By David Futrelle
So Disney just announced the imminent arrival of a new She-Hulk series on Disney+. Most fans seem pretty psyched about the news. “YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!” wrote one She-Hulk lover on Twitter. “I’M NOT KIDDING I STARTED CRYING,” wrote another. “SHE-HULK … WAS THE FIRST MARVEL FEMALE HERO THAT I LOVED.”
And then there are these guys, littering Instagram and Twitter with these bad takes.
This post was perhaps the most inadvertently ironic:
Yes, I’m sure that Stan Lee would be SHOCKED to learn that a character he created nearly 40 years ago has gotten a show of her own.
It’s almost as if these guys are fake comic book fans or something.
This guy, meanwhile, had his own very specific agenda:
TWITTER MAN ONLY WANT PRETTY SHE-HULK. TWITTER MAN SMASH IF SHE-HULK LOOK TOO BUTCH!
H/T — Thanks to Twitterers @goslngs, @eriktonys and @BrieLarsonHQ, from whom I nicked the Instagram screenshots above.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!
I just think it’s great that lawyers are finally getting a bit of representation in media.
Of course, if they had just followed that advice with regards to Sarkeesian and Quinn, GamerGate wouldn’t have happened and we wouldn’t be in this mess.
I’d have to disagree here. They’d argue that it was impossible to avoid coverage of Sarkeesian and Quinn because the gaming media was unethically colluding to signal-boost these stories.
It’s still bullshit, of course, but they’ll always find a way to read oppression into any action and cast themselves as the helpless victim. That’s how aggrieved entitlement is.
@Ariblester
I meant that if they truly committed to the idea of not watching or following things they didn’t like and not complaining about them, they wouldn’t have cared if the media was talking about the women and they would have gone on with their lives like normal people. I know they would have found a way to get angry in reality. That was a hypothetical statement.
I’m not a fan of the phrase “if you don’t like it, just don’t watch/play/do it”. Aside from being very commonly perceived as flippant despite not usually being meant that way, it could be used to excuse blatantly sexist/racist/otherwise bigoted/oppressive works. I’m not sure what it says that it virtually never gets used that way, but it could. And in the eyes of the people to whom we use this as a response, it’s being used to very poorly justify things they see as oppressive or atrocious. For example, “just don’t have an abortion” gets thrown back as “just don’t murder”. Admittedly, I can’t think of a good response which doesn’t require a higher level of engagement, and nobody should have to engage if they’re not up to it, or leave it unchallenged if it needs to be challenged. But I’m not sure it’s actually productive with fence-sitting observers either.
…Not telling people not to say that. If your conscience dictates that you do so, then by all means do so. It just doesn’t sit quite right with mine, so I avoid saying it for now.
I’m not saying they can’t criticize it. But they started a whole harassment campaign and spent the past 5 years obsessing over it instead of just not playing depression quest or not watching Feminist Frequency. I mean, they’re angry that entertainment is being made that they don’t enjoy. They’re not angry that it’s harmful in some way or plays up stereotypes or anything like that. They’re angry that women are included. That’s the very definition of it simply not being for them.
These guys have just now discovered Marvel has a character called She-Hulk running around?!? A char that’s been around since, I don’t know, the late 1970’s? And that she’s had more than a few successful series over the decades? And are these same guys going to be shocked beyond belief when they learn that DC has had a Superwoman and a Batwoman character running around their stables for decades now? Have they never heard of copyright/trademark protections on property before? (Which was likely a main emphasis on why those characters were created to begin with, I believe.)
If I recall correctly, Shehulkie started out as the HULK SMASH! Hulk in a dress, before a creator experimented a bit and found she worked best as more of a party girl type. Her job description has varied a bit over the years, from being a member of the New York City’s District Attorneys office, to being a private attorney, to being a bounty hunter / bail bondsman when she got disbarred (Peter David’s run in the early 200’s), as well as assorted superhero stints on assorted teams. It’ll be interesting to see what bits of that history gets chosen as part of her MCU incarnation.
And as for why many people are excited about the current batch of superhero movies, well, for some of the older fans, we’ve been waiting forever for movies made by people who 1. like – or at least respect – the source material enough to make good updated stories featuring these characters, and 2. get a big enough budget to make them look real, if that makes sense. The older TV/movie versions of these characters did what they could with the special effects budget of their time (and did pretty good in some cases), but these current movies are a dream come true, in a way. And I, at least, want to ride it out while it lasts.
