InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "I've got sand in my underpants"

zechs27 (zechs27) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-07-10 18:44:00

Entry tags:

char: hobgoblin/jason macendale, char: hobgoblin/roderick kingsley, creator: george perez, creator: roger stern, creator: ron frenz, publisher: marvel comics

Hobgoblin in Dark Reign?
Joey Q answers if Roddy will have some role in Dark Reign. As to make this legal I'm posting a classic Hobgoblin moment from Hobgoblin Lives.

From today's Cup O'Joe:

http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21973

Kiel Phegley: CBR Forums member bloc-op was one of a few people asking, "Is there any chance to see the Hobgoblin in Dark Reign? It would be great to see him in that storyline. I think he is not use a his full potential he should be with the Zodiac gang."

Joe Quesada: It's always a possibility, bloc-op, but I'll be honest with you right now, at the moment there are no plans for Hobgoblin and I don't think we'll see him during Dark Reign.

Jonah Weiland: Why not?

Joe Quesada: It's just that we've got enough! [laughs] There comes a point where everything that's in the story has got to be in the story for a reason. So I don't think you'll be seeing him in Dark Reign.

*sob*

What is it with Joe and his Hobgoblin bias? The original hasn't been seen in over ten years in the regular 616. The new Hobgoblin who appeared in Secret War hasn't been seen since the Red Sonja/Spidey crossover. What gives Joe? Heck you even ask them a question if they could reprint the Hobgoblin Saga and they'll just chuckle and say, "Wasn't there one released like in the 90s?"

Yeah there was.. AND IT'S OUT OF PRINT. *sigh*

What is it with Marvel currently and their anti-Hobgoblin agenda? Too many Goblins in the house? Come on, would one more Goblin really be too much?

I guess we can only hope then either Roddy returns again in MC2 or Spectacular Spider-Man Season 3 is confirmed and come's here sooner. I really miss that magnificent bastard. But I digress, if Marvel just continues his legend of magnificent bastardy will just grow and grow. After all Roddy show's us crime does pay. *sniff*

Anyway to make this legal, from Hobgoblin Lives #1 when Roderick decides he's had enough of that idiot:

(Post a new comment)

	aaron_bourque 2009-07-11 12:55 am UTC (link)
	Because if they used a really good villain, the heroes would have even less hope. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	zechs27 2009-07-11 02:00 am UTC (link)
	Yeah but in this case, I mean techincally for the moment Kingsley hates Norman more probably than Spidey or any hero at the moment. The only one who be a thorn in his side would be Betty Brant. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	daningram 2009-07-11 02:50 am UTC (link)
	One day, writers will realize that hero vs. villain formulas need to be spiced up. Had they any brains, they'd have a third player in Dark Reign, so it might be a little less obvious where the end result will tilt. (Reply to this) (Parent)

fredneil.livejournal.com
2009-07-11 03:35 am UTC (link)

I'd guess that probably Spidey hates Norman more than any person in the world, except maybe Harry at times. With any other hero, it's a "I hate you because you're evil and the world isn't safe with you around," kind of hate. With Spider-Man it's a "You killed the woman I loved in front of me (and that's just the beginning of a long list) and every time I hear your name, I want to rip your heart out of your chest with my bare hands" kind of hate. At least, it should be, though I don't know if they've gone there since Amazing #122.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

milleniumrex
2009-07-11 01:10 am UTC (link)

Thing is, this is the perfect opportunity for Kingsley to pull a Luthor.

Contact the underground heroes anonymously , provide them with information on Osborn and the means to take him down, and reap the rewards of a major threat to him going down in flames. When the smoke clears from Norman's epic fall, Kingsley will be in the position to pick up the pieces and re-establish himself as the new Kingpin of the MU.

