume the Chitauri sleeper agents congregated in only a few dozen rooms or floors, with the other rooms and floors being used for tech, weaponry, etc.
I just finished reading that issue too and was going to say pretty much the same thing. They also mentioned that back in WWII they nuked Japan to finish the chitauri off, so they have a history of taking extreme measures to kill them.
Given the habits of the Chitauri I don't blame them. That can easily be taken as a social commentary on the "acceptable" losses of innocent civilians in war.