@professorrespect: Characters being inconsistent is a faulty argument IMO. Superman is a regular planet buster/star level character, but then "struggles" with villains like Atomic Skull or Parasite. Wonder Woman has gone toe to toe with Superman and Doomsday as well as fought Darkseid and other gods, but then "struggles" with Giganta and recently been shot and tagged by Doctor Poison's squad. Hel, Hulk recently had a fight with the Thing, which by consistency standards, should've shown Hulk instantly stomp Thing.
When written well, Thor is at lowest multiplanetary. When fighting Gorr, his blows shattered the planet he was on and cracked a planet in the distance. He's hit a Celestial hard enough to crack the Celestial's armor and shook the planet they were on. While mind controlled and not holding back, he's beaten Silver Surfer and Adam Warlock at the same time.
Hel, speaking of Silver Surfer, he couldn't harm Durok the Demolisher, a character who previously stomped Thor and Surfer, he even broke the latters board. But during Ragnarok, Thor killed Durok by bear hugging him and unleashing all of his power. Without Mjolnir.
My only real point bringing any of this up is that it's incredibly disingenuous to use character inconsistency as a hit against a character. Especially when they have more than a few instances of being at a certain level. Writers change. Different writers and teams have varying opinions and what makes characters "relevant" or "relatable". Some writers decide that a regal, powerful, prince of Norse gods is boring and needs to be humanized to sell. Others think that humanizing mythical characters defeats the entire purpose.
Using "inconsistency" to lowball or dismiss a characters feats is just as disingenuous as using hyperbole or hearsay to highball or "wank" a character. Not attacking you specifically, just putting it out there for the discussion.
Log in to comment