If that were the literal truth, my appreciation for the character might go up a couple notches.Well, Skye was tied to a bed.
If that were the literal truth, my appreciation for the character might go up a couple notches.Well, Skye was tied to a bed.
You haven't watched 24 have you?![]()
Saw the first three episodes, quickly got tired of it.
Not Wōden?I could see that.
So wooden.
What if in the season finale they reveal the Leader has Ruffalo captive in his secret lair and they have to rescue him to unleash the Hulk, who of course does his rampage entirely off screen?
That would be an extraordinary copout. I'm not even opposed to having Bruce Banner without the Hulk. But having the Hulk offscreen is a dumb idea and contrary to their stated rule of not doing "oh you just missed Iron Man!" (although, to be fair, they've cheated slightly by having conversations with Fury described offscreen, but that's nowhere near on the same scale).
I also have no problem with investigating the aftermath of a rampage or something like that.* Basically, my objection is building to the moment of Hulk and then not showing the Hulk.
* My idea for an episode (or Hulk movie, really) is Fugitive-inspired. Basically, there was massive destruction blamed on the Hulk. Agent Clay Quartermain is assigned to a Hulk taskforce to track him down. At the same time, Bruce Banner is trying to hide from them, establish his innocence, and stay calm. In the end, they realize it's not the Hulk to blame and SHIELD and the Hulk save the day.
... One where he lost control and Hulked-out unwillingly, almost killing Black Widow and fighting Thor....
I guess it's that Banner controls when he Hulks out but not so much what the Hulk does afterward, aside from being "aimed" in the right direction.
The "aim" thing reminds me of the Lou Ferrigno Hulk in the TV series. Banner didn't have any conscious control of the change and tried not to let it happen, but the Hulk always reflected Banner's emotions -- attacking the people/things that had threatened him as Banner and protecting the people Banner wanted to protect. And he retained Banner's unwillingness to kill.
I guess it's that Banner controls when he Hulks out but not so much what the Hulk does afterward, aside from being "aimed" in the right direction.
The "aim" thing reminds me of the Lou Ferrigno Hulk in the TV series. Banner didn't have any conscious control of the change and tried not to let it happen, but the Hulk always reflected Banner's emotions -- attacking the people/things that had threatened him as Banner and protecting the people Banner wanted to protect. And he retained Banner's unwillingness to kill.
I like that the Hulk saved Iron Man.
They don't? Then why the fuck do you know what either is? I'm sure you're not simultaneously from Africa and Australia, after all. (Jesus Christ...)This debate only works if Skye is Asgardian, no? Certainly someone from Africa knows what a Zebra is, but they don't know what a Kangaroo is.
I think that any reference to the Hulk raging uncontrollably would undermine the character arc from the Avengers. The end of the Avengers established that Banner could now control the Hulk.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.