She’s been in comics for decades, including her own solo book. She’s appeared in two cartoons. She’s been in the Lego Marvel games and Marvel vs. Capcom 3. And yet these self-proclaimed comic book defenders seem to think she was just introduced. They just couldn’t be arsed to notice until now. It’s the same with their claim that there are no women inventors.
@Lainy really not important in any way but Superman and Supergirl are also canonically cousins. Sorry just a lurking DC nerd nerding it up
Okay. For once, I find common cause with one of the comments in the article.
The recent She-Hulk, in the comics, is to my mind somewhat… lacking in inspiration– she’s more a sort of stand-in for the original Green Giant while Hulk himself is doing a turn as a semi-Lovecraftian constantly resurrecting horror from (possibly) beyond. I am not kidding, Immortal Hulk is a good read, but hasn’t a lot to do with the classic take on the character.
And yeah, I’ve always had a fondness for Byrne’s version of She-Hulk. Actually, in many ways, that take on the character was a classic woman’s power fantasy (And yes, women can have them too.) Jennifer Walters was a smart, well dressed, successful and intelligent attorney, and (usually) a highly respected one, who was confident in her ability, her intellect, and her femininity.
She just happened to be a a smart, well dressed, successful and intelligent attorney, and (usually) a highly respected one, who was confident in her ability, her intellect, and her femininity who was also around eight feet tall, emerald green, and capable of bench-pressing a moderate size passenger jet.
Picture above notwithstanding, (It was from the first few issues of series 1, which really was a Hulk clone + fanservice, and little else) she usually dressed like anyone else (if redefining the phrase “plus size”) and when on the job, dressed very well, and very professionally. Actually, she was one of the few characters who was as likely, if not more likely, to be wearing a pencil skirt and suit combo as a super-hero leotard.
Yeah. The character was eye-candy– visually. But the personality was a seriously capable professional (Well, the lawyer part. The stories could make Deadpool seem sensible at times) who just happened to have Superhero as her second job. And she tried to dump the hero part more than once, preferring to work as a lawyer– usually for superhero based lawsuit as a defense attorney.
So, yeah. Kinda think the blog writer was being unfair to Mr. Garcia. I wonder if he reads comics?
Is not the civil behind Daredevil a lawyer too ?
These guys are seriously having a conniption fit over the She-Hulk, who has been part of the Marvel IP since the 70’s and is now getting breathed new life into a video series medium? And these guys are supposedly, allegedly “Marvel Comic Book Fans” and “Marvel fans” in general.
That’s…. words frankly fail me at this juncture.
The guy tweeting about how Stan Lee would be somehow ‘disappointed’ over a character he created having this opportunity in media: that a whole new level of nonsense.
These guys are supposed to be fans? These guys, these “fans”, are somewhat comparable to the, admittedly small but uncomfortably vocal, subset of “fans” in the Strike Witches Fandom who are raging homophobes who hate that the series has Yuri and lesbian relationships and characters to various degrees as a strong secondary or tertiary genre component and thus go on Yuri erasure rants and bigoted screeds and getting offended at seeing Yuri characters and interactions in a strongly Yuri series. As a fan of Strike Witches with other fans…. such “fans” are more than irritating so i sadly have experience to some capacity even though I belong to a differing fandom.
On lawyers doubling as superheroes,
Years ago on Pharyngula there was a regular commenter named Portia (IIRC) who mentioned being a lawyer and a volunteer firefighter.
One time when she mentioned some lawsuit she was working with, I had a brain glitch and initially interpreted “lawsuit” as some kind of professional attire you wear while practicing law. Kind of like firefighting gear, or superhero costumes.
I was following the ~gate plaguing comics somewhat closely, so I’ve seen “comic book fans” (among others):
* ‘splain Neil Gaiman’s career to Neil Gaiman
* Call Watchmen and action comedy
* Claim Grant Morrison’s writing is apolitical
* Give money to fundraisers to “own the libs”… I mean, to save the comic shops / industry despite most of these books never coming out in the shops (heck, some likely won’t come out till the heathdeath of the universe).
* Trying to claim various artists/writers (living or dead) as their supporters without any evidence
* Calling God Loves, Man Kills not a comic book (IT’S A GRAPHIC NOVEL!)
* Not knowing V for Vendetta was based on a comic book
* Saying X-Men has no metaphor
* Asserting that comic books can’t be art
I forgot:
* Endlessly whining about “SJW Marvel” where “SJW” meant “has some books with minority characters and/or art style they don’t like”. I mean, literally calling titles “PC trash” based on a single promo image.
