Comic Battle >> View Thread

Author
Fifthchild


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,474



It's pretty common to hear people complaining about jobbing when we see a fight that theoretically should be a stomp end up as a competitive affair. But is this always a bad thing? Should fights be written in a logically rigorous fashion or is it better that writers flex the rules a bit, or even a lot, so as to make for a good fight? 


For myself I think I was a bit more of a "purist" back in the day but nowadays I think I see the merits of being a bit more laid back about such things.





His Holiness The Pope
The Church of Hulk
St Jones Church, New Mexico
Posted with Apple iPhone 5.0.2
bd2999

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



    Quote:

    It's pretty common to hear people complaining about jobbing when we see a fight that theoretically should be a stomp end up as a competitive affair. But is this always a bad thing? Should fights be written in a logically rigorous fashion or is it better that writers flex the rules a bit, or even a lot, so as to make for a good fight? 



    Quote:

    For myself I think I was a bit more of a "purist" back in the day but nowadays I think I see the merits of being a bit more laid back about such things.


It depends on what was done and to who and if any explanation is given. I would say that jobbing is an overused term for alot of people. Anytime their favorite character looks bad it is jobbing. Again it depends on the scenerio but it is a bit overused.

True jobbing by it's nature is not good. The other issue that causes some of these is that Marvel in particular has started a large trend of favoritism in their books with a few characters. So this makes fans on the recieving in a bit more sensitive.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0 on Windows XP
Gamma Ra


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,839



When you have two opponents that are peers, on any given day, either one should be able to walk away with a victory.


    Quote:

    It's pretty common to hear people complaining about jobbing when we see a fight that theoretically should be a stomp end up as a competitive affair. But is this always a bad thing? Should fights be written in a logically rigorous fashion or is it better that writers flex the rules a bit, or even a lot, so as to make for a good fight? 


Certainly there are many other factors that affect the outcome of a fight other than a character's stats.


    Quote:

    For myself I think I was a bit more of a "purist" back in the day but nowadays I think I see the merits of being a bit more laid back about such things.


I am more of a percentage guy.







He's... A Misunderstood MONSTER! An INCREDIBLE force! He's ASTONISHING! That's why you don't comprehend him! And because of his...RAMPAGING, the Hater will not tolerate him SAVAGE, INDESTRUCTIBLE, nor his being IMMORTAL!!!
Watch out for that Gamma-Burst ...The WORLD BREAKER!!! "Only the Hulk could have attempted it! Only the Hulk would have been capable of it! Only the Hulk could have done it!"- Tales To Astonish #063 "There is no way to measure his strength! There is nothing he cannot do!"- Tales To Astonish #073 "That something -- anything -- could grab hold of an energy field should be IMPOSSIBLE! But the Hulk grabs hold just the same!"- The Incredible Hulk #242 Gamma Ra the Assassin aka Lord Smash'emall - Faithful Member of The Church of Hulk
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.13 on Windows 7
The Mandarin


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,765


Obvious jobbing is always a bad thing. It breaks suspension of disbelief. That, however, is not to say that the overdog should always beat the underdog. There is a plausible way to make most underdogs beat most overdogs. It's when it's really obvious that the overdog is being written magically much weaker and/or dumber than normal that jobbing is a bad thing. Technically, every fight is a jobbing, since these characters don't exist.




Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.13 on Windows Vista
Surly Rockbottom







I think that jobbing is a problem with most people when the fight ends up being a ridiculous stomp in the wrong direction - sort of like Black Panther arm-barring the Silver Surfer.

Personally, I'm a bit more accepting of the competitive affair. I try to judge fights on the Battle Boards, for instance, with the criterion of "would I throw the comic in a fire if I saw character X defeat character Y." A well written battle is one in which I say to myself, "Hmm, I never would have thought that Moon Knight could beat Spider-Man in a fight, but when you put it that way - I'm all good."

