Disney + | She-Hulk

I'm having a little trouble figuring out what "really" happened during the climax after she got them to re-write it.
Anyway, the show was really fun!
I had the same thought. My working presumption is to take it at face value and presume what happened in-universe are the things incorporating the changes Jen wanted. I still wonder where Matt Murdoch came from! He literally just dropped from the sky, as far as I could tell! :lol:

It was pretty crazy. I enjoy some crazy!

SSB
 
Last edited:
Yes, but what things?
Phelps IS HulkKing, and HAD collected her blood, but ended up not using it?
Blonski HAS been appearing as Abomination, but really only attended (and allowed the meeting to be booked at his retreat) for the money, as he claimed?
Was Tatania there?
Jenn interrupted the meeting and called the cops, everyone stood down, end of scene?
 
Phelps IS HulkKing, and HAD collected her blood, but ended up not using it?
Blonski HAS been appearing as Abomination, but really only attended (and allowed the meeting to be booked at his retreat) for the money, as he claimed?
First question -- I'm going to presume that he either didn't use it or was unable to do so.

Second question -- I think so, especially because I had that feeling even before things went bonkers. His comments seemed generic to me, exactly as if he were hired to come in and speak at a group event and he hadn't bothered to familiarize himself with this specific group.

Third --- your question about Titania (not quoted above) , I'm going to presume she wasn't there, partly based on Bruce's appearance at the family dinner. When he shows up there, it seems as if he has just returned, so therefore he didn't actually show up at the meeting after events were altered. At least that's my thinking for now, unless and until they do something that gives us a different take.

SSB
 
Yes, but what things?
Phelps IS HulkKing, and HAD collected her blood, but ended up not using it?
Blonski HAS been appearing as Abomination, but really only attended (and allowed the meeting to be booked at his retreat) for the money, as he claimed?
Was Tatania there?
Jenn interrupted the meeting and called the cops, everyone stood down, end of scene?
In the first episode, Bruce said that their ability to metabolize gamma radiation instead of... you know... dying horribly, was a literal billion-to-one shot. Doesn't mean their blood isn't dangerous, but it wouldn't create another Hulk as it did when Todd originally injected himself. Them making it work was a plot hole. Jenn's revised ending eliminates the plot hole; presumably they couldn't figure out a way to synthesize it in order to get it to work on Todd.

I actually do believe that he was just doing a speaking appearance/renting the location. I don't think he's actually an Intelligencia member, just a bit of a mercenary, which still fits with his original personality.

Titania was there, but there's no indication of why. As Jenn didn't call this out to K.E.V.I.N., presumably, they just let that slide because she's still there in the revised ending (and also vindicates Matt being playfully offended when Jenn hadn't heard of Daredevil).

Basically... yeah.
 
Not watching the video, thanks. I think it's very telling that the headline behind him in the still specifies that the finale is telling "toxic Marvel trolls" to go **** themselves, and this guy apparently decided that applied to him and got offended...
But the problem is that Disney has applied the term to everyone who didn't like it, including those that had legit criticisms about it's stories and characters (like they have with the fandoms when they have released unfavorable Star Wars and Marvel related materials in the past few years). However, if you're not interested in the video, that's okay. That's your decision on what to watch.
 
Last edited:
But the problem is that Disney has applied the term to everyone who didn't like it, including those that had legit criticisms about it's stories and characters (like they have with the fandoms when they have released unfavorable Star Wars and Marvel related materials in the past few years). However, if you're not interested in the video, that's okay. That's your decision on what to watch.
I mean... I hear what you're saying, but it doesn't match up with what I've seen, so, I suppose it's a matter of 'your mileage may vary'.
 
Just an aside, but did anyone else note how much better the She-Hulk CGI was for the finale?

SSB
I don't know, I actually thought it looked really bad at times, specifically the shot where she's walking outdoors across the "real world" studio, just before she finds the writers. The walking animation looked stilted and stiff, and there were some jerky moments between She-Hulk and the background. The other characters also had similar problems, like they looked a bit too CGI, and didn't quite match the environment.

Overall, the CGI didn't bother me though, but it did seem that the budget constraints were the reason for any issues. I also didn't like that they called out the CGI issues (K.E.V.I.N. mentioning doing the transition between She-Hulk and Jenn off-camera). I think it's a disservice to the animators to blatently say that in the show. And I've learned you shouldn't usually call out your own mistakes or things that are lacking because it draws attention to the flaws, often flaws a lot of people don't even notice.
 
