Ant-Man #5
May. 24th, 2015 02:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
history79 posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
scans_dailyhistory79 posting in scans_dailyhistory79 posting in scans_daily
Profile
Scans Daily
Extras
scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free. Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively,
scans_daily is probably not for you.Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 01:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 01:34 pm (UTC)It's one of those game-breakers writers pretty much have no choice but to ignore because it'd end too many stories. (See also: Why doesn't Superman pull out the Phantom Zone projector?)
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 01:37 pm (UTC)...Heck, why did the Illuminati not just decide to shrink him to cannonball-size and fire him through the encroaching planet?
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 01:47 pm (UTC)I remember he shooting some canisters of shrinking gas or whatever once as a kind of attack before, mind you I think it was back in the Silver Age. Still, how can that not be a weapon he'd try to make at least once?
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 01:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 03:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 08:31 pm (UTC)Ultron usually can't be shrunk because he has some gadget or other which maintains his external shell and protects it from any damage or alteration.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 05:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 01:01 am (UTC)Plus his mind-beam thingies don't care about size.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 02:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 03:44 pm (UTC)Oh god now I'm having daymares about ants trying to burrow into my pores. Antman is the most horrifying Avenger ever.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 04:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 06:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 05:02 am (UTC)Why assume the writers haven't thought of it? It's more likely that they've thought of exactly this and discarded the notion because they have this funny notion that their stories need to be able to still contain conflict.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 07:53 am (UTC)I'd say conflict isn't so much the matter as drama. Characters need things they can't or won't do (unless they're specifically calculating and ruthless, like Dr. Doom, or Mr. Fantastic, or Darkseid) with their talents and resources so that the question remains "how will this person deal with this challenge?" rather than "how would these attributes be most efficiently used?", the latter of which is best suited for role-playing games or long conversations on bus rides.
There are many reasonable problems to have with the depiction of a super-character, that they aren't behaving like a Platonic ideal is not one of them. Seriously!
In closing, if Scott wants to wear hotpants and nothing else while reclining on sofas, good for him. I don't just understand, I encourage this freedom. I respect him for it.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 06:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 02:50 pm (UTC)Initially I was skeptical because of the way it threw out Scott Lang's character growth in favor of establishing a status quo that would match the movie. Then I was won over by the art, tone, and lovable reformed supervillains. Then Cassie Lang got turned into a helpless child for her father to rescue, and even as someone who didn't read Young Avengers that annoys me conceptually.
It's still a funny book, and it's enjoyable for the most part, but at times it feels like a product of "Marvel Comics, subsidiary of Marvel Entertainment, subsidiary of Disney", in a way that I find very off putting.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 05:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-24 03:00 pm (UTC)Nah, Scott. That door has cheapened death in comics to a joke, so you'd be okay to not like it very much.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 12:09 am (UTC)Which honestly can apply to some comic fans too. After all, we hate it when it's used to bring back a villain for a cheap movie tie-in like this, but love it when it's used to bring back someone who really shouldn't have died in the first place, or who came back even better, or just a character we really really like.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 01:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 09:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 11:37 am (UTC)I don't mind if writers remove toys from the box- i.e. shooting Kitty into space, putting their story on hiatus- but breaking 'em for the sake of drama is cheap, because it's not *the character's* story ending there. I mean, effectively it is, but in the sense it stops, not concludes.
no subject
Date: 2015-05-25 03:15 am (UTC)