To anticipate where you're going with your questioning: fights do need a certain logic; if Superman gets hit in the face by a steel girder thrown by Solomon Grundy without blinking, and then gets staggered by a kick in the puss from Batman I might start to move my mouth in the direction of saying "bullsh . . .," but then again, I know Batman's martial arts training could possibly allow him to know just the right spot to kick, and sometimes Superman might not have had enough sunlight (or when Grundy threw that girder Superman was in peak form and totally expecting it, etc. etc.)

What I'm getting at is that I think like a No-Prize contender in very many comic book battles. Writers are going to make mistakes. These things come out monthly (for the most part), and its not like they're using their Master's in English to write the next great novel. The writers do want to make a good fight - and I'm all for them doing so - but if Hulk pioks up Thor's hammer from the ground and throws it back at him, I'm going to seriously wonder if the editor's credit is a fake name.

So there needs to be some logic, but it doesn't mean that they're being rigorous. In the case of Hulk and Mjlonir; yes, one must be a purist. In the case of Black Panther arm-barring the Silver Surfer? Who knows? Maybe Norrin's pacificistic nature influenced him to use the scenario as an excuse to cease hostilities and make T'Challa feel good about himself. It's not beyond Norrin's personality to do so.
Also, jobbing isn't just about specific fights. Some characters have a reputation as jobbers (Darkseid, Wonderman, and Thing come to mind). These are a result of a certain history that, for a variety of complex reasons, sort of boil down to telling a good story.
 
I hope that I'm answering your question. The "rules" should be somewhat flexible. I've seen a Thing vs. Wolverine end in a hilarious one-shot win for Ben, and I've seen a Thing vs. Wolverine end in a terrible maiming for Ben. Both were good stories. A "rigorous" approach might have decided that because of that one-shot victory of Thing over Wolvie that Wolvie is never, ever, ever a threat to Ben in any circumstance.
 
Things can go too far though. A "good fight" isn't just about the fight - it's also about the story. If writers flex the rules in order to make the Punisher kick the ever-loving crap out of Thor because "Thor is a pompous and arrogant douche and Frank is so much more real and like me," then it shows - and the story is just not a good story (unless you really hate Thor and identify with Frank Castle, which is entirely possible . . . but still, that only makes it subjectively good, not objectively good).
 
By all means, lay back - that's what entertainment wants you to do, ideally - but don't let them do whatever they damn well please to you while you lay there. They are supposed to entertain you, but you also need to maintain a critical mind.






Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0; on Windows Vista
Dark Marvel


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,819






Photobucket
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.9 on Windows 7
Bird-Man of Akah Ma'at


Location: Madripoor
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,197


It's a bad thing if the character jobs alot. However losing to an underdog once or twice is ok if written within "reason" imo.




"I am made of things your philosophy will never comprehend." -Loki
Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0; on Windows XP
Zeeder




In every single comic there is "jobbing". It's the job of the villians to lose, for instance.
What most call "jobbing" is simply a low end showing for a character. That same character would have "jobbed" regardless. It's the showing that counts. HOW did he "job"?
Example 1. Firelord vs spiderman.

Firelord was going to lose this battle. He was the villian. He was up against spiderman in his book. It was his job to lose. HOW he lost makes it a low end, high end, or average showing.
Had spiderman beaten him up in an alley like a street punk, that would have been a very low end showing for Firelord that went against all his other showings.
The author clearly showed firelord was beyond spiderman in power. Spiderman won barely in a desparate fight. Firelord was shown trying to best him in a physical contest, instead of just toasting the city.
Either would be "jobbing".

Example 2. Zeus vs Galactus

It was Galactus's job to lose. PAK, instead of having a normal zeus whoop Galactus, had a chaos amped zeus do it to an arrogant Galactus.

The power of a character that is destined to lose in a story, is determined by HOW he loses. We know he is going to lose.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.13 on Windows Vista
The Real Lance Eason




From context, I was under the impression that jobbing implied a character getting pwned by another character to make either the second character (or just as often a third character who will come in a kick character #2's a**) look good.
I don't think it even has to always imply that the fight goes against established, internal logic - just that Character 1 (who must have some reputation for being bada**) will get punked by Character 2 to build character 2 up as a super-bada**.
And that sets up the drama for when another character or characters must face Character 2.