The Former Network Executive has just posted this.


Wow!

After 27 pages, it makes "I told you so," feel so underwhelming.

The real F-You goes out to everyone who blindly defended the show. The writers now admit to it. The real fans *tried* to tell you.

Don't get angry at us, we told you so.
 
Sensationalistic videos like that are difficult to watch because the "I'm angry and going to insult everything" vibe gets old after 30 seconds regardless of accuracy of content. Sure it will get views and resonate with those who already agree but push those who don't farther away often in just the video thumbnail or description (as we saw here). So yay for clicks from those who agree, nay for changing anyone's POV. Delivery is everything.
 
Sensationalistic videos like that are difficult to watch because the "I'm angry and going to insult everything" vibe gets old after 30 seconds regardless of accuracy of content. Sure it will get views and resonate with those who already agree but push those who don't farther away often in just the video thumbnail or description (as we saw here). So yay for clicks from those who agree, nay for changing anyone's POV. Delivery is everything.
Except the video is about an article where the writers and cast of the show were interviewed and quoted.

They (show creators) are now telling you, "you were scammed."

The folks who said, "things weren't right about the show," were right.

and the writers are so woke-pathologic that they call those who pointed out the poor-quality that they claim to have INTENTIONALLY baked into the show, "toxic."
 
I just saw this article on Collider - I hadn't read any reviews of She-Hulk until now, and I wasn't even seeking them out, this one just caught my eye as I was scrolling through their site. I thought the writer, Maggie Boccella, made some good points - some that I had myself and some I hadn't thought of - like this passage:

The end of Episode 8 presented an interesting set of questions at that point in She-Hulk’s narrative. Would the MCU contend with what it’s like for women, even when they’re heroes, to live in fear of doing anything that could be considered out of line? Would it comment on what it means to be a hero as a woman when Jen can’t shamelessly rage the way Bruce can? Would it give her a chance to finally accept her own internal rage at the entire situation, thus finally accepting her new existence as She-Hulk?
No, but apparently they’ll introduce her to the AI machine that supposedly controls the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Because that’s totally the better option here.

I feel it's a well thought out piece that crtiques the finale fairly and calls out it's failings both as a source of light entertainment and as a commentary on serious issues facing women. I think it's worth a read whether you liked the show or not.

 
Except the video is about an article where the writers and cast of the show were interviewed and quoted.

They (show creators) are now telling you, "you were scammed."

The folks who said, "things weren't right about the show," were right.

and the writers are so woke-pathologic that they call those who pointed out the poor-quality that they claim to have INTENTIONALLY baked into the show, "toxic."
I watched the series, the video and read the Variety article. I entirely understood his points.

Not to be a broken record my point is simple, those who agree will click because they agree, those who don't agree are not going to get swayed by an angry bitter old man swearing at a camera no matter how true his words. Many won't even watch the video because of the evident tone. It's impossible to convince others to change their POV by yelling at them, being obnoxious, rude and snarky. It turns people off and makes them not even listen to the message. I mean at one point the guy basically says "**** you if my swearing offends you."

So awesome former network executive, get your clicks, do your thing but don't expect it to make a shred of a difference or to evoke any kind of change in anything.
 
Last edited:
I watched the series, the video and read the Variety article. I entirely understood his points.

Not to be a broken record my point is simple, those who agree will click because they agree, those who don't agree are not going to get swayed by an angry bitter old man swearing at a camera no matter how true his words. Many won't even watch the video because of the evident tone. It's impossible to convince others to change their POV by yelling at them, being obnoxious, rude and snarky. It turns people off and makes them not even listen to the message. I mean at one point the guy basically says "**** you if my swearing offends you."

So awesome former network executive, get your clicks, do your thing but don't expect it to make a shred of a difference or to evoke any kind of change in anything.

well, as far as broken records...

You are attacking the messenger and avoiding the message. Read the article from which it is based.

Jessica Gao is TELLING YOU that it was intentional.

To paraphrase, she has jelly on her hands, jelly on her face and she is saying, "yes, I ate the jelly!"

And you are still asking, "where is the jelly? Well, that guy who is pointing at Jessica seems toxic. Hmmm, maybe the jelly is over here."
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top