Talk:Planetary (comics)

message: Wiped the spoiler; not the first time, I notice. A single, context-free sentence spoiling the major plot development of the first half of the series doesn't exactly seem to be helpful in intent, even with the spoiler tag. (And it certainly doesn't need its own subsection.) --Unint 20:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed Dyslexic agnostic 20:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The spoiler

message: Several small points with regard to the list of issues and what references and analogs are present.
Issue #1 -- "The Shadow".  This character is a lot more like a combination of The Spider and The Green Hornet than it is the Shadow, and is very definitely not named The Shadow in the comic.  All the other characters have their Planetary/Wildstorm analogue name unparenthasized, and the character they reference parenthasized -- so it should be The Spider (The Spider, Master of Men).
:Actually, Ellis referred to this character as the 'Shadowy Spider'.  The Green Hornet connection wasn't know until later.  And actually, the Spider was kind of loosely based on the Shadow to begin with.  --Emb021 22:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Shadow was mentioned explicitly in Ellis' script. --Mister Six 11:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be, but early on-line discussions by Ellis, he refers to the character as the 'Shadowy Spider'.  Looking at the character, you see elements of both characters.  Being a long-time pulp hero fan who is familiar with these characters (Doc Savage, Shadow, Spider, G-8, Operator #5, et al), I quickly got the references and this is what made me interested in this series.  --Emb021 17:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: True, but the fictionsuit idea is specifically from The Invisibles. 
Issue #12 -- The issue title, 'Memory Cloud', may be a reference to the ailment of Joe in Joe Versus the Volcano, a 'Brain Cloud'.
Issue #14 -- Not only is there a Miracleman reference in the appearance of the "Armory" universe, but the stick which transforms into a superweapon is a very clear reference to the cane that Donald Blake used to transform into Thor in the Marvel universe.  Also, the bearded and wheelchair-bound scientist is more than a little reminiscent of The Chief (comics) from Doom Patrol.
Issue #15-- The Carlton Marvel character seems a reference to the Burroughs adventurer characters who traveled to Venus, the Moon, etc.  --Emb021 17:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: well, the vast structure is also based on Arthur C Clarke's Rama.  --Emb021 22:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Until this issue, we didn't know that the 'Shadowy Spider' was more of a Spider/Green Hornet analog.  --Emb021 22:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Cuh, I actually meant The Green Hornet when I was typing it in... --Mister Six 11:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on character references 

message: Just to nitpick, but in a spirit of accuracy, the article lists Sherlock Holmes as one of the characters on whom a pastiche version was 'based'. Technically, this is misleading and inaccurate; Holmes is actually one of the few 'other' fictional characters who appears in Planetary as 'himself'.--Joseph Q Publique 09:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha, I was about to say the same thing!, also it doesnt even mention the Spider, the Shadow, or Fu Manchu, in that particular area. I may change it soon.FourtySixNtwo 16:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pastiches and analogues

message: According to this article at newsarama, at SDCC '07 Warren Ellis himself said: Planetary #27 was written two months ago. and later added that There will be a one-shot Planetary comic, and it will be expensive.Although I haven't read about it anywhere else, we should mention that one-shot in the article somewhere. --h_a 15:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue 27 plus an expensive one-shot 

message: :Image:Absoluteplanetary.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Absoluteplanetary.jpg

message: I'm doing some research right now, with a view to cleaning up the Planetary-related articles. I feel like this article currently draws too many inferences from the comic (OR), rather than references from independent sources. Yes, we're all supposed to infer that Jack Carter is John Constantine. The problem is that the comic doesn't make that explicit connection, so we can't cite the comic as such a reference. I'm tracking down sources that spell out what we all know.
I also feel like the individual character pages may be overdone and that one List of characters in Planetary might be better. Perhaps the Planetary field team members deserve their own pages (though I don't really think so), I'm nearly certain Bret Leather and Lord Blackstock don't. The useful info on the characters is fairly limited, and I think it will make the articles more accessible to new readers. Thoughts? » scoops “ŧäłķ„ 00:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean-up

message: Clark (Superman) Kent is quickly killed off in the JLA edition because it is theorized that many of his powers are dependent on gravity, and he is on the Moon. The Moon has just one sixth of Earth's gravity so a 180 lbs man would weigh 30 lbs. There would surely still be sufficient gravity for Clark Kent to retain some of his powers, even if diminished, like flight. Also he was expelled from a building only a short distance from the surface so should have floated down again instead of leaving the Moon as if there were NO gravity there. This idea of his powers would also mean that Clark Kent could never travel far beyond the atmosphere of Earth or he would die as he lost many of his powers as gravity diminished. While Diana (Wonder Woman) Prince struggles and is twice badly wounded by her foe, Bruce (Batman) Wayne of course effortlessly defeats his foe by moving faster than two bullets fired simultaneously at him about one hundredth of a second ago. He's Batman. He can do anything bad writing allows of this human being.(171.96.122.240 (talk) 06:30, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Gravity and bad writing