The full Spider-Man: Homecoming trailer has been released, and frankly, if you haven't seen it, don't watch it. It seemed like one of those trailers that give away far too much of the plot. It did look cool, and the inclusion of Iron Man will keep it fresh after five previous Spidey flicks (sort of a live-action issue of Marvel Team-Up). I like the take on The Vulture as a scavenger of tech from leftover super-battles. I'll definitely check this out in the theater and hope there are still a few surprises left.
These two first crossed paths back in STF #578,,,
26 comments:
Cool cover, Ross.
I always thought that Hourman was kind of a strange name for Rex Tyler to adopt given that it is based on the fact that his powers only last for an hour at a time. It's almost as if he is giving the bad guys a clue to his biggest weakness. That would be like Superman calling himself Vulnerable-To-Kryptonite Man!
This is kind of an interesting choice for a team-up.
I have to confess: I much prefer this sequel cover to the one for STF #578. That being said, I would like to reassure you that trailers rarely give away the whole final draft of a movie. Seeing as how most of them seem to be composed of out-takes that wind up on the editing room floor during post-production!
For example: it was implied, in the trailers for FATE OF THE FURIOUS, that Charlize Theron's character put Dom on an emotional short leash by threatening Brian and Mia! But, I went to see it...and guess what?
Completely different leverage/blackmail.
Sad but true, Anon. :-(
Sonofjack, I quoted a similar thought last year. See https://braveandboldlost.blogspot.com/2016/07/hourman-vs-hulk.html?m=0 for responses.
And, as your namesake replied, back then:
"That's why it's called 'suspension of disbelief.' The same thing could be said about the Ray (keep him literally in the dark) or Hawkman (literally clip his wings) or even Spider-man (spray him with insecticide)! Need I go on?"
To the Anonymous whose comment I... uh, "borrowed": Oops! Sorry about that. I didn't consciously remember your comment, but I was reading this blog back then, so I must have read it when you originally posted it. I know you weren't accusing me of anything, but I think that I must have inadvertently plagiarized. D'oh!
To Cary Comic: I don't think the quote you referenced is really valid. The Ray is called the Ray and Hawkman is called Hawkman because they resemble a ray and a hawk respectively. Spider-Man's powers are spider-like. They chose names based on their abilities, not on their limitations.
@Sonofjack: the limitations are the inherent flip side of the abilities. Something _any_ criminal genius could all too easily discern! Hence, Spidey getting bug-sprayed with ethyl chloride, discourtesy of Alistair Smythe, in one confrontation. Plus the Wizard recruiting Hydro-Man, for the Frightful Four, in order to douse the Human Torch with high-pressure blasts of water!
Cary Comic, how is it that you are not getting this? Of course every hero hero has certain limitations. No one is saying otherwise. However, the Human Torch does not call himself "Douse-Me-With-Water Man". Hourman has chosen a code name that gives his enemies a major clue to his greatest weakness which they otherwise might never suspect. I just thought that was kind of funny and I thought I would share. Sheesh!
And, again, I say the same logic applies to the Human Torch! The word "torch" implies "fire" which is naturally cancelled out by water. So, undeniably, yeah: he might as well call himself "Douse-Me-With-Water Man."
Really, Cary Comic? You honestly think that it is "undeniable" that the Human Torch might as well call himself "Douse-Me-With-Water Man"? That makes sense to you? Do you really think that it's the Human Torch's name that gives away that he is vulnerable to water attacks, or could it be that he is covered with flame?
Okay... see if you can follow this very simple logic. If Hourman called himself (for example) Mightyman his enemies would most likely never find out that his powers lasted only an hour. It's true that they might not figure it out even though he calls himself Hourman, but why give them such a big hint by needlessly exposing his major weakness? By doing so, he greatly increases the chance that his enemies will figure it out.
The point is, he could have chosen a name that in no way gave a hint to his weakness. Instead he chose a name that would be the equivalent of the Golden Age Wonder Woman calling herself "Please-Don't-Bind-My-Wrists-Together Woman".
And I hope you feel as stupid as I do for carrying this ridiculous debate on for a third day now. I've exposed one of my major weaknesses. Following Hourman's logic I guess my superhero name would be "Can't-Just'Let-It-Drop Man"!
On the other hand, the phrase "Man of the Hour" has been around since before Rex Tyler was born! So, the average street criminal of the 1940's would most likely not have had the smarts to make such a Holmesian deduction. And, as for the high-tier super-villains the JSA faced? Most of them had boastful aliases of their own that gave away their own inherent weaknesses.
Example: the Golden Age Icicle. Vulnerable to heat!
Now, we can let the matter drop.
One more comment. Sonofjack, I'm flattered that my comment has such an influence. No thoughts of plagiarism.
Well, Anonymous, I think you made a very astute observation. Of course, that's before was informed that it was undeniable that the Human Torch might as well call himself "Douse-Me-With-Water Man" and that the name "Hourman" was actually a reference to the phrase "Man of the Hour".
One last comment: I have to agree with Carycomic on this one.
"Nuff said."
So glad you finally saw things my way.
Cary Comic, you're a pathetic little troll who either does not have the intelligence to recognize how weak your arguments are or the integrity to admit that you're wrong. Either way, you are Klassy with a capital "K".
At least he doesn't resort to sarcastic misspellings in a last-ditch attempt to out-stubborn somebody else. Now, would you all just permanently drop the subject...with a capital D?
@Batman of Earth-13: I never admit to something I most definitely am not! Which in this case, was my stance in the now truly-concluded argument (re: NOT being wrong).
Cary Comic, I guess that means that you don't have the intelligence to recognize how weak your arguments are. To tell the truth I was kind of leaning in that direction all along. Peace.
Well, what do you know! A duel of wits...between unarmed opponents. :P
Congratulations, Anonymous. Just when I thought this discussion could not get any more sophomoric, you prove me wrong! At least try to come up with something original. "A duel of wits...between unarmed opponents" followed by ":p"? That's too pathetic to even be insulting.
What's truly pathetic is letting someone like Carycomic successfully goad you into continuing a useless arguement, making him the _lesser_ of two idiots! You want to permanently end this "discussion?" DON'T INSIST ON HAVING THE LAST WORD! Because, even _stating_ you're not dignifying certain remarks with a response is a dignifying response.
So, by pretending to let him win the arguement, you're the actual winner.
Anonymous, thanks for the free advice. It was worth every penny. I wonder if you can see the irony of someone posting "DON'T INSIST ON HAVING THE LAST WORD!" more than a month after the last previous comment was posted.
And when did I say that I wanted to permanently end this discussion? I'm having a good time! For that matter when did I state that I was not going to dignify certain remarks with a response? If you are going to criticize, at least be accurate.
Post a Comment