Comics

It's Anger Across The Ages in 'Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk & Totally Awesome Hulk #1'

(Marvel)

Two Hulks from two eras, Bruce Banner and Amadeus Cho, do a lot of smashing but leave surprisingly little impact.


Matteo Buffagni

Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk

Publisher: Marvel
Price: $4.99
Writer: Greg Pak
Publication date: 2017-08-02
Amazon

There are few constants in the ever-evolving, constantly-retconning narrative that is the Marvel universe. Costumes may change. Marriages may be undone by deals with Mephisto. Characters may turn out to be from an alternate universe, a Skrull agent, or evil clones of characters that died years ago. The fact that anyone can accept that kind of convoluted continuity with a straight face is a miracle, in and of itself. That makes the constants that remain all the more important and few are as memorable or iconic as the Hulk's anger.

His enemies may not like it when he's angry, but the Hulk's destructive rage makes for some of the best entertainment that the Marvel universe can offer. That anger, as blinding as it can be sometimes, takes many forms over the course of the Hulk's illustrious life. The rage that begins under Stan Lee's legendary pen is not the same as the one that continues under Greg Pak. That's what makes the concept of mixing the past and present so intriguing. That's the premise behind the Marvel Generations series. That's how the rage of one Hulk meets the rage of another in Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk #1.

In terms of context, the differences between Bruce Banner and Amadeus Cho are considerable. While both carry the burden of the Hulk, the weight of that burden is different for both characters. The death of Bruce Banner in Civil War II and the emergence of Amadeus Cho in Totally Awesome Hulk puts both characters on a different path. Pak, with the skilled art of Matteo Buffagni, brings those paths together in a story of shared anger.

The premise of the story is somewhat unclear. The mechanism by which Cho ends up in the past, confronting the Hulk during one of his earliest clashes with General Ross, is not overtly explained. Cho is in the present one moment. Then, he's in the past. That's the extent of the explanation.

That's not to say it's wholly contrived. In a world routinely driven by reality-bending hardware like the Cosmic Cube, the Infinity Gauntlet, and editorial mandates, it's not that much of a stretch that Cho would find himself unexpectedly in the past. That sounds like the sort of thing that happens to anyone who hangs out with Cable too much.

The lack of a premise does little to undermine the gamma-powered action, though. Pak doesn't waste any time giving Hulks from two different eras to start smashing something. He understands that if there are going to be two hulks in a story, then there needs to be twice the smashing. Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk #1 does plenty to fill that quota. Buffagni also does plenty to give it the distinct visual elements that make a Hulk story stand out. There are open spaces, raging monsters, and hard-nosed old men trying to solve problems by blowing them up.

In terms of checking the boxes for a classic Hulk story, Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk #1 covers most of the basics. However, the boxes it doesn't check are arguably the most important and that represents the most significant flaw in a story that otherwise has ample entertainment value. It's not enough to just have two Hulks smashing things. That's all well and good, but smashing without any greater meaning or drama behind it is just empty smashing. Even with the Hulk, that kind of smashing only goes so far.

It's when Cho and Bruce Banner aren't bulky green behemoths where the story really stalls. There's some initial confusion, as is to be expected whenever someone not named Dr. Doom warps time and space. Then, they start interacting, but not much comes of it. They try to avoid General Ross. They attempt to conceal themselves in populated areas. They even talk about their respective struggles to control the Hulk and the rage that drives him.

However, not much really comes from those conversations. Cho and Banner don't tell each other anything that they don't already know about themselves or the Hulk. There's not much dramatic impact in anything they do. Cho barely references the Hulk's future death in Civil War II, nor does he show much emotion when interacting with Banner. Given their history and their various connections throughout the Hulk's mythos, it feels downright muted.

There's still an underlying theme. There's still a sense of connection between Amadeus Cho's version of the Hulk and Bruce Banner's version. Concepts of anger, burdens, and dealing with inner monsters are all there. There's just no melodrama behind it. It may as well be an unnecessary reminder. Anyone who reads a Hulk comic from any era will get that same message, albeit with different varieties of smashing.

There's nothing about the narrative in Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk #1 that's out of place in terms of characterization, plot, or style. Both Banner and Cho get a chance to be their own Hulk. Pak, whose Hulk pedigree is beyond dispute, handles both characters as well as he has in previous efforts. Buffagni's artwork helps supplement those efforts. That's what makes the utter lack of impact so glaring and for a character who specializes in smashing, that's saying a lot.

Mixing elements from the past and present creates opportunities to explore classic themes while expanding on the dramatic weight that has built up to such a massive extent over the years. Marvel Generations: Banner Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk #1 feels like one of those opportunities only partially realized. It does enough to smash all the right things. It just doesn't add enough merit behind the smashing.

5

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less
6

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less
Theatre

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less
10

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less
7

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 Popmatters.com. All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.

rating-image