Exactly they tried to deal with the problem by laughing off the Nazi link instead of seriously deal with like the X-Men producers did. But then the die was already cast on The First Avenger
Agents of SHIELD. Season 1 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
Exactly they tried to deal with the problem by laughing off the Nazi link instead of seriously deal with like the X-Men producers did. But then the die was already cast on The First Avenger
As said in my edit, it came across as a character moment for Garrett rather than "OMG Nazis!!!!!" cut it out.
If they wanted to deal with the Nazis, they'd be using Nazis. They're not, they're using Hydra...a completely fictitious comic book villain group with completely imaginary Nazi origins that never actually existed in the real world and therefore has no actual connections to the Nazi party of the WWII era.
Yes, I'm the one who pointed that out earlier. But as Nerys Myk says, they don't use the logo, so that's a non-issue. What I don't understand is why one or two posters are reacting as if it's somehow morally objectionable to use anyone even vaguely associated with Nazis as villains. I could understand an objection to showing a protagonist with Nazi affinities, but villains are supposed to be evil!
Apologies than for not attributing the quote to you
As I'm so fond of pointing out, I haven't really started reading Marvel until the past 2 years, so Hydra in comic form is not really on my radar. How were they portrayed when they were first introduced? Were they more intrinsically associated with Nazis than they are now?
What I find objectionable is trying to deny a Nazi link
I don't know, but again, why would it be a problem if they were? Nazis have been villains in thousands of works of fiction, from serious dramas like Schindler's List that confronted their atrocities to comedies like Hogan's Heroes and The Producers that made fun of them, and everything in between.
Nobody here is trying to do that. Obviously the Nazis are part of HYDRA's origins. I and others are simply pointing out that it's possible for any faction or organization to undergo schisms and changes -- that just because HYDRA began as an arm of the Nazi movement, that does not mean it couldn't have branched off and developed incompatible goals, or transformed itself in the ensuing seven decades. This isn't a binary choice; hardly anything ever is. HYDRA can have a past rooted in Nazism and a present mostly divorced from it.
They were just a evil organization in the James Bond mode, only with funky hoods. They didn't get a connection to the Nazi's until later when one of Fury's old foes, Baron Von Strucker, was shown to be it's leader. Even then the connection wasn't direct, as Strucker had been marked for death by Hitler and was on the run when he hooked up with Hydra in the Far East. The Red Skull doesn't figure into the story until he was retconned as a "sponser" of Strucker's attempt to forge a post war power base years later. The only time prior to that the Skull was shown to be connected to Hydra was when he took over the Las Vegas branch.
Apologies than for not attributing the quote to you
As I'm so fond of pointing out, I haven't really started reading Marvel until the past 2 years, so Hydra in comic form is not really on my radar. How were they portrayed when they were first introduced? Were they more intrinsically associated with Nazis than they are now?
Clear as mud. So is that sign supposed to be = or <> ?
National Socialism seems like a pair of warm pleasant comforting words.
Last edited:
Sort of like "Patriot Act" and "Right to Work State".
They just don't want characters like Ward and Garrett to be Nazis or tolerant of Nazis. They just want them to be generic traitors.
The general public also probably knew --or if they didn't before, they will now-- that the World Security Council that oversees SHIELD and a faction of SHIELD itself aboard the Helicarrier plotted to destroy New York City with a nuclear weapon prematurely to stop the alien threat. I imagine that would create a hell of a lot of distrust among Americans in New York and beyond.
Now once again you have a plot that would kill millions in the US (and eventually elsewhere) involving SHIELD and the Helicarriers, so I could see why they might be labeled a somewhat extra-national rogue threat, since they're only partially controlled/financed by the US, yet twice now have nearly launched massive attacks upon US soil and populations.
Natasha was in civilian garb for the hearing, so it's possible that she quit SHIELD for the civilian sector like Maria Hill did, and thus was considered less of an immediate threat than those agents like Coulson and Hand who had chosen to remain active within the organization --with access to surviving weapons, vehicles, data, bases, and so forth.
With exceptions for when their publicly or privately documented (but accessible by intelligence agency data mining) ideology aligns with that of HYDRA, I would assume:
- The wealthy.
- The politically and socially powerful/motivated.
- Those with strong media access/control.
- The highly educated/intelligent/skilled.
- Those with military/law enforcement/weapons training (& weapons access).
- Criminals and those with violent tendencies or rhetoric.
- Those mentally ill people who might be considered potentially dangerous to others.
- The independent-minded.
- Terrorists/revolutionaries/freedom fighters.
Essentially anyone who has the means, motive, or a history/public & private profile/testing that makes them potentially difficult to control and that doesn't align with HYDRA's philosophy.
They appear to represent locations where SHIELD/HYDRA battles have been going on or have recently concluded. Hand said that Captain America had defeated the HYDRA forces at the Triskelion, so the footage of the crashing Helicarrier must be a playback rather than live. Presumably the footage in the other windows is similarly recent, although a couple of them seem to be showing aftermath rather than active combat.
Similar threads