* Claiming progressive books ruin the industry, by… following the industry trends. Ie. Their sales going generally downward and getting relaunched or cancelled when becoming too low. (But they yet to judge non-progressive books the same way… I mean, Punisher being at volume 12 (13 is upcomming) by now MUST prove that cishet white dudes with guns don’t sell! /s)
I’m sorry, there are people who watch an anime series that is male-gazey as all get out, whose central draw is female child soldiers in short shorts, and yet actively dislike girl-on-girl action? Okay then.
I couldn’t resist. BEHOLD! POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD!!!!
FWIW, that book called *itself* a “graphic novel” on its original release’s cover.
(It’s a good X-Men story, but if it were in prose it might be more of a novella.)
Nemquam, that was from a period in which the phrase “graphic novel” was being used VERY loosely. There were plenty of stories published as graphic novels, though they ran only 40-60 pages in length. I guess that works if you use the principle of “a picture is worth a thousand words–i.e., a 40 page story with six panels per page is thus calculated as being the equal of 240,000 words. I do not think, though, that you would have needed that many words to describe the action in these stories.
It was also common to collect four to eight issues of a comic and call that a graphic novel. That seemed odd because these collections never seemed to contain complete stories–each would begin with multiple story-lines underway, and end with practically none of them resolved.
Yes, the character of She-Hulk was created specifically to secure the trademark on the name. This was back when the Hulk TV show was still on the air, and (if I am remembering correctly–not guaranteed after all these years) its success had prompted some movie producer (Roger Corman, maybe?) to announce a movie with this title.
A similar situation led to the creation of Spider-Woman. The animation studio Filmation began producing a Saturday morning cartoon series by the name. Marvel felt that it should have ownership of that name, but its lawyers told them that owning a character named Spider-Man probably did not in and of itself give them a claim on related names. Marvel therefore rushed out a Spider-Woman one-shot–which, to its surprise, sold very well, encouraging the company to give the character her own series. I note that the Filmation series did run on CBS for a year, but its heroine was renamed Web Woman.
Because women have taken over. And because we’ve taken over you’ll be seeing some representation of women in movies. Possibly you’ll also be seeing some women on your TV and even hearing women in your music downloads. This is difficult for you. We’re terribly sorry. Try to take it easy.
Okay. The difference between comic books and graphic novels: It depends.
“Comic (book)” is used to describe:
1) The whole medium of comics
2) Just the ones published in single issues (magazine) format
“Graphic novel” can mean:
1) Comic specifically produced to be published in book format
2) Any comic published in book format (so collections and whatnot are also included in this)
3) TWU ART(tm) which is totally distinct from the “funny books” (comic books)… as evidenced by it being in the book format and being sold in real(tm) book stores alongside real books
Yes. This comment contains sarcasm. :3
One last post: I note that there were at least two previous attempts at a live-action She-Hulk. Back in the late ’80s, when there was a run of TV-movies in which Bill Bixby/Lou Ferrigno teamed up with other Marvel heroes (Daredevil, Thor), there were plans for one that would have introduced Jennifer Walters. Melissa Gilbert (of LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE fame, but now grown up) would have played her in normal form, and volleyball player Gabrielle Reece was to have played She-Hulk. That casting indicates that the plan was for her to change back and forth, rather than be perpetually in her Hulk form.
Also, Cannon Studios, a company best known for its many Charles Bronson and Chuck Norris movies, at one point announced a She-Hulk movie starring Brigitte Nielsen. An ad was published in VARIETY which actually showed Nielsen as the character. (Google should bring this up for you.) Now, bear in mind that Cannon routinely announced movies with nothing more settled than a title, maybe a star, and some advertising art. Its method was to use these to gauge investor interest; only if there was enough of that would work begin on a script. So, there was probably never anything done on this movie than Nielsen’s photo session.
*facepalms* Are you serious??? I’m sorry, this actually floors me, because being a guy who hangs out a lot on the Rule 34 side of the interwebs… there’s actually a surprisingly large fanbase devoted to She-Hulk pin-ups.
*nudges box labeled “She-Hulk pinups” behind the couch*
And I’ll tell ya from Jump Street that they’re mostly the big muscular She-Hulk, not the John Byrne style. For a bunch of very-online self-styled aficionados of comic books, they’re surprisingly intolerant of one of the more popular muses for *ahem* risque lithographs.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/ee95d0c6-5d95-44c7-9bae-b02b42538052/gif
Really? This one? Because I think dude means this one (and I read so many selfidentified She-Hulk fans hate on the design):
(This was the cover of a fairly current Avengers issue. Also that couple is canon.)