(Reply to this)

	daningram 2009-07-11 01:44 am UTC (link)
	Because yeah, God forbid they use an interesting villain logically. ...I swear, Dark Reign seems to be nothing more than bad fanfic. When is it gonna be over? (Reply to this)

	zechs27 2009-07-11 01:56 am UTC (link)
	O_o why is my image having a wierd freaky thingie called the anti-sec movement? Ugh.. looks like I'm gonna have to use the photobucket. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	jlroberson 2009-07-11 02:07 am UTC (link)
	I saw that too. I'm glad I host my own images. I've read it twice and I still don't understand what it's about. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	moneyless_jew 2009-07-11 02:08 am UTC (link)
	Posting again to make sure it doesn't get lost in reshuffle: What exactly is that? Do I need to be worried? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	jlroberson 2009-07-11 02:09 am UTC (link)
	Ain't got the foggiest. It appears to be something that was mass-spammed. I'm guessing hackers. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	moneyless_jew 2009-07-11 02:10 am UTC (link)
	IDGI What did they do, put it in Imageshack? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Maybe of interest-- jlroberson 2009-07-11 02:13 am UTC (link)
	Note the filename: "roddypwnsjason.jpg." (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jlroberson 2009-07-11 02:11 am UTC (link)
	Though this might provide some explanation: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3167383 This sounds similar. They hacked in. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	fungo_squiggly 2009-07-11 02:15 am UTC (link)
	What exactly is that? Do I need to be worried? Only if you take part in the evil, evil practice of Full Disclosure. Why, have you been publishing any exploits online? HAVE YOU!? Because if you have, Anti-sec's elite legion of pretentious asshats will freaking END YOU. Apparently. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	moneyless_jew 2009-07-11 02:17 am UTC (link)
	I'm so comp-illiterate this is far beyond my grasp. They lost me at 'hello.' (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

tanetris
2009-07-11 02:43 am UTC (link)

When a software vulnerability (something that would let someone who knows about it do things with your computer that you don't want them to do, if you run that software) is found, there are two basic schools of thought on how to handle it.

1. Full disclosure. Tell everyone and anyone. This compels the people who made the software to fix it, and compels people who use the software to get the update. This also means that, until it is fixed and everyone updates, a lot of people will be able to exploit it.

2. Security through obscurity. Tell no one and hope they don't notice. This minimizes the number of people who find the exploit. Useful until a fix is ready, but too often this becomes a substitute for actually fixing the problem at all.

Apparently the person or group who made the image believes (or claims to believe) that the former is in fact a grand conspiracy to rob you of your hard-earned dollars to buy security software.

More likely it's some "l33t hacker" mad that their pet exploit got out into the open and fixed, so they're throwing an extremely public tantrum. Either way, nothing for us to worry about, beyond waiting for Imageshack to get unhijacked.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	mechanicaljewel 2009-07-11 02:52 am UTC (link)
	That's so stupid. I thought the point of being a hacker was the challenge of it all. What's the point of doing the same hack over and over again, when you could force the IT guys to kick it up a notch? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ashtoreth 2009-07-11 04:53 am UTC (link)
	Its the difference between a great gamer who puts a lot of time in to become the best, and somebody who uses a cheat to become uber. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jlroberson 2009-07-11 03:03 am UTC (link)
	Not just from what you wrote but looking up some stuff you mentioned, I now know a whole bunch more about hacker history than I did. Thanks! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	besamim 2009-07-11 02:24 am UTC (link)
	If these guys are gonna include a manifesto with their hacking, they could at least write one that makes a lick of sense. What's with all this "full disclosure" and "exploits" crap, and why should we care? Those of us who have held at least one job in their life and have ventured/been allowed out of mommy's basement, anyway. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	zechs27 2009-07-11 02:57 am UTC (link)
	Though I find it a little irony here. Someone is being a bastard denying a Hobgoblin moment. Though I am SOO not looking at my other posts I made here given most of those where on image shack. Dear God.. I hope we don't lose the images when this is returned. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-07-11 03:31 am UTC (link)
	I had to go and download every single file on my two old Imageshack accounts a few months back, just in case I needed the files. I spent two hours but I got everything. And now I make backups of every file I post here at SD, in case it's needed down the line or I get kicked from Photobucket. Backups are nice. I learned this the hard way. -_- (Reply to this) (Parent)

