Intelligent Hulk

[Bartmanhomer]

Is Intelligent Hulk any different from the other Hulks? I only see him in the Avengers: Endgame.

[Keltest]

Well, obviously he's more intelligent.

In the comics, theres been a few different flavors of smart Hulk. They run the full range from "Literally Bruce Banner but with muscles" to "Complete alternate personality that knows everything Bruce does, but also has the muscles of the Hulk and is totally evil and doesnt like Bruce".

I think typically the smarter Hulks have been portrayed as losing direct slugfests with the "regular" Hulk that most people think of, but are still operating at such a scale that 90% of the time it doesnt even matter. And of course there are exceptions. As with everything comics, theres a lot to unwrap there.

[Bartmanhomer]

Well, obviously he's more intelligent.

In the comics, there's been a few different flavors of smart Hulk. They run the full range from "Literally Bruce Banner but with muscles" to "Complete alternate personality that knows everything Bruce does, but also has the muscles of the Hulk and is evil and doesn't like Bruce".

I think typically the smarter Hulks have been portrayed as losing direct slugfests with the "regular" Hulk that most people think of, but are still operating at such a scale that 90% of the time it doesn't even matter. And of course, there are exceptions. As with everything comics, there's a lot to unwrap there.
Well of course he more intelligent. In the movie, he's very calm and rational compared to the other Hulks.

[Keltest]

The Hulk's near-mindless rage is typically portrayed as a result of the damaged subconscious of Bruce Banner. He's had better luck controlling/directing the Hulk when he's more mentally healthy. The movies dont really get into it, but the Hulk isnt really a separate person from Banner, just a different aspect of the same mind.

[Bartmanhomer]

The Hulk's near-mindless rage is typically portrayed as a result of the damaged subconscious of Bruce Banner. He's had better luck controlling/directing the Hulk when he's more mentally healthy. The movies don't get into it, but the Hulk isn't a separate person from Banner, just a different aspect of the same mind.
Well, I already knew that the Hulk has a serious anger problem with just about everyone and everything he get angry. After all, he is the Hulk.

[Keltest]

Well, I already knew that the Hulk has a serious anger problem with just about everyone and everything he get angry. After all, he is the Hulk.

Plenty of them dont have anger issues at all. There have been a lot of Hulks over the years. The one with anger issues is Banner, not the Hulk.

[Bartmanhomer]

Plenty of them don't have anger issues at all. There have been a lot of Hulks over the years. The one with anger issues is Banner, not the Hulk.

Huh? So you mean to tell me that Banner has anger issues the whole time? :confused: :eek:

[Keltest]

Huh? So you mean to tell me that Banner has anger issues the whole time? :confused: :eek:

Yeah. From before the accident that made him the Hulk even.

[Bartmanhomer]

Yeah. From before the accident that made him the Hulk even.

Wow, I knew that about Banner. This is very mind-blowing. :eek:

[Brother Oni]

Wow, I knew that about Banner. This is very mind-blowing. :eek:

There's a scene in the first Avengers movie that gives it away, although only as a throwaway line: "I'm always angry (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qq6dQwLh1s)".

[HandofShadows]

Wow, I knew that about Banner. This is very mind-blowing. :eek:

Yeah, Banner had a VERY bad childhood. His father was an alcoholic and was highly abusive towards Bruce thinking he was a mutant. Eventually Bruce's father murdered his wife (IIRC Bruce witnessed it or something very close) and Bruce ended up in a mental institution for awhile. He was still a child then. So he's really messed up. There's actually a saying that goes like this. "Banner does not protect the world from the Hulk. The Hulk protects the world from Banner." Because if Banner ever really went over to the dark side he would make most super villains' look like amateurs'. :smalleek:

[Bartmanhomer]

There's a scene in the first Avengers movie that gives it away, although only as a throwaway line: "I'm always angry (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qq6dQwLh1s)".

How did I miss that part? :confused:

[HolyDraconus]

Yeah, Banner had a VERY bad childhood. His father was an alcoholic and was highly abusive towards Bruce thinking he was a mutant. Eventually Bruce's father murdered his wife (IIRC Bruce witnessed it or something very close) and Bruce ended up in a mental institution for awhile. He was still a child then. So he's really messed up. There's actually a saying that goes like this. "Banner does not protect the world from the Hulk. The Hulk protects the world from Banner." Because if Banner ever really went over to the dark side he would make most super villains' look like amateurs'. :smalleek:

I dont think that saying ever worked. Either Banner was kept in checked by his lack of knowledge due to age, or, when he became smart enough to be a credible threat as a supervillain there was too many people that can stomp him flat. Stark is more or less a god, Richards SPAWNED a god, and is older than Banner, so he would have been able to slap him down when he was young, Doom considers Richards his only equal, so theres that, and Web head may be the youngest in some iterations doesnt detract from the fact that he can shut down both Hulk and Banner.... on all fronts. Hell, Banner would be warm-up training to dealing with Croc. And Doc Oc is far more competent than people realize. Banner would of been put down.

And all of that is with exceeding him mentally. Physically, Hulk has lost to the likes of Juggernaut and Colossus, and Onslaught technically has zero strength and thumped the Hulk. Or Jean or worse, Xavier, can just mind wipe him, since, unlike Wolverine, his body doesn't move without an ego.

Needless to say, that saying is just dumb. Its like believing Batman can punch down Superman without help.

[Lurkmoar]

Hulk has gone through some many iterations and tweaks over his... what, 60 years in the public eye?

I'd say the most dangerous mentally Hulk is likely the Devil Hulk, who's running around in The Immortal Hulk. Funnily enough, he's Banner's innate desire for a father figure. But because of his horrible childhood, Banner and EVERY Hulk instinctively distrust father figures. Devil Hulk can smell the lies of men, damage or even cause lethal damage to divine beings and has an instinct for everyone he runs into. During a tussle with the Avengers a while back, he was able to psyche out She-Hulk, comparing her current state to what the world fears about the Hulk. Also, the Devil Hulk's stated desire is to 'End the World', so Hulk can finally be alone.

Also, Immortal Hulk has tons of body horror, taking a critical eye to comic book death and how horrific it is for the people coming back and their loved ones. I like the book quite a bit.

