I was just delighted that it made a lot more sense out of the "I've got some Doom in me" than a sloppy genetics --> personality argument. And, well, bringing it all full circle. *And* Hickman was delighted on his Twitter that he basically made a mockery of everything .1 issues were generally intended to be.
I was just delighted that it made a lot more sense out of the "I've got some Doom in me" than a sloppy genetics --> personality argument.
Indeed! Although it was obvious by the end that the Reeds were pretty unreliable narrators, that point was still bugging me a bit, because Hickman's take on pre-accident teenage Doom in the time travel issues was really a bit too much like full-on adult supervillain Doom for my liking. So I did have a nagging suspicion that he might genuinely be taking the position that Doom was born the way he is rather than shaped into it by his life. Very nice and unexpected surprise to see that exploded quite so thoroughly in this issue. :D
*And* Hickman was delighted on his Twitter that he basically made a mockery of everything .1 issues were generally intended to be.Heh, yes, I saw that. Although really, I think it still works pretty well as a point one; just taking the more creative route of introducing the type and scale of stories that Hickman's F4 tells instead of a standard "meet the characters"
( ... )
I admit to loving a great deal of snotty Hegelian aristocrat Doom. Oh, man. You just know that the reason for Victor von Doom is Rule of Cool, and yet, in Austrian usage, that's totally a nobility marker, be it from birth or elevation...
I think you could certainly argue that Victor very deliberately reinvented himself as an aristocrat on his arrival in America, as soon as he had the chance to do it in front of people who didn't know his past. I guess I'm just attached to the image of teen Doom as the Gypsy rebel foreign scholarship boy of Books of Doom, since it's kind of a fascinating contrast with Reed as the upper class, American-born millionaire son of a famous scientist; when you look at those origins, things did not shake out along the hero/villain lines the way you'd expect them to. It's really quite an interestingly bizarre dynamic to have the hero of the tale be the one who was handed everything from birth while the villain's a completely self-made man on a very sympathetic quest.
Comments 7
I was just delighted that it made a lot more sense out of the "I've got some Doom in me" than a sloppy genetics --> personality argument. And, well, bringing it all full circle. *And* Hickman was delighted on his Twitter that he basically made a mockery of everything .1 issues were generally intended to be.
Reply
Indeed! Although it was obvious by the end that the Reeds were pretty unreliable narrators, that point was still bugging me a bit, because Hickman's take on pre-accident teenage Doom in the time travel issues was really a bit too much like full-on adult supervillain Doom for my liking. So I did have a nagging suspicion that he might genuinely be taking the position that Doom was born the way he is rather than shaped into it by his life. Very nice and unexpected surprise to see that exploded quite so thoroughly in this issue. :D
*And* Hickman was delighted on his Twitter that he basically made a mockery of everything .1 issues were generally intended to be.Heh, yes, I saw that. Although really, I think it still works pretty well as a point one; just taking the more creative route of introducing the type and scale of stories that Hickman's F4 tells instead of a standard "meet the characters" ( ... )
Reply
:)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment