[TV] She-Hulk: Attorney at Law (*SPOILERS*)

[NineSpine]

What of the people that "died" in the snap? Were those people "legally dead"? And if so...what does that mean about the "irreversible" condition?

This already happens in the real world. People are declared legally dead incorrectly and it has to be reversed.

[Biomega]

He. Is. Not. Dead.

Not currently.

But as we've established, the extant law as written doesn't really deal with that kind of situation well. A lot of the subsequent stuff is contingent on a ruling on that.

As was pointed out by others, all we have, currently, is his statement that he did die, and was considered to have died, legally. Whether that's conjecture on his part, an outright lie, or reference to a previous ruling on the case, we do not know. We can only take information as it is presented to us. But even aside from that, you could, as I have pointed out, make some very interesting arguments for extant law as written to fail to properly account for this case. Which could very well open up a lot of legal avenues.

You are trying to bring common sense into matters of law. Big mistake ;P

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Which is why it was the first thing I mentioned as a possible case. The problem being, what if you die while doing so. There's likely no precedent of someone doing this, dying, and then being prosecuted. Which may well leave you a good argument for why Mr. Immortal shouldn't be, either.

At the very least it creates a situation where a court would have to decide if his "death" actually counts before he could be charged with reckless endangerment. I imagine that the court would rule against him...but until it does...it's in a state of legal limbo.

But, that's not the situation that his lawyers were currently dealing with. They were dealing with, for lack of a better term, "divorce settlements". And if that case were to go tot trial the matter of his "deaths" would have to be sorted out...and that would not be in the best interests of their client.

- - - Updated - - -

This already happens in the real world. People are declared legally dead incorrectly and it has to be reversed.

Kinda contradicts your whole "irreversible" point though does it not?

[NineSpine]

Not currently.

But as we've established, the extant law as written doesn't really deal with that kind of situation well. A lot of the subsequent stuff is contingent on a ruling on that.

As was pointed out by others, all we have, currently, is his statement that he did die, and was considered to have died, legally. Whether that's conjecture on his part, an outright lie, or reference to a previous ruling on the case, we do not know. We can only take information as it is presented to us. But even aside from that, you could, as I have pointed out, make some very interesting arguments for extant law as written to fail to properly account for this case. Which could very well open up a lot of legal avenues.

You are trying to bring common sense into matters of law. Big mistake ;P

The law does deal with this. Legally dead is defined as "irreversibly dead". When he "dies" it is a temporary status, and therefore not irreversible. This is no different than someone dying during surgery and being resuscitated which happens literally every hour of every day across the country.

Anyone who fakes their death is considered "legally dead". That doesn't mean their actions in attaining that status were not illegal.

- - - Updated - - -

Kinda contradicts your whole "irreversible" point though does it not?

That's like saying that we cant say anyone is guilty of a crime because sometimes convictions are overturned

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

That's like saying that we cant say anyone is guilty of a crime because sometimes convictions are overturned

No, it's like saying that when someone's conviction is overturned...they were never, legally speaking, guilty.

The point being made here is that the Mr. Immortal's case is unique and there is no real legal precedent for his particular condition. That is going to be a thing with Superhuman Law...it's going to set a lot of new precedents. That's the reason The Law Firm created a Superhuman Law Department and why they specifically wanted a Superhuman lawyer to head it. In this case, they want to avoid creating a new precedent...because the most likely outcome would not be in the best interests of their client.

[Raisei]

You specifically said they were better. The book isn't always better than its adaptation.

Considering how much the show is propped up in this thread BECAUSE it adapts these comics one should hope they are excellent, because otherwise you just deprived several of your colleagues here of their argument. Me? I don't care.

You're confusing one person's opinion for reality.

Never said that I believe this to be reality, you are just lying and making things up again.

The fun bit about it is that this commentator is clearly influenced by and using woke language (the "straight white men" strawman f.e.) to complain about a book that is supposedly the inspiration for this show. So the show clearly wants to be for women and the woke crowd but is proudly based on a book that some woke people are calling misogynistic. There is a joke in there somewhere.

People like to fuck. There's nothing wrong with that. Why shouldn't our art reflect real life?

Again, that is not my opinion. It is the point of a person claiming to understand how to write women better then Dan Slott. I have not written the article. Personally I think women should be as promiscuos as they like. Men too. The times where we judge people by their sex life should be long over.

Again you're seeing something that isn't there.

Interesting. Considering you are clearly imagining that the article speaks for me, which it does not, like at all.

[NineSpine]

No, it's like saying that when someone's conviction is overturned...they were never, legally speaking, guilty.

Correct, so if we have now established that if he is not irreversibly dead his "legally dead" status is now invalid.

[Geckoo]

I don't recall any other marvel show that has their main character break the 4th wall or set up a profile on a dating app. The closest thing is Deadpool...and the She-Hulk trailers didn't make it look anything at all like Deadpool.

So what? breaking the 4th wall is what makes it a sitcom? you have a trailer that is intentionally selling both action and comedy, the music leans more towards action while the clips lean more towards comedy, but both things exist in that trailer and nothing about it suggest that the show is a sitcom. Is not a big deal though, i was just pointing out that it is okay to expect something else if our expectations come from the trailer.

What's weak about them? This is a vague complaint.

It doesn't have the structure of a sitcom and the show has very few episodes to properly develop any interest in a cast of characters. We basically have Jen and that's it. All of the other characters introduced don't stick around or have enough screen time or developement to make the viewer actually care about them or be invested in any story with them alone. A sitcom can have a main character, but it's usually supported by a bunch of secondary characters that are present through the whole thing and she-hulk just has Nikki barely doing that.

That's why the episodes with cameos from already stablished characters worked better, the supporting characters didn't need to be developed in the show, wich was a smart move considering the time restraints, so it was easier to tell a self-contained story with them, but it was also time that they didn't (or couldn't) invest into developing the cast from the show.

The premise of a sitcom with she-hulk leading her legal team and dealing with a different kind of crazy each week is actually not bad, but that's not what we got. We keep saying that this is a sitcom, but it is not. Is just a comedy show that has a few episodes structured like a sitcom, but not all comedy shows are sitcoms. Wich takes me to your next point:

It's a sitcom...not an action series or a drama. I don't expect a ton of action or intricate plotlines from a sitcom

It can be more than one thing you know... a comedy show, an action show, an adventure show... it's all those things, it has elements from all those things being present through every episode. But even if it was a sitcom, i'm not going to expect action from HIMYM, but it's very reasonable to expect more action when the main character has superpowers and is part of a cinematic universe that tells stories about superheroes.

You don't like the comedy. Other people do.

Yeah, of course! i'm not here to convince you otherwise, when it comes to jokes finding them funny or not is very personal. If people likes it and has fun watching it? good for them.

The CGI is not very good most of the time. I can give you that. I don't think the CGI is bad enough that it hurts the show though.

As far as issues go, this one is in the bottom of the list for me... it is bad, but as you say, not to the point of hurting the show. There are a few scenes where it looks like they inserted a videogame character, but i find that to be more funny than dissapointing.

Most of your complaints are simply handled by saying "It's not for you".

There are issues with the show that are entirely a matter of personal taste, but i also see a bunch of issues that wouldn't necessarily make me dislike the show, like the CGI i just mentioned.

[Biomega]

The law does deal with this. Legally dead is defined as "irreversibly dead". When he "dies" it is a temporary status, and therefore not irreversible.

As I've pointed out, that isn't a good argument to make in a world where 50% OF THE GLOBAL POPULATION literally came back from the dead. You can't just assume death is irreversible when you have almost 4 billion examples of it literally being reversed.

WE have that luxury because we have no evidence for the reversibility of death. THEY DO.

And who knows, the Blip might precisely be WHY Mr. Immortal claims he legally died. Maybe they actually changed legislation to account for things like the Blip. But even if not and everything is as it is for us, that would call into question a lot of the foundations for legal definitions of death. And remember: laws have to be universally applicable, they can't just be "this holds for everyone except Mr. Immortal" (unless that's actually written into the law).

Both our intuitive and legal/medical definitions of death rest on observed facts of the natural world that aren't the same as they are in the MCU - Mr. Immortal is an exception that breaks that order, and that requires adjustment. You can't just handwave it away as it being just one guy.

Whether or not courts would rule in his favor or not we don't know (and that's assuming his outright statement about actually having legally died was incorrect to begin with) but at the very least, they COULD rule in his favor.

This is no different than someone dying during surgery and being resuscitated which happens literally every hour of every day across the country.

It is, because none of that meets the definitions of death which are largely based on "common medical consensus". The things that killed Mr. Immortal WOULD fall under common medical consensus for death for everyone except Mr. Immortal (and maybe supers of similar power).

Anyone who fakes their death is considered "legally dead".

That's not quite correct, but I get what you're trying to say. A successfully faked death usually leads to being declared dead at some point.

That doesn't mean their actions in attaining that status were not illegal.

Nor does it mean they WERE. Faking your death in itself is not illegal. Insurance fraud or avoiding criminal prosecution are, and many faked deaths are done for that purpose. But those are crimes regardless of whether you faked your death or not.

I can only repeat: faking your death is not in itself illegal (in most US jurisdictions).

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

So what? breaking the 4th wall is what makes it a sitcom? you have a trailer that is intentionally selling both action and comedy, the music leans more towards action while the clips lean more towards comedy, but both things exist in that trailer and nothing about it suggest that the show is a sitcom. Is not a big deal though, i was just pointing out that it is okay to expect something else if our expectations come from the trailer.

Breaking the 4th wall is what lets you know you're in for something different. The show does have both action and comedy...but as you said, the emphasis is on the comedy.

It doesn't have the structure of a sitcom

What's the structure of a sitcom? It literally means "situational comedy".

and the show has very few episodes to properly develop any interest in a cast of characters.

The show has very few episodes in general. And "interest in characters" is going to be entirely subjective. You may not be interested in those characters yet. But I am. I liked Nikki and Pug straight away. Mallory is growing on me. And I'm interested in Holliway.

We basically have Jen and that's it. All of the other characters introduced don't stick around or have enough screen time or developement to make the viewer actually care about them or be invested in any story with them alone.

We just had an entire episode where "plot line A" involved two of the supporting characters.

A sitcom can have a main character, but it's usually supported by a bunch of secondary characters that are present through the whole thing and she-hulk just has Nikki barely doing that.

That's not true.

That's why the episodes with cameos from already stablished characters worked better, the supporting characters didn't need to be developed in the show, wich was a smart move considering the time restraints, so it was easier to tell a self-contained story with them, but it was also time that they didn't (or couldn't) invest into developing the cast from the show.

Sure, it's easier when characters come from other shows...like Frasier already being established in Cheers before getting his own show.

It can be more than one thing you know... a comedy show, an action show, an adventure show... it's all those things, it has elements from all those things being present through every episode. But even if it was a sitcom, i'm not going to expect action from HIMYM, but it's very reasonable to expect more action when the main character has superpowers and is part of a cinematic universe that tells stories about superheroes.

And you do get more action than you would from HIMYM. We've seen Jen in a few different battles already. Wrestling with Bruce, fighting against Titania, against the Wrecking Crew, against demons, and against Titania again. But the show is not She-Hulk, Super-Hero-at-Large. It's She-Hulk, Attorney-at-Law.

Ii'll say again... what you are giving me are subjective reasons why a person may not like She-Hulk...and it's fine if they do not.

[NineSpine]

As I've pointed out, that isn't a good argument to make in a world where 50% OF THE GLOBAL POPULATION literally came back from the dead. You can't just assume death is irreversible when you have almost 4 billion examples of it literally being reversed.

WE have that luxury because we have no evidence for the reversibility of death. THEY DO.

Death is reversed all the time, both legally and medically. People are declared dead and turn up alive later. People die and get resuscitated literally all the time. The idea that this is new or novel is silly.