[Bartmanhomer]

Yeah, Banner had a VERY bad childhood. His father was an alcoholic and was highly abusive towards Bruce thinking he was a mutant. Eventually, Bruce's father murdered his wife (IIRC Bruce witnessed it or something very close) and Bruce ended up in a mental institution for a while. He was still a child then. So he's messed up. There's a saying that goes like this. "Banner does not protect the world from the Hulk. The Hulk protects the world from Banner." Because if Banner ever really went over to the dark side he would make most supervillains' look like amateurs'. : smaller:

I didn't know about Banner's origin and childhood. This is all new to me.

[Ramza00]

Huh? So you mean to tell me that Banner has anger issues the whole time? :confused: :eek:

Yep. Bruce is an enneagram 9, that means he has conscious ego defenses, but also mental habits that work unconsciously to neutralize anger and rage. Think that Adam Sandler movie from the mid 00s “Anger Management.”

Anger is so scary due to childhood trauma (Bruce was abused as a child) that the unconscious mental habits are trying to shortcut anger for it got him in trouble in the past. Likewise The Hulk is the opposite extreme.

Then again with 50 years of comics there have been dozens of different Hulks with Bruce as the core over the years. (Not counting other hulks inside of other people like Red Hulk aka the General Thunderbird Ross or something which is the father in law of one of Bruce’s love interests, there is a half a dozen other gamma infused Hulk like people.)

[Bartmanhomer]

Yep. Bruce is an enneagram 9, that means he has conscious ego defenses, but also mental habits that work unconsciously to neutralize anger and rage. Think that Adam Sandler movie from the mid 00s “Anger Management.”

Anger is so scary due to childhood trauma (Bruce was abused as a child) that the unconscious mental habits are trying to shortcut anger for it got him in trouble in the past. Likewise The Hulk is the opposite extreme.

Then again with 50 years of comics there have been dozens of different Hulks with Bruce as the core over the years. (Not counting other hulks inside of other people like Red Hulk aka the General Thunderbird Ross or something which is the father in law of one of Bruce’s love interests, there is a half a dozen other gamma infused Hulk like people.)
Enneagram 9 sounds like an anime show.

[Ramza00]

Enneagram 9 sounds like an anime show.

Yeah it sounds like an Anime show.

It is a personality, psycho-analysis, defense mechanism understander. And once you understand the defense mechanisms you use the most it tries to teach the idea of the golden mean. For with the things that most threaten us / scare us we are often doing tactics that are excessive, or deficient, and not "excellent."

But seriously Enneagram 9 sounds like Anime, like Eureka 7 or something else with greek in its name like Neon Genesis Evangelion. In reality it is merely greek that says you are drawing a shape with 9 sides, enna meaning 9 and gram meaning "written" or "drawn" (and now you know where instagram gets its name from.)

[Bartmanhomer]

Yeah it sounds like an Anime show.

It is a personality, psycho-analysis, defense mechanism understander. And once you understand the defense mechanisms you use the most it tries to teach the idea of the golden mean. For with the things that most threaten us / scare us we are often doing tactics that are excessive, or deficient, and not "excellent."

But seriously Enneagram 9 sounds like Anime, like Eureka 7 or something else with greek in its name like Neon Genesis Evangelion. In reality, it is merely greek that says you are drawing a shape with 9 sides, enna meaning 9 and gram meaning "written" or "drawn" (and now you know where Instagram gets its name from.)
Wow. Now I learn a few new things in this thread. :smile:

[Traab]

Yeah but back to the original topic, we have had so many hulks. One of my favorites was the grey hulk who was smart-ish? I dont think he was banner smart but he was at least regular human smart. Also he didnt have rage issues anymore, but was far weaker than the standard hulk. Went by the name Joe Fixit working as an enforcer in vegas for a time iirc. Just did a quick search and my favorite smart hulk was Merged or Professor Hulk. Full banner intellect, more or less full strength i think, used a lot of tech like reed richards.

[Bartmanhomer]

Yeah but back to the original topic, we have had so many hulks. One of my favorites was the grey hulk who was smart-ish? I don't think he was banner smart but he was at least regular human smart. Also, he didn't have rage issues anymore but was far weaker than the standard hulk. Went by the name Joe Fixit working as an enforcer in vegas for a time IIRC. Just did a quick search and my favorite smart hulk was Merged or Professor Hulk. Full banner intellect, more or less full strength i think, used a lot of tech like Reed Richards.
I remember there's also She-Hulk. She is very intelligent. :smile:

[Scarlet Knight]

Yeah, Banner had a VERY bad childhood. His father was an alcoholic and was highly abusive towards Bruce thinking he was a mutant...

Is that a retro story? Hulk was created when the world feared radiation , not genetic mutations, if my memory serves me.

[Lurkmoar]

Is that a retro story? Hulk was created when the world feared radiation , not genetic mutations, if my memory serves me.

Yeah, Jack Kirby and Stan Lee had a fun time with the power of the atom. Closer to revision then a retcon. The story about Bruce Banners terrible childhood was in the 80s iirc.

[Bartmanhomer]

Yeah, Jack Kirby and Stan Lee had a fun time with the power of the atom. Closer to revision than a retcon. The story about Bruce Banner's terrible childhood was in the 80s IIRC.

Amazing and I don't read comic books, so I also learn something new as well. :eek: :biggrin:

[Lurkmoar]

Amazing and I don't read comic books, so I also learn something new as well. :eek: :biggrin:

tbh you're not missing much nowadays. Continuity snarls and reboots, massive amounts of convoluted backstories, characters with inconsistent characterization, sometimes questionable art, often weak writing and poor editorial oversight are rife.

There's plenty of gems of course, but they're getting harder to find. Literally. Just about every supermarket, pharmacy and corner stone no longer stock comic books, actual book stores are closing and its harder to find actual comic books because they don't sell as well anymore. Manga is doing pretty well though.

You'll have more luck with webcomics anyway.

[Red Fel]

I remember there's also She-Hulk. She is very intelligent. :smile:

Well, She-Hulk is a different concept entirely. She's one of many people who became Hulk-ified after exposure to Bruce, in this case via blood transfusion. (See also Doc Sampson, another favorite of mine.)

