Quote:Actually if you have ever read any of the interviews with Jack and Roz Kirby, Jack created the Hulk fron an inspiration of a woman who saved her child by lifting a car off of her and the concept of Frankenstein. It was also Jack who named him the Hulk. There is plenty of reading on Jack getting the shaft on all of the creative property that Jack lost through a fee for service agreement with Marvel.
Yes, Stan and Jack co-created many of Marvel's iconic characters. That's not relevant to my point though. Stan Lee wrote hundreds of issues with the Hulk and Thor in them, the ones that established these characters for decades. You can dismiss Stan Lee for some anonymous person's online opinion, but Stan's opinions about his characters are worth far more in my eyes.
Quote:As far as links, Thor 64 linked the one video of Stan introducing a Thor cartoon about a character he gets credited creating that was really Jack Kirby's invention more than Stan's. Some time it's better to be a businemssman and public relations guru than an artist. It certainly pays more.
Again, they co-created Thor. You wrote that yourself in a previous post in this thread. However much you want to discredit Stan Lee, he wrote Thor from his inception in 1962 to roughly 1971, longer than Jack drew Thor. A character isn't created only in the first issue. Stan Lee spent 10 years defining Thor. That you want to put some CBR writer's opinion over Stan's on what Thor should or shouldn't be able to do is ludicrous.
Quote:In any event it doesn't matter, these characters or pop culture mythology the same way Greek are Norse gods are and it really depends on the storytelling through the ages that define them. Even one of the greatest fanatsy forces in history JRRT was revising his own works until he defined changing the number and power of Balrogs, family lineages, adding and removing individuals from his Middle Earth legendarium. And Stan Lee is no JRRT and about every writer and author that has followed has been more talented artistically.
So Rob Liefeld, Chuck Austen, Terry Kavanagh, Jeph Loeb, Scott Lobdell, Brian Michael Bendis, Todd Dezago, and dozens of journeymen writers, all are more talented than Stan Lee? I'm afraid you've blown any credibility you might have had. The Galactus Trilogy, the X-Men's early battles with the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, Thor's early fights with the Absorbing Man, Ego the Living Planet, and Mangog, Captain America vs. the Red Skull with the Cosmic Cube, the Silver Surfer's first encounter with the Stranger, and too many great Spider-Man stories to name are all classics that rival anything any other comics writer would be proud to have under their belts.
Quote:And while you may discredit some of the links I provided, one chronicled every issue they have ever fought in and I hate to tell you Hulk came out on top or stalemated almost every time. So blame Defalco or Machio or Brevoort and any of the editors or creators through the years but that is the way it is.
Interesting that you mention Brevoort here since he maintains a public forum to answer questions. He was asked, "I understand why the current editorial position is that Hulk and Thor are peers, which brings the inevitable 'who is stronger/better' question in the fanbase, and why there is no clear cut answer. BUT isn't it true that in the 70 and more years of their existance, Hulk has kept on becoming more strong/durable/powerful each new generation, peaking with the Worldbreaker recently? since he keeps on growing, isn't it logical that he has by now grown beyond Thor, could grow even beyond Odin possibly?" Tom simply answered, "Nope" and he's stated that he sees the Hulk and Thor as equally strong on his site.
Quote:If you want to ignore the comics and use the cinematic universe, it wasn't "We have a Thor", that Tony informed Loki when he said he had the Chitauri army it was "We have a Hulk."
Sigh. This is some weak sauce. The writers wrote Tony saying that because "We have a Hulk" has a ring that "We have a Thor" simply doesn't. "Hulk" existed as a word before "Hulk" existed as a name and the word referenced objects. So Tony referencing the Hulk as if the Hulk were just an object is what gives the line some flash.
Quote:And there are various other examples. Even in Raganarok when they were figuring out how to get off the planet, Loki suggest they unleash the Beast.
What does this even mean?
Quote:I guess you could just burn the 15 or so comic issues where they have fought so you can ignore the outcomes.
First, I don't have to ignore anything. Contrary to your opinion and that one link's opinion, Thor and Hulk have stalemated or fought inconclusively almost every single time they've battled. The closest to clear and clean victories either have had is when Thor ko'd the Hulk with a lightning bolt in Hulk Annual 2001 and when Hulk ko'd Thor in "Let the Battle Begin," a poorly written one-shot whose continuity is questionable enough that Marvel left it out of the Thor vs. Hulk compilation that just came out. That compilation was clearly looking for material to fill it as it included several stories of Thor fighting Red Hulk and Marvel still excluded "Let the Battle Begin."
Second, I didn't post in this thread to argue who is stronger between Thor and Hulk even though that's apparently what you're trying to argue with me. My opinion is that the Hulk has dynamic strength so, yeah, if Hulk gets angry enough, he can surpass Thor's strength. The vast majority of the time though, they are roughly on par in strength.
Finally, I posted here because you invoked some random online opinions as if they should take precedent over Stan Lee's about the characters he made or helped create. I find doing that ridiculous.