And who knows, the Blip might precisely be WHY Mr. Immortal claims he legally died. Maybe they actually changed legislation to account for things like the Blip. But even if not and everything is as it is for us, that would call into question a lot of the foundations for legal definitions of death. And remember: laws have to be universally applicable, they can't just be "this holds for everyone except Mr. Immortal" (unless that's actually written into the law).

Maybe they changed the law and maybe Mr Immortal is really Steve Rogers wearing a mask. Maybe maybe maybe is not an argument.

Both our intuitive and legal/medical definitions of death rest on observed facts of the natural world that aren't the same as they are in the MCU - Mr. Immortal is an exception that breaks that order, and that requires adjustment. You can't just handwave it away as it being just one guy.

He doesn't break anything. Legally dead is irreversibly dead. The fact that he can survive things other people can't has nothing to do with that. I can survive a ton of things that a 110 year old person can't survive. That doesn't magically change what legally dead means for each of us.

Whether or not courts would rule in his favor or not we don't know (and that's assuming his outright statement about actually having legally died was incorrect to begin with) but at the very least, they COULD rule in his favor.

"Legally dead" is the status of anyone who fakes their death successfully, no matter how many laws they broke in the process. I don't know why you guys are obsessed with refusing to understanding this and forcing me to repeat myself 500 times.

It is, because none of that meets the definitions of death which are largely based on "common medical consensus". The things that killed Mr. Immortal WOULD fall under common medical consensus for death for everyone except Mr. Immortal (and maybe supers of similar power).

Legal death means irreversible death.

That's not quite correct, but I get what you're trying to say. A successfully faked death usually leads to being declared dead at some point.

Nor does it mean they WERE. Faking your death in itself is not illegal. Insurance fraud or avoiding criminal prosecution are, and many faked deaths are done for that purpose. But those are crimes regardless of whether you faked your death or not.

I can only repeat: faking your death is not in itself illegal (in most US jurisdictions).

Faking your death by recklessly endangering other people and then forging fake identities is illegal. Again, why do I have to repeat myself?

[Ivanstone]

Interesting. Considering you are clearly imagining that the article speaks for me, which it does not, like at all.

Clearly your presenting one article as if it were some grand proof of your point. You linked it. I could care less about it’s existence. It’s just one opinion amongst 1000s.

Meanwhile, your the one ranting about a show you hate making false claims about the creative teams agenda. A more sensible person would’ve stopped watching weeks ago.

[AcidicSyn]

I'm curious. Does Mr. Immortal ever actually die when he does what he does?

Like, take Jack Harkniss from Doctor Who/Torchwood. No one can argue that guy dies. Brain and heart activity stop. Dude gets blown up and encased in concrete and just sort of....grows back into existence, when the organs necessary to facilitate breathing grow back, he gasps and there he is.

For Mr. Immortal, all I have is the show. He jumps out of a window, falls what, 40 stories and flats out on a car. Then instantly just gets up and walks away. So IS he immortal? or indestructible? Could you, say, cut his head off and he would go limp? or would his head call you rude?

[NineSpine]

I'm curious. Does Mr. Immortal ever actually die when he does what he does?

Like, take Jack Harkniss from Doctor Who/Torchwood. No one can argue that guy dies. Brain and heart activity stop. Dude gets blown up and encased in concrete and just sort of....grows back into existence, when the organs necessary to facilitate breathing grow back, he gasps and there he is.

For Mr. Immortal, all I have is the show. He jumps out of a window, falls what, 40 stories and flats out on a car. Then instantly just gets up and walks away. So IS he immortal? or indestructible? Could you, say, cut his head off and he would go limp? or would his head call you rude?

His power is regeneration, not dissimilar to wolverine.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I'm curious. Does Mr. Immortal ever actually die when he does what he does?

He says he does. I doubt he's ever had any scientific tests to confirm that.

- - - Updated - - -

His power is regeneration, not dissimilar to wolverine.

Very different from Wolverine actually. His regeneration, in the comics at least, only triggers at what would otherwise be fatal injuries. Otherwise he heals at a normal human rate. And Wolverine is not Immortal. He will, outside of external forces, live for a very long time...but not indefinitely and he can be killed.