Because her background is different - she isn't battling so much buried rage and psychological damage - she doesn't have to deal with Hulk's anger issues. Instead, she just lives her life, except as a giant green muscle woman. A life in which she is a lawyer. Frequently for superheroes. Which is honestly its own kind of awesome and I would still love to see that courtroom drama as a TV show.

But on the point of Banner as supervillain, consider where he was when the Hulk emerged - he was working on a gamma radiation weapon. A radioactive bomb. He was - and remains - one of the world's foremost experts in this deadly and dangerous radiation.

Let's be clear: If Banner hadn't become Hulk, but had eventually snapped, you know he would have put that knowledge to the worst possible use. That is 100% supervillain material right there.

[tomandtish]

But on the point of Banner as supervillain, consider where he was when the Hulk emerged - he was working on a gamma radiation weapon. A radioactive bomb. He was - and remains - one of the world's foremost experts in this deadly and dangerous radiation.

Let's be clear: If Banner hadn't become Hulk, but had eventually snapped, you know he would have put that knowledge to the worst possible use. That is 100% supervillain material right there.

Yeah, Red Fel is exactly right. it's important to note that when Marvel releases a list of how heroes rank in given categories, Banner is always in the top 5 for intelligence. Honestly, the only reason why others get more attention is because the Hulk part gets in the way.

But a fully realized evil Banner in a Hulk body would probably immediately rise to a top 5 threat list.

[Bartmanhomer]

tbh you're not missing much nowadays. Continuity snarls and reboots, massive amounts of convoluted backstories, characters with inconsistent characterization, sometimes questionable art, often weak writing, and poor editorial oversight are rife.

There's plenty of gems of course, but they're getting harder to find. Literally. Just about every supermarket, pharmacy,y, and cornerstone no longer stock comic books, actual book stores are closing and it's harder to find actual comic books because they don't sell as well anymore. Manga is doing pretty well though.

You'll have more luck with webcomics anyway.Well if I have time, I'll start reading the Hulk comics on the internet.


Well, She-Hulk is a different concept entirely. She's one of many people who became Hulk-ified after exposure to Bruce, in this case via blood transfusion. (See also Doc Sampson, another favorite of mine.)

Because her background is different - she isn't battling so much buried rage and psychological damage - she doesn't have to deal with Hulk's anger issues. Instead, she just lives her life, except as a giant green muscle woman. A life in which she is a lawyer. Frequently for superheroes. Which is honestly its kind of awesome and I would still love to see that courtroom drama as a TV show.

But on the point of Banner as a supervillain, consider where he was when the Hulk emerged - he was working on a gamma radiation weapon. A radioactive bomb. He was - and remains - one of the world's foremost experts in this deadly and dangerous radiation.

Let's be clear: If Banner hadn't become Hulk, but had eventually snapped, you know he would have put that knowledge to the worst possible use. That is 100% supervillain material right there.Well I'm glad that She-Hulk got a different concept compared to her male counterpart. If Marvel would include the rage with a low IQ and other psychological problems then other readers (mostly female readers) would find it somewhat offensive and they think "If this how Marvel depicted what female superheroes are?" But I'm glad that they didn't depict She-Hulk that way. Besides I like She-Hulk.


Yeah, Red Fel is exactly right. it's important to note that when Marvel releases a list of how heroes rank in given categories, Banner is always in the top 5 for intelligence. Honestly, the only reason why others get more attention is that the Hulk part gets in the way.

But a fully realized evil Banner in a Hulk body would probably immediately rise to a top 5 threat list.

That's true. An evil Banner would be a serious threat to the Marvel Universe.

[Red Fel]

Well I'm glad that She-Hulk got a different concept compared to her male counterpart. If Marvel would include the rage with a low IQ and other psychological problems then other readers (mostly female readers) would find it somewhat offensive and they think "If this how Marvel depicted what female superheroes are?" But I'm glad that they didn't depict She-Hulk that way. Besides I like She-Hulk.

I won't speak for female readers, but I will say it frustrates me when the female version of a male superhero is nothing more than the distaff counterpart - "Hey, let's make this guy, but a chick." So I for one appreciate when the character is, "Hey, let's make this guy, but different in a lot of ways, sex being only one of them."


Yeah, Red Fel is exactly right. it's important to note that when Marvel releases a list of how heroes rank in given categories, Banner is always in the top 5 for intelligence. Honestly, the only reason why others get more attention is because the Hulk part gets in the way.

But a fully realized evil Banner in a Hulk body would probably immediately rise to a top 5 threat list.

A fully realized evil Banner without the Hulk's power would be a threat. The Hulk, with or without evil Banner, was enough of a threat that the world's greatest geniuses literally created a plan to launch him into space. Go read the Planet Hulk storyline. And then read World War Hulk, because the Jolly Green Giant was not a fan.

Point is, both Banner and Hulk are legitimate threats to take seriously. The irony is that each one effectively limits how dangerous the other can be. The scary part is when they get along.

[Traab]

Funny thing, had banners life not sucked so badly growing up, its entirely possible that explosion would have turned HIM into The Leader. Basically multiplying his intellect and mental abilities many fold. Imagine Banner being turned into something so smart that he could honestly consider reed and doom to be amateur dabblers in the field of science? Though that banner I dont see going evil. He would probably not be a hero either as he wasnt really the type to go heroing by choice. You could probably justify him going either way due to his intellect. He could be like movie ultron and decide the only way to keep humanity safe is to destroy the people (heroes included) endangering it with their actions. Or become a hero because he can nearly doc manhatten himself and predict how things will go so he steps in to stop the bad stuff.

[Bhu]

Green Scar Hulk is a pretty immediate threat to the entire world. The Hulk also once became a Herald of Galactus (think Hulk plus Silver Surfers powers). The One Below All intends to use Hulk to wipe out realities. Depending on the retcon he ranges from "someone get the military" to "someone get the Avengers, X-Men and whoever else we can fly in".

[Rynjin]

SFDebris is doing a pretty solid retrospective on the Hulk right now that explains a lot of the confusion and retcons around the guy. (https://sfdebris.com/videos/special/incredible.php)

[Xyril]

I dont think that saying ever worked. Either Banner was kept in checked by his lack of knowledge due to age, or, when he became smart enough to be a credible threat as a supervillain there was too many people that can stomp him flat. Stark is more or less a god, Richards SPAWNED a god, and is older than Banner, so he would have been able to slap him down when he was young, Doom considers Richards his only equal, so theres that, and Web head may be the youngest in some iterations doesnt detract from the fact that he can shut down both Hulk and Banner.... on all fronts. Hell, Banner would be warm-up training to dealing with Croc. And Doc Oc is far more competent than people realize. Banner would of been put down.

