Conservapedia #wingnut

Conservapedia #wingnut conservapedia.com

Based on the comic book character of the same name, Jennifer Walters is a lawyer, but after a car crash caused her cousin Bruce Banner’s blood to mix with hers (different than the original origin) turns her into a She-Hulk. Unlike Banner, she can turn from She-Hulk to Jennifer back and forth. There’s a major feminist tone to it as Jennifer narcissistically says she has it worse than Bruce, and blames men for her other problems. She’s also an adulteress, and rarely takes her job seriously. It also turned openly Catholic hero Matthew Murdock A.K.A. Daredevil into a bumbling bafoon to make Jennifer look good. At the end of the show, Jennifer breaks the fourth wall (a tribute to the 1990s comics) and goes to KEVIN (a robotic stand in for producer Kevin Fiege) and complains that her ending sucks.

Liberal critics Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert give biased reviews to theatrical films, telling their viewers what to think.

18 comments

His Excelsior!ness Stan Lee could have made Storm as much a man as Wolverine.

So why didn’t he?

He could have made Wolverine as black as that member of the X-Men - created as a metaphor for the Civil Rights Movement - who could manipulate the weather…!

Sure, the series was somewhat average but it wasn’t due to “liberalism.” It might be due to its somewhat comic tone compared to MCU.

I wonder what would you say about Jessica Jones and Luke Cage.

“but after a car crash caused her cousin Bruce Banner’s blood to mix with hers (different than the original origin)”
IIRC he donated blood to her to save her life, so not that different. Of course, the Hulk movies have made it clear that his blood carries his condition, he’d not likely make a conscious choice to give it to her.
Then again, he’s the fucking Hulk. Anything that’s going to make him bleed that much should turn him into the Hulk before that can happen. On the third hand, it’s a fucking comic book show, how much rational analysis is actually justified?

“ Unlike Banner, she can turn from She-Hulk to Jennifer back and forth.”
Um, that’s exactly like Banner. He’s Hulk or he’s Bruce, alternately. I think you mean that she can voluntarily switch from one to the other? You guys never use a beta reader, do you?

“and rarely takes her job seriously.”
And if she did you’d complain that the show was self-important, like as not.
And she broke the fourth wall all through the series, not just the finale.
Did you not watch the show or just not understand it?

At least conserapedia has basic knowledge of the original (80s) She-Hulk comic. That's more than can be said for most people attacking it.

I think Siskel and Elbert died long before She-hunk became a show.

@Blackcat #220877
She-hunk

A show about a trans man?

<@KeithInc.> #220863

Then again, he’s the fucking Hulk. Anything that’s going to make him bleed that much should turn him into the Hulk before that can happen.

That’s actually explained in the show itself, tbh. Banner and Hulk (merged as “professor Hulk” by that point) consciously stayed in Banner form (with some help from a device) to recover easier from the events of Endgame.

Look, say whatever you want, but I happen to think her being a powerful, tall, feminist Amazon who could snap me in half with her pinkie and still has a lot of brains only makes She-Hulk that much more attractive to me. Same with Power Girl from DC.

Liberal critics Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert give biased reviews to theatrical films, telling their viewers what to think.

Yeah, OK…isn’t that what being a critic literally IS? Sure, they were biased, but ain’t every damn critic?

And Conservapedia complaining about someone being biased is EXTREMELY ironic!

@TheKingOfRhye

The New Yorker’s Richard Brody was utterly scathing about “Avengers: Endgame”.

It’s the fact that so many people ensured it broke the billion in just five days was the financial Infinity Gauntlet that not only snapped his but Conservapoodia’s opinions into nonexistence.

That is but part of His Excelsior!ness Stan Lee’s legacy: how he has inspired Purveyors of Wonder.

What will your legacy be, Andy Schaftafly…?!

I’ve seen a few S&E reviews; they never once said anything akin to “I didn’t like this movie, and neither do you, moviegoing public! Gaze into our collective EEEEEEVIL EEEEEYE and you’re opinions shall be revealed to you!” They only ever gave their opinions. They either recommended a film, or they didn’t, based on their personal tastes. And it should be said, Roger Ebert wrote Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, so fuck his tastes, that movie sucked. Which is, again, my opinion.

And besides, what does any of this have to do with Jesus? Are you allowed to watch movies or television? Are you allowed to do anything that isn’t slamming your head against your book and trying to force everyone else into believing your superstitions?

@kuyohashi #220911

One critic called Excalibur (1981) Excal-bored. I enjoyed it, wasn’t bored at all. Not all critics agree. Sometimes Siskel and Ebert highly disagreed.

Everybody conservative/MAGADerpian and liberal hates she-hulk…
Why Roger and Gene on the same list?

@TatersForever5481 #220924

I loved She-Hulk. I think it doesn't deserve the hate it get.

@Creativerealms #220925

1 in a billion tier take. It’s just a show though.

@Malingspann #220878

Thanks for the catch. She-Hunk would be more frightening to Conservapedia.

Adblocker not detected

Please install a browser add-on that blocks ads and other malicious scripts in your browser to protect your security and privacy. Learn more

uBlock Origin for Firefox, Google Chrome, and Microsoft Edge
1Blocker for Apple Safari
AdAway for Android

Conservapedia #wingnut conservapedia.com

18 comments

Confused?