It usually comes off as lazy, though it is often effective. But even when effective, it usually comes at the expense of Character 1.

The Thing has played this role often (and the Hulk and sometimes the Surfer sometimes get a little pseudo-jobbing verbally when the Thing goes down, 'cause he usually says something like, "No one's ever hit me like that! Not the Hulk - not the Surfer! Nobody!"), and in a twist most of Marvel's strength elite at the time were mass jobbed to the Champion to make the Thing look - well, not tougher, but more courageous.

Anyway, there's exceptions, but I think it's usually bad.


Posted with Apple Safari 4.0.4 on MacOS X
The Real Lance Eason






Posted with Apple Safari 4.0.4 on MacOS X
Jeff Harey


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


Explain a lot of Ben Grimm's showings then. He's usually the hero and he still loses. World War Hulk was the villian (he brought a squad of powerful aliens into Manhattan, attacked dozens of heroes who had nothing to do with his exile into space and sent many of them into the same type of gladiator pit he escaped from) and he still won until he and Sentry beat each other senseless. Of course, there was the Civil War when one side practically beat the other senseless for far less of a point than the 1861-65 conflict.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0; on Windows 7
Hatman






Posted with Apple Safari 5.0.1 on MacOS X
MysteryMan




>


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Pogue Mahone





    Quote:
    Explain a lot of Ben Grimm's showings then. He's usually the hero and he still loses. World War Hulk was the villian (he brought a squad of powerful aliens into Manhattan, attacked dozens of heroes who had nothing to do with his exile into space and sent many of them into the same type of gladiator pit he escaped from) and he still won until he and Sentry beat each other senseless. Of course, there was the Civil War when one side practically beat the other senselessfor far less of a point than the 1861-65 conflict.

I can sympathize with WWH he was shanghaied so the Illuminati would pass there bill Thing is a midcarder in terms of strength



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.6.13 on Windows 7
Odin's illegitimate Son




According to wrestling vernacular (where the term originated), it simply means "to lose". To "job" is to "lose". When a wrestler agrees to lose the match, he is only doing his "job", hence the term.

But in this message board, it means, "not fighting the way one character is supposed to fight". It's like saying, "oh, the Hulk should have toasted that guy in 3 seconds instead of 5 minutes, to my eyes he jobbed, because he should have done it more easily".... That is just plain wrong.

So, goingback to your question, "is jobbing always a bad thing?".... according to your premise, "it shouldn't be, in order to make the fight more enjoyable...a good fight"....well, then, this is already wrong. Any loss is a "job", regardless whether the fight is good or bad.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows Vista
The Real Lance Eason




It makes sense it was wrestling.


Posted with Apple Safari 4.0.4 on MacOS X
Jeff Harey


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


He was tricked into space, true, and he lost his wife (though somehow she bore two children after the destruction of the planet), but he was willing to kill thousands, if not millions, to get back at a handful, one of whom, Namor, sat out the fight in the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. Ben wasn't intended by Stan and Jack to be cannon fodder for every Tom, Dick and Harry of both sexes, but to give Thor and Hulk stiff fights even if he lost.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0; on Windows 7
smallfry




Hulk was not a villain in WWH, he was being true to the information he had. He only tossed into the ring those who presumed to vote on his life. The Ghost Rider arc in this story line showed that Hulk was not guilty of wrongdoing, which is why GR wasn't able to fight him in his vengeance persona. The Cho monologue showed that Hulk was Not a killer, even under extreme duress. Hulk threatened many, but killed no one, and had no intention of killing. All of the "alien monsters" had been imprisoned as well as Hulk, and fought along side him with honor... but for the bug, who was the real villain in the story.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.5 on MacOS X

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software