And all of that is with exceeding him mentally. Physically, Hulk has lost to the likes of Juggernaut and Colossus, and Onslaught technically has zero strength and thumped the Hulk. Or Jean or worse, Xavier, can just mind wipe him, since, unlike Wolverine, his body doesn't move without an ego.

Needless to say, that saying is just dumb. Its like believing Batman can punch down Superman without help.

This is legitimately interesting analysis, and I agree with most of it, but I think it was prompted by a misunderstanding of what that saying means. It does not imply that Hulk/Banner were the only in the world with the power to keep his dangerous half in check. Rather, it's a subversion of the general view that the Hulk is the more dangerous force of nature, and that it's largely due to Banner's efforts that those other powerful heroes you mention aren't constantly forced to drop whatever their doing in order to contain.

However, many plots in the comics have tried to show that this is backwards in varying ways. The first is in terms of Banner's own anger issues. As others have stated, Banner has a lot of reason to be angry, but because he has spent so much of his life unable to act on it, he learned to bury it all deep inside. The Hulk is a place for all of that repressed anger to go--he provides both a target for Banner's rage and a constant reminder of why he can't let anger color his own actions. This aspect is more subtle and open to interpretation.

The second aspect is less psychological and more practical. The idea is that Banner has a brilliant mind--yes, there are others who are more brilliant, and no, you don't have to repeat your list. Even if he's not the single smartest guy in the world, other brilliant Marvel protagonists have regarded him as plausibly being in the top ten or so in terms of raw intellect. He could have a tremendous impact on the world, but instead he's constantly distracted trying to cure or contain the Hulk. In Siege, when Norman Osbourne was consolidating power, part of his list of threats to be neutralized was Bruce Banner, who had been "cured" of the Hulk at the time. His solution was to bring back the Hulk, because Hulk-free Banner was already well on his way to establish himself as his own tech-based superhero, and posed a direct threat to Obsourne's position, whereas Bruce-as-Hulk would once again be primarily focused on keeping himself under control. I think it's debatable whether or not Banner as a scientist, unfettered by the Hulk, would naturally become a mad scientist--and if he did, how hard it would be for other heroes to stop him. However, the comics universe clearly and consistently imply that the potential impact of Bruce Banner--for good or for ill--far surpasses the impact of even the greatest mindless Hulk rampage.

That is what they mean when they say the Hulk protects the world from Banner, not the other way around.


I won't speak for female readers, but I will say it frustrates me when the female version of a male superhero is nothing more than the distaff counterpart - "Hey, let's make this guy, but a chick." So I for one appreciate when the character is, "Hey, let's make this guy, but different in a lot of ways, sex being only one of them."


How do you feel about Hawkeye (comic version) and Hawkeye? Superficially, their powersets are identical and their personalities are broken in very similar ways. However, this similarity partly explains why Hawkeye wanted to be another Hawkeye to begin with and why they're drawn to work together, but recognizing their similarities (and similar flaws) has also pushed Hawkeye to deliberately make different (and hopefully better) choices from the ones Hawkeye made, making their respective stories very distinct.

[KillianHawkeye]

Well I'm glad that She-Hulk got a different concept compared to her male counterpart. If Marvel would include the rage with a low IQ and other psychological problems then other readers (mostly female readers) would find it somewhat offensive and they think "If this how Marvel depicted what female superheroes are?" But I'm glad that they didn't depict She-Hulk that way. Besides I like She-Hulk.

I want to know why this would be offensive to female readers but the regular Hulk isn't offensive to male readers. This is some sexist BS! :smallannoyed:

The Hulk is one of my favorite characters, and as a man, I don't care that he's an incoherent rage monster most of the time. Please explain the difference to me.

[Bartmanhomer]

I want to know why this would be offensive to female readers but the regular Hulk isn't offensive to male readers. This is some sexist BS! :smallannoyed:

The Hulk is one of my favorite characters, and as a man, I don't care that he's an incoherent rage monster most of the time. Please explain the difference to me.

Because they don't want She-Hulk to be an angry, stupid superheroine. That's why. Just think about it.

[Keltest]

Because they don't want She-Hulk to be an angry, stupid superheroine. That's why. Just think about it.

As a general rule, when somebody asks you to clarify something for them, repeating yourself is just going to annoy them. They already read your post once, reading it again isnt going to change the content. You need to elaborate when somebody asks for clarification. You say its bad for a heroine to be angry and stupid, so why is it OK for the male Hulk to be angry and stupid? And if it is ok, then why is it bad for a female to be angry or stupid.

Not that i would be particularly interested in She-Hulk if she was literally just female Hulk with no other character differences, but its a bit of a leap in premise for something to be actively offensive instead of just boring.

[Bartmanhomer]

As a general rule, when somebody asks you to clarify something for them, repeating yourself is just going to annoy them. They already read your post once, reading it again isn't going to change the content. You need to elaborate when somebody asks for clarification. You say it's bad for a heroine to be angry and stupid, so why is it OK for the male Hulk to be angry and stupid? And if it is ok, then why is it bad for a female to be angry or stupid.

Not that i would be particularly interested in She-Hulk if she was just female Hulk with no other character differences, but it's a bit of a leap in the premise for something to be actively offensive instead of just boring.

Just to clear The artist and writers didn't want She-Hulk is angry and stupid like her male counterpart so they give She-Hulk a different concept for being She-Hulk smart and calm for the female readers.

[Keltest]

Just to clear The artist and writers didn't want She-Hulk is angry and stupid like her male counterpart so they give She-Hulk a different concept for being She-Hulk smart and calm for the female readers.

Youre still repeating yourself. This post has no new information. WHY did the artist and writers not want She-Hulk to be angry?

[Bartmanhomer]

Youre still repeating yourself. This post has no new information. WHY did the artist and writers not want She-Hulk to be angry?