	foxhack 2009-07-11 03:26 am UTC (link)
	Do you really want them to use Hobby and end up killing him so a crapassed new villain gets "street cred"? No? The STAY QUIET BEFORE QUESADA NOTICES! D: (Reply to this) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-07-11 03:31 am UTC (link)
	(The preceding post was made half-jokingly, but I really don't want Quesada to notice Hobby, really.) D: (Reply to this) (Parent)

	zechs27 2009-07-11 03:43 am UTC (link)
	Good point but then when and who? Sooner or later Stern can't tell the stories he wants to. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	ashtoreth 2009-07-11 04:57 am UTC (link)
	Stern just wrote an AWESOME story in Spiderman Family about Aunt May's past. He actually managed to include and fix 'Trouble'. I swear, it was a master craftsman's continuity. It is a bit wierd that the best BND stories are in Spiderman Family. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	fredneil.livejournal.com 2009-07-12 03:02 am UTC (link)
	I have to ask. How did he fix Trouble? I thought the only way to do that was to say, "It happened to some other people who have nothing at all to do with Spider-Man." (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

ashtoreth
2009-07-12 04:35 am UTC (link)

Stern fixed the bad hair coloring and took out the cheesy stupid. The sex was left out of the telling--she was telling her nephew, after all. It was set better and he used a different friend rather than May's very young sister-in-law.

And May mentions that she miscarried the only child she ever got pregnant with. This allows the main events to have happened, but she isn't Peter's real mother. She's much older by the time Peter's mother gets pregnant.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	fredneil.livejournal.com 2009-07-12 05:14 am UTC (link)
	Thanks. I can live with that, though I still like the "it was some other people" explanation. Or "If Stan Lee didn't write it, it's not canon." If I keep repeating those two phrases, I find Spider-Man a lot less aggravating. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Hobby
(Anonymous)
2009-08-30 05:09 am UTC (link)

To answer your question, bro, about Marvel not bringing back the Hobgoblin is because Marvel is hellbent on making Norman into a Lex Luthor ripoff and using him and Norman at the same time wouldn't make Norman look as good. In fact, they gave traits of the original Hobgoblin to Norman when he returned from the dead and they gave us that half assed encounter between the two only to shut the fans up as Norman wasn't even in costume and Kingsley was portrayed as an inept and sniveling ratbag.
To make matters worst, we get a barrage of other goblins like Menace and the Grey Goblin who nobody cares about instead of just bringing back Kingsley. Let's face it folks, Marvel is becoming more and more like DC Comics in the fact that they refuse to work hard anymore and give us interesting stories-alas the Hobgoblin bias is a good example of this.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Hobby zechs27 2009-08-30 06:11 am UTC (link)
	Oh I know. I got laughed at by several people at Marvel during Wizardworld last year for bringing up the possiblity of putting the trades of him back into print. They where all, "Didn't we release a couple of them in the 90s? Go buy them." Yeah dude they're FUCKING hard to get trades. I was lucky to get mine. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Hobby zechs27 2009-08-30 06:14 am UTC (link)
	I wouldn't say that. Stern wrote both as equals. And Norman only did what he did in that storyline only because he was the free one, not Roddy. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Re: Hobby
(Anonymous)
2009-09-03 01:25 am UTC (link)

I agree that they are both good villains but wouldn't it have been better if they had built on the rivalry between both characters seeing as how they came back at the same time? This would have been so much preferable to just blaming Norman for so many of the wrongs in Peter's life and giving us lame goblins like Menace and the Grey Goblin who are obviously not Norman's equals. To me this wreaks of biased and lazy writing. What was the actual point of bringing back Hobby if they weren't really going to use him, pray tell?
Remember Kingsley actually held his own against Norman and gave him pause. Did any of the other goblins do that? Although Menace held her own against Norman in a fight, they quickly turned her into his concubine during "The American Son" storyline, ruining little potential she already had as an interesting antagonist.
As it now stands Norman is in the same boat as Venom was during the 90's when Marvel overexposed him and Kingsley is in the same position as Ben Reilly was after the clone saga ended when they wanted people to forget his existence.
If you want to see the Hobgoblin at his best read Spidergirl.

(Reply to this) (Parent)