Talk:Hulk Vs

Untitled
does anyone have an idea what the productioncosts were? --88.73.152.165 (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The synopses are going much too in-depth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.234.223.212 (talk) 09:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

The Differences from comics section
The difference section is based on the same section from the Iron Man animated film article. I have tried to cite sources to give it more depth and truth.

Omega Red has never been part of Weapon X in the comics. This is a solid difference. No reference can be cited because Omega Red has never been part of it.

The film protrays Thor has not trying to battle the Hulk, but trying to reason with him and even showing fear of the Hulk. In all their encounters in the comics this is not true so I have tried to show that.

The Mindless/Bannerless Hulk rarely appears so references are nearly impossible, but the times Thor has battled it he more or less held his own. This is radically different from the movie where Thor was portrayed as virtually powerless with two whole minutes being nothing but the Hulk's punching bag.

In the film Amora was portrayed as a powerful spellcaster needing her to cast most of his spells with Loki displaying little magic and at times even being ignorant of it. In the comics, Loki is one of the most powerful spellcasters and pretty much always does his own magic.

In the film, based on how easily he trashes Thor the Hulk is displaying a level of strength that he rarely has in the comics. He has never treated Thor that way so I thought it was a difference worth noting.

The Hulk attacking Asgard and fighting through everything and the level of strength is displayed is very reminiscent of an early Thor story featuring the character of Mangog —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.31.83.39 (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not sure if this section is nessacary as it is a stand alone from the comic. -TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. The list represents WP:OR, as it is one editor drawing conclusions based on a sample set which cannot be demonstrated to be exhaustive, nor does he demonstrate any authority to make the call on these matters. He is citing primary, not secondary sources, meaning no other expert has drawn the conclusions he has. I'm taking this out as poorly sourced. ThuranX (talk) 06:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

If you removed it here should not the same section from the The Invincible Iron Man be removed as well. It does not cite any sources and I fail to see a difference between the section I tried to add here with actual references and that section that does not even both with any. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.31.84.52 (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * To be clear: Your argument is one of the WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS variety. It's not a good argument to make. In this aprticular case, i did look there and find a sewage heap of problems, equal to that found here, and removed it. In the future however, you need to focus on each article more independently, what goes on at George Washington may not be appropriate for Ebola Virus. Read he essay for more on this idea. ThuranX (talk) 05:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)