I didn't mean angry. I meant not being stupid that all. As I already mentioned before the She-Hulk is very different from the male Hulk because the artist wants her to be smart. Of course, they want the same anger attributes as the Hulk but not the same intelligence. I can't be anymore clearer than that and I'm not going to repeat myself again. :mad:

[Red Fel]

Youre still repeating yourself. This post has no new information. WHY did the artist and writers not want She-Hulk to be angry?

I can't and won't speak to the why - I'm not in the writers' heads at present - but I can speak to two points.

First: If memory serves, the writers originally wrote her as angry - her first series was Savage She-Hulk, after all - but they moved away from that, and it was a good thing. Why? Because it made her a different character. The Hulk is defined by his rage. Arcs where he has been more Banner, less Hulk, have made him stand out less as a character, because there are a million and one "big strong dude" types in Marvel comics. Hells, when you see the Hulk do a team-up with the Thing, you might as well be looking at a pallet-swap.

But She-Hulk, traditionally, is not defined by her anger. She is defined, if anything, by the fact that being a giant green muscle-person does not always define her. She is a practicing lawyer. She goes to court, as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone just sort of goes along with it. She hangs out with friends, as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone goes along with it. She fangirls over Captain America - wouldn't you? - as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone goes along with it. The Hulk, in essence, is defined by his powers, while She-Hulk is not, and that makes them distinct characters with distinct stories and distinct arcs.

Also, she has a name, you guys. It's Jennifer. Be nice to Jennifer.

Second: If memory serves, they actually did make her angry in a relatively recent arc. In fact, I think they gave her a Grey She-Hulk incarnation. But that was more to serve as an arc for her - realizing that she could potentially be as dangerous as her cousin - rather than a constant struggle. Bruce has the constant battle against his rage; Jennifer has less of a constant battle, and more of a general awareness that she has the potential to go down that road.

[Keltest]

I can't and won't speak to the why - I'm not in the writers' heads at present - but I can speak to two points.

First: If memory serves, the writers originally wrote her as angry - her first series was Savage She-Hulk, after all - but they moved away from that, and it was a good thing. Why? Because it made her a different character. The Hulk is defined by his rage. Arcs where he has been more Banner, less Hulk, have made him stand out less as a character, because there are a million and one "big strong dude" types in Marvel comics. Hells, when you see the Hulk do a team-up with the Thing, you might as well be looking at a pallet-swap.

But She-Hulk, traditionally, is not defined by her anger. She is defined, if anything, by the fact that being a giant green muscle-person does not always define her. She is a practicing lawyer. She goes to court, as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone just sort of goes along with it. She hangs out with friends, as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone goes along with it. She fangirls over Captain America - wouldn't you? - as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone goes along with it. The Hulk, in essence, is defined by his powers, while She-Hulk is not, and that makes them distinct characters with distinct stories and distinct arcs.

Also, she has a name, you guys. It's Jennifer. Be nice to Jennifer.

Second: If memory serves, they actually did make her angry in a relatively recent arc. In fact, I think they gave her a Grey She-Hulk incarnation. But that was more to serve as an arc for her - realizing that she could potentially be as dangerous as her cousin - rather than a constant struggle. Bruce has the constant battle against his rage; Jennifer has less of a constant battle, and more of a general awareness that she has the potential to go down that road.

Lemme be clear here, i personally already get the reasons for why She-Hulk is not just female Hulk, and approve and appreciate them. Im just trying to prompt BMH into explaining himself in more detail, and apparently not meeting much success.

[Bartmanhomer]

I can't and won't speak to the why - I'm not in the writers' heads at present - but I can speak to two points.

First: If memory serves, the writers originally wrote her as angry - her first series was Savage She-Hulk, after all - but they moved away from that, and it was a good thing. Why? Because it made her a different character. The Hulk is defined by his rage. Arcs where he has been more Banner, less Hulk, have made him stand out less as a character because there are a million and one "big strong dude" types in Marvel comics. Hells, when you see the Hulk do a team-up with the Thing, you might as well be looking at a pallet-swap.

But She-Hulk, traditionally, is not defined by her anger. She is defined, if anything, by the fact that being a giant green muscle-person does not always define her. She is a practicing lawyer. She goes to court, as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone just sort of goes along with it. She hangs out with friends, as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone goes along with it. She fangirls over Captain America - wouldn't you? - as a giant green muscle-person, and everyone goes along with it. The Hulk, in essence, is defined by his powers, while She-Hulk is not, and that makes them distinct characters with distinct stories and distinct arcs.

Also, she has a name, you guys. It's from Jennifer. Be nice to Jennifer.

Second: If memory serves, they actually did make her angry in a relatively recent arc. I think they gave her a Grey She-Hulk incarnation. But that was more to serve as an arc for her - realizing that she could potentially be as dangerous as her cousin - rather than a constant struggle. Bruce has a constant battle against his rage; Jennifer has less of a constant battle and more of general awareness that she has the potential to go down that road.

You explain much better than I do which I was trying to say the whole time of that.

[Traab]

Honestly, it isnt just gender swaps that are the problem, its any time they create "Like this character, but we changed one thing" Its the real reason why so many object to rebooting heroes as new people rather than creating a new character entirely. Sometimes its sexism/racism/whatever, but mostly its annoyance that they are taking the lame route out and trading off the name of an established character to try and get people to read their new version. As an example, superman, but female, isnt interesting unless you want to go all in on a deep dive into all the ways life is different for a buxom gorgeous blue eyed blond haired woman who is also a kryptonian. From the worries about flying in a miniskirt (Seriously, why does she do that?) to the far more serious issues of why it might be a different experience for clark when he gets captured and held powerless by his enemies than it would be for kara. That being said, I dont count kara as a part of this, nor galatea/karen starr/power girl/whoever she is this month. They were not replacing superman, but being added to the super family in various ways which IS interesting. I just used it as a prominent example.

[Xyril]

I want to know why this would be offensive to female readers but the regular Hulk isn't offensive to male readers. This is some sexist BS! :smallannoyed:

The Hulk is one of my favorite characters, and as a man, I don't care that he's an incoherent rage monster most of the time. Please explain the difference to me.

I don't think the idea of a dumb, angry woman would be offensive to most reasonable people. Actually, that trope exists in a decent number of comic characters.