[Svifnymr]

As I've pointed out, that isn't a good argument to make in a world where 50% OF THE GLOBAL POPULATION literally came back from the dead. You can't just assume death is irreversible when you have almost 4 billion examples of it literally being reversed.

WE have that luxury because we have no evidence for the reversibility of death. THEY DO.

And who knows, the Blip might precisely be WHY Mr. Immortal claims he legally died. Maybe they actually changed legislation to account for things like the Blip. But even if not and everything is as it is for us, that would call into question a lot of the foundations for legal definitions of death. And remember: laws have to be universally applicable, they can't just be "this holds for everyone except Mr. Immortal" (unless that's actually written into the law).

Both our intuitive and legal/medical definitions of death rest on observed facts of the natural world that aren't the same as they are in the MCU - Mr. Immortal is an exception that breaks that order, and that requires adjustment. You can't just handwave it away as it being just one guy.

Whether or not courts would rule in his favor or not we don't know (and that's assuming his outright statement about actually having legally died was incorrect to begin with) but at the very least, they COULD rule in his favor.

That ties back to what I said last week, where the show has some decent stuff to it, but feels hollow to me. Sure, they can decide the point of the show is not to delve into the issues they raise, but it feels empty to me with nothing else to fill it. Mr Immortal feels like one of the writers telling one of the others about how she knew this guy that was so afraid of confrontation, he'd literally throw himself out a window to avoid it. Or one of them talking how at a wedding one time, the bride told them to bus tables. And they all laughed at that in the conversation, so they made a show out of it.

So, here we are discussing the legal ramifications of Mr Immortal, but they never really addressed any of it in the show. Sure, HE says he was legally dead, but that doesn't really mean anything. If he got hit by a car, died, and got back up and walked away, he wasn't really dead long enough to be dead.
Did he like, get hit by a car, stay dead for a few days while a coronor did an autopsy or examination, they buried him and then he dug his way out? Seeing him crawl out of a grave, dusting himself off and decrying how it's too bad since he really liked that marriage, might have been a good scene.

[NineSpine]

He says he does. I doubt he's ever had any scientific tests to confirm that.

- - - Updated - - -

Very different from Wolverine actually. His regeneration, in the comics at least, only triggers at what would otherwise be fatal injuries. Otherwise he heals at a normal human rate.

That's not very different. It's slightly different. The power to fly or shoot lasers out of your eyes is "very different".

[Svifnymr]

That's not very different. It's slightly different. The power to fly or shoot lasers out of your eyes is "very different".

well, it does mean that if he threw himself in front of the car, but was just injured so badly that he was in a full body cast rather than dying, that things might really suck. Also there's the question of pain. But, oh well!

[Endus]

I'm curious. Does Mr. Immortal ever actually die when he does what he does?

Like, take Jack Harkniss from Doctor Who/Torchwood. No one can argue that guy dies. Brain and heart activity stop. Dude gets blown up and encased in concrete and just sort of....grows back into existence, when the organs necessary to facilitate breathing grow back, he gasps and there he is.

For Mr. Immortal, all I have is the show. He jumps out of a window, falls what, 40 stories and flats out on a car. Then instantly just gets up and walks away. So IS he immortal? or indestructible? Could you, say, cut his head off and he would go limp? or would his head call you rude?

In the comics, he has a stupidly high healing factor that kicks in only at death: non-fatal wounds he heals from normally. You could throw him into a star and he'd sit, burning and healing, until the star goes nova, collapses into a black hole, and evaporates over several billion years. He'd be pissed about it, but survive. His immortality is canonically infinite, like "will eventually be a founding entity for whatever universe comes next" infinite.

In the MCU? Nobody knows.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

That's not very different. It's slightly different. The power to fly or shoot lasers out of your eyes is "very different".

Wolverine heals from any injury or sickness. Mr. Immortal only heals from "death". Wolverine breaks a limb (when his bones aren't sheathed in admantium) he heals in seconds. Mr. Immortal breaks a limb... he heals at the same rate you or I would.

Wolverine can die. Mr. Immortal cannot.

Very different.