It's more that the overall trend that existed back in the Golden/Silver Ages of comics was kind of lazy/sexist in retrospect, because so many female versions of male heroes were, quite literally, just lazy female expys of the original hero with either no meaningful identity/personality of their own, or a lazily feminized version the original hero's personality. In the absence of this conspicuous trend (i.e., if She-hulk had been created now, at a time when lots of female comic characters are either their own hero entirely, or a such a distinct, fleshed out character in their own right that they're only nominally a "female version of [male hero]), dumb, angry She-Hulk wouldn't raise any issues at all.

Taking the social/offensiveness aspect out of it, a lot of lazy tropes/cliches also work the same way. Take the orphan protagonists. (Or anything you can insert into "[something] is the new dead parents" on a meme.) There's nothing to say that dead parents can't make for a compelling backstory. However, there was a period when variations of that backstory became such a cliche that you couldn't help roll your eyes when you saw yet another damage, orphaned hero introduced to the world.

Perhaps this was unfair to the writers/creators, but context is unfortunately a real thing that can entirely change how people see your works. If Batman had never been so influential, you could probably go no deeper than "Hero lost his parents at a young age, which traumatized him and caused him to grow up looking for an outlet for his rage," and nobody would hold it against you because it was uncommon enough. Now, the exact same story might read as bad fanfiction. This isn't to say the orphan backstory is unusable--it just means that you have to work that much harder to distinguish your orphan hero story from what's already out there.

[Precure]

Jennifer can be brutal and dumb like her cousin when plot demands it. She's also kind of an airhead, though not to the same extend as Jan.

[KillianHawkeye]

I just want Bartmanhomer to explain his reasoning that female readers would be offended by an unintelligent female super hero, but just accept that there are unintelligent male super heroes. It's 2020, why would one be offensive and the other not be?

Why is it okay that the adult male characters in family sitcoms are almost always the dumbest or least competent members of the cast, but the reverse if rarely if ever true?

Why is there a double standard where men not expected to be offended by bad representation in media? Do you think that men and women get offended by different things or something?

[Bartmanhomer]

I just want Bartmanhomer to explain his reasoning that female readers would be offended by an unintelligent female superhero but just accept that there are unintelligent male superheroes. It's 2020, why would one be offensive and the other not be?

Why is it okay that the adult male characters in family sitcoms are almost always the dumbest or least competent members of the cast, but the reverse is rarely if ever true?

Why is there a double standard where men not expected to be offended by bad representation in media? Do you think that men and women get offended by different things or something?

And yet I and other members have already explained clearly about it. She-Hulk is a different concept compared to the male Hulk. The other artist didn't feel like making a dumb She-Hulk character because they didn't want to offended other female readers because of the context and the sensitivity of the intellect of women.

[Keltest]

And yet I and other members have already explained clearly about it. She-Hulk is a different concept compared to the male Hulk. The other artist didn't feel like making a dumb She-Hulk character because they didn't want to offended other female readers because of the context and the sensitivity of the intellect of women.

Stating that it would be offensive is not explaining why it would be offensive about it. What is offensive about it being done to a woman that doesnt apply to a man? You arent explaining clearly at all. You aren't saying anything new.

[The Glyphstone]

Perhaps we should just move on then, instead of pressing a point that isn't going anywhere?

[Bartmanhomer]

Perhaps we should just move on then, instead of pressing a point that isn't going anywhere?

I couldn't agree with you even more. This whole argument is getting tiring which I've already explained myself multiple times and I'm not going to continue repeating myself for it. So we should move on from that part.

[Xyril]

I didn't mean angry. I meant not being stupid that all. As I already mentioned before the She-Hulk is very different from the male Hulk because the artist wants her to be smart. Of course, they want the same anger attributes as the Hulk but not the same intelligence. I can't be anymore clearer than that and I'm not going to repeat myself again. :mad:

Dude, this post literally just said "I didn't mean this thing that I said in my previous post and repeated in a subsequent post, I meant something else slightly different." You're not repeating yourself, you're clarifying/correcting yourself at a painfully slow pace.



I couldn't agree with you even more. This whole argument is getting tiring which I've already explained myself multiple times and I'm not going to continue repeating myself for it. So we should move on from that part.

No, you haven't. OTHER PEOPLE, including me, have answered with our views on why that sort of thing is potentially offensive, but you have never answered the question of why, not once. All of your answered have been entirely circularly and tautological. You literally answer the question of "Why is this offensive to women" by responding, effectively "Because women are offended by it."

If I were commissioning chat AIs and it responded like you do, I would conclude that it would fail the Turing test, and have the programming team and their entire families shipped off the the spice mines of Kessel.

[Bartmanhomer]

I'm done with the whole conversation. I can't have a simple constructive conversation in this thread because some people in this thread can't grasp a simple clarification even though I explained myself and other people multiple times and you people want to stir up drama. I'm sick and tired of it! :furious:

[Xyril]

I'm done with the whole conversation. I can't have a simple constructive conversation in this thread because some people in this thread can't grasp a simple clarification even though I made myself pretty people multiple times and you people wants to stir up drama. I'm sick and tired of it! :furious:

Perhaps your posts aren't as people as you think they are. Maybe if you're willing to let go of your ego for a moment and acknowledge that people legitimately can't understand you because of a mistake you made, or because you didn't express yourself well, then maybe you could meet them halfway and have an actual conversation.

Maybe browse this thread before you banish yourself forever. These people you're complaining about "stirring up drama"? We're all having an interesting conversation with each other. Yes, sometimes we argue with each other, but even the disagreements involve meaningful communication and the exchange of ideas. There's only one set of interactions where communications break down: The exchanges between [someone else in thread] and you. And even then, people are sincerely trying to meet you half way. They want to help you communicate better, and to engage with the community in a way that you clearly seem to want to do. And this is despite the fact that in this thread--but not exclusively in this thread--your primary response to any criticism is to lash out. With "can you please clarify what you said, I don't think you answered my question" counting as criticism.

[KillianHawkeye]

This is not about She Hulk. I perfectly understand why they wanted her to be a different character from regular Hulk. In fact, there have been a lot of variations on the Hulk and his intelligence level over the years.

No, my question is only why you stated that women would be offended by an unintelligent female character but continue to assume that everyone (men included) is fine with Bruce Banner turning into a nearly mindless monster without getting offended by that.

You might be "done with this" conversation, but you have not even attempted to answer my question.

[me_ow]

Oh man ! your title is one of the most controversial combinations that you can make using the word hulk !
Intelligent Hulk ! :elan:

[Lurkmoar]

Oh man ! your title is one of the most controversial combinations that you can make using the word hulk !
Intelligent Hulk ! :elan:

You must have missed Joe Fixit, Professor Hulk, Green Scar, World Breaker and the Devil Hulk. :smallyuk:

[Traab]

You must have missed Joe Fixit, Professor Hulk, Green Scar, World Breaker and the Devil Hulk. :smallyuk:

Yeah, he may be most generically known as the angry dumb green guy, but he has been around many decades and has run the gamut of intelligence levels from mindless animal to bruce banner with green muscles.

[Lurkmoar]

Well, the old TV show and the Marvel movies have pretty much run with "Big, angry, dumb green guy." So, that's the one that the general public at large knows.

A smarter Hulk didn't show up until the last Avengers movie. \(o~o)/

[Xyril]

A smarter Hulk didn't show up until the last Avengers movie. \(o~o)/

They were vague on the transition, but my first reaction was that this was "Bruce Banner finally deals with his psychological issues and resolves his dissociative personality disorder Hulk." Except as the movie went on, it really felt like Banner hadn't actually dealt with anything and was actually just deep in denial over the fact that Infinity Wars was a traumatic event.

[The Glyphstone]

They could have made an entire movie about that, but they just handwaved it in two sentences. No wonder it feels lackluster.

[KillianHawkeye]

They could have made an entire movie about that

My least favorite thing about the MCU is that, while they have the rights to use the character of Banner/Hulk, Marvel Studios (and later Disney) never got the rights from Universal to do any Hulk solo films. So he's just stuck appearing in The Avengers or in other people's movies. :smallsigh:

I really like the Hulk, so I wish he could've had more movies.

[The Glyphstone]

My least favorite thing about the MCU is that, while they have the rights to use the character of Banner/Hulk, Marvel Studios (and later Disney) never got the rights from Universal to do any Hulk solo films. So he's just stuck appearing in The Avengers or in other people's movies. :smallsigh:

I really like the Hulk, so I wish he could've had more movies.

I didnt realize that. I suppose that explains why he got sidelined so badly.

[Devonix]

I didnt realize that. I suppose that explains why he got sidelined so badly.

Marvel has the rights to make Hulk movies, they have complete control over the character. What they don't have is Distribution rights. They share distribution with Universal. Which means that any time they make a solo Hulk film if they want to put it in theaters, Universal gets control over the theater distribution.

[The Glyphstone]

Does Universal get any share of the revenue? If not, theyd obviously sandbag the distribution, so Marvels not going to bother anyways.

[KillianHawkeye]

I may not be remembering all the details correctly, but suffice it to say that Marvel needs Universal's cooperation to do a solo Hulk movie, and the two companies haven't had enough motivation to work together on it. Hulk isn't exactly worth what Spider-Man is worth, sadly.

On the other hand, the whole Spider-Man deal is still fairly recent on the scale of shared movie universe planning, and they'd pretty much already resigned themselves to resolving the Hulk's story without another solo film by the time this level of cooperation became a possible. It's unfortunate, but the bell has already rung on the current incarnation of the Hulk, and there's no way it's worth it for Marvel to accommodate anyone's demands to do another Hulk movie.

I recently heard they were originally going to have smart Hulk appear at the end of Infinity War, but they decided to push it back to happen during the time skip in Endgame, so we should just be happy that they didn't rush it.

[Xyril]

Even before the MCU was setting the bar a bit higher, the Universal Hulk movies weren't well received. Marvel Studios did a great job rehabilitating that incarnation of the character, and I think fans would generally trust them to do a decent Hulk solo movie, but I can understand why neither studio would want to take the risk.

[Traab]

Classic hulk just seems to be on par with the fantastic four when it comes to making a great stand alone movie. If they wanted to do a stand alone hulk film they would probably have to setup one of the alternate versions of the hulk to happen.

[Rater202]

I figure maybe a movie based on the Immortal Hulk might be decent.

It's a bit closer to the Hulk's roots where he was the middle ground between a superhero story and horror story and it's one of the best comics MArvel is pushing out right now.

(That and Venom. Marvel does cosmic horror very well right now.)

It outsold Batman two months in a row a while back.

Set it up as an"Elseword" type thing, like how Joker isn't related to the other DC movies, and make it abundantly clear that this movie is about the monster within and you might get asses in the seats.


"Psst. Hey. Hey, big guy? I hear you, kid. I love you, I'll always be here for you. He's not your dad. Not a good dad. A dad can't hurt you and be a good dad. Just let me out, okay? Let me out and I'll kill him."

[Ajustusdaniel]

I figure maybe a movie based on the Immortal Hulk might be decent.

It's a bit closer to the Hulk's roots where he was the middle ground between a superhero story and horror story and it's one of the best comics MArvel is pushing out right now.

(That and Venom. Marvel does cosmic horror very well right now.)

It outsold Batman two months in a row a while back.

Set it up as an"Elseword" type thing, like how Joker isn't related to the other DC movies, and make it abundantly clear that this movie is about the monster within and you might get asses in the seats.

I'm really enjoying Immortal Hulk, but you'd have to strip it down a bit to make a stand-alone movie, I think. At the moment, Bruce has at least four personalities swapping in and out- Puny Banner, the Devil Hulk, "The Big Guy," AKA the classic Hulk Smash fellow, and Joe-Fixit. Not to mention a supporting cast who occasionally have alternate forms of their own, and the everpresent possibility of possession by possibly a couple different Gamma related entities.

You probably could make a simplified version that would fit in a theatrical release film, but I think I'd prefer to see it as an ongoing series (probably animated, but effects are getting to the point where it could maybe be done live-action).

[dps]

I just want Bartmanhomer to explain his reasoning that female readers would be offended by an unintelligent female super hero, but just accept that there are unintelligent male super heroes. It's 2020, why would one be offensive and the other not be?


I can't speak for him, but I would point out that yes it's 2020, but She-Hulk wasn't just created this year. Things were a lot different back in 1980. For one thing, I don't think that the writers were too worried about the reaction of female readers, because back then I doubt they even considered the possibility of females reading superhero comics. But they might have been worried about the reaction of the media in general.

[Bartmanhomer]

Ok. I'm very calm now and I'm going to try to be as very clear as possible: It's a stereotypical thing nonetheless. And as for male readers for having a dumb angry Hulk. They don't care for it and they're ok with it.

[Sholos]

As a male reader, I'm certainly not okay with male characters in general being presented as dumb and angry. The reason it's okay with Hulk is that there are plenty of male characters that aren't presented that way, not because it's inherently harmless to do so.

[KillianHawkeye]

I'll be honest, I don't know if having a character portrayed as angry and dumb should be offensive or not. What I am sure about is that this is not (or should not be) a gender issue.

[Bartmanhomer]

I must apologize for my behavior earlier in this thread. I just got frustrated and just lost control. :frown:

[Lurkmoar]

I must apologize for my behavior earlier in this thread. I just got frustrated and just lost control. :frown:

None of us are perfect AI honed machines thus we are cursed with illogical behavior, tense emotions and preconceived notions.

Anyway, I think it's fine to depict characters as dumb and angry, as long as there is a point to it in the story it is being told. However, even calling Savage Hulk, the most familiar version of the Hulk as dumb, would be a disservice to the character. His emotional quotient is childlike, and Savage Hulk may not be fully literature(he had to be taught to spell his name in an old story). That said, there's nothing wrong with his memory. Treat that Hulk good, and he'll consider you a friend. Hurt or attempt to hurt him or his friends, you're bad, and you deserve a smashing. Savage Hulk is well aware of his own strength, and Amadeus Cho theorized that Hulk tapped into Banner's intelligence to ensure that no innocent parties during his battles. Flying rubble can hurt!

Savage Hulk is gullible to be sure, but dumb?

[TeChameleon]

I think a big part of the trouble with making a solo Hulk movie is that he suffers the same trouble as Iron Man; he simply doesn't have that much of a rogues' gallery to draw from- at least, not memorable ones (not saying that the Iron Man movies weren't good, but look at them if you removed RDJ's stellar turn as Iron Man; I honestly think they'd be kind of lackluster movies). Without a strong antagonist to structure things around, things become much more difficult to do.

... the Fantastic Four have the opposite problem. They have some absolutely stellar baddies, but moviemakers insist on altering their villains in the stupidest ways possible. Just embrace the megalomaniacal sorceror-king in medieval-looking super-armour, for crying out loud! :smallmad:

[Traab]

I think a big part of the trouble with making a solo Hulk movie is that he suffers the same trouble as Iron Man; he simply doesn't have that much of a rogues' gallery to draw from- at least, not memorable ones (not saying that the Iron Man movies weren't good, but look at them if you removed RDJ's stellar turn as Iron Man; I honestly think they'd be kind of lackluster movies). Without a strong antagonist to structure things around, things become much more difficult to do.

... the Fantastic Four have the opposite problem. They have some absolutely stellar baddies, but moviemakers insist on altering their villains in the stupidest ways possible. Just embrace the megalomaniacal sorceror-king in medieval-looking super-armour, for crying out loud! :smallmad:

On top of the lack of baddies, the hulk suffers from a lack of good dialogue which makes iron man and spiderman so much fun. You can only hear HRRRAGH! and HULK SMASH! so many times till it gets obnoxious, and banner himself is not a magnetic personality either.

[GloatingSwine]

On top of the lack of baddies, the hulk suffers from a lack of good dialogue which makes iron man and spiderman so much fun. You can only hear HRRRAGH! and HULK SMASH! so many times till it gets obnoxious, and banner himself is not a magnetic personality either.

Which wouldn't be a problem if the writers ever read a Hulk comic.

Hulk in Thor Ragnarok is basically the only time we've ever seen anything close to a comic accurate Hulk on screen. (At least in live action, some of the animated ones aren't as bad)

[Keltest]

Which wouldn't be a problem if the writers ever read a Hulk comic.

Hulk in Thor Ragnarok is basically the only time we've ever seen anything close to a comic accurate Hulk on screen. (At least in live action, some of the animated ones aren't as bad)

In fairness, the need to have his character arc exclusively through other character's movies complicates being true to the character tremendously.

[Traab]

Which wouldn't be a problem if the writers ever read a Hulk comic.

Hulk in Thor Ragnarok is basically the only time we've ever seen anything close to a comic accurate Hulk on screen. (At least in live action, some of the animated ones aren't as bad)

The problem is doing a standalone film. He works fine with an ensemble cast, but when he is the main character and the entire movie revolves around him, it just doesnt seem to work well. At least not with the standard dumbish hulk smash and bruce doesnt want to change setup. Bring in a different type of hulk and it could work better.

[GloatingSwine]

In fairness, the need to have his character arc exclusively through other character's movies complicates being true to the character tremendously.

I'm not just talking about the MCU Hulk though.

The old TV series and the Ang Lee movie were the same. They've never read a Hulk comic so they don't know that Hulk is also a character.

They just think "oh he's an uncontrollable rage monster, hulk only smash".

[Rater202]

"Hulk hurts. All the time hurts. All the time always. Why? Why Hulk have to hurt so much?"
~The Hulk, Immortal Hulk #12.

He's crying his eyes out as he says this.

A lot of people don't get that the Hulk isn't just "Bruce when he's too angry to make words" or an external creation of the Gamma Rays.

The Savage Hulk. The Big Guy? He's the part of Bruce that will always be the terrified three-year-old who wishes that Daddy would stop yelling and just love him like a Daddy is supposed to. The scared child lashing out at a world he doesn't understand and that keeps hurting him.

And he's just one fragment of Bruce's shattered psyche.

[Traab]

I'm not just talking about the MCU Hulk though.

The old TV series and the Ang Lee movie were the same. They've never read a Hulk comic so they don't know that Hulk is also a character.

They just think "oh he's an uncontrollable rage monster, hulk only smash".

From what I remember, the hulks general personality was "Leave me alone" He rarely fought for the sake of fighting, he tended to fight in order to escape whatever was attacking him. The hulk was actually kind of a sad dude. Unless you refused to let him go, then he smashed you till you did. Which really kinda made the connection between him and banner visible. Both were in a strong mindset of "Dont try to hurt me or it will end badly" Both wanted to avoid confrontations. Its just the hulk had the power to enforce his desire to be left alone by smashing anything bothering them.