Did Night Thrasher just make a Celestial Flinch?
Guess he's just that radical.
>>83872864
Dunno about Thrasher but I'm finding the editorial-enforced focus on that initial Celestial encounter to be noteworthy. It looks like they keep bringing it up because it wasn't just an incidental event but is going to become pivotal to the resolution of Civil War II.
Is Ulysses not predicting the future but altering reality, making his visions of the future become true?
That can't be a Celestial. I refuse to believe it.
>>83873060
A celestial pops up and attacks, using mini-celestials so the heroes have something to fight individually. I've never seen celestials operate that way. Makes me wonder if, in-story, this isn't really a celestial but is the inhuman kid's impression of what a celestial is and he is creating these visions not foreseeing them.
>>83873222
>>83873060
They never said what it was but it wasn't a Celestial.
>>83873021
>caring about Civil War 2
You deserve the shit that you get.
>>83873222
Just like how I refuse to believe that the Gardner that the Apocalypse Twins killed was a Celestial. Celestials have never shown to cared about mutants. It is usually all about the Eternals as shown with Tiamut's interaction with the Eternals in the Eternals mini.
>>83872864
>a leader of warriors
The first New Warriors ongoing was way better than it had any right to be. Can't be too mad at how aggressively 90s it was since it gave us Namora and Tai.
Fuckin' Tai....
>>83873292
Actually, they did. Now it was Kamala who called it a Celestial and perhaps she was mistaken but nobody corrected her. And I'm fairly confident that at least one if not several of the tie-ins have specifically referred to that initial attack as being from a celestial.
Again, they could all be wrong, and to this reader's eye its modus operandi didn't feel very celestial-y to me, but is that an intentionally-written psyche-out or just unintentional bad writing? Its hard to tell anymore.
>>83873292
Ms Marvel called it a Celestial, Dr Strange referred to it as a "Celestial Destructor" in the very first issue.
Strange did say that it was returned to the dimension from which it came. Celestials aren't other-dimensional, was this something like a Dark Dimension version of a Celestial?
>>83873370
>Namora
Namorita, you mean.
Namora is from the 50s.
>>83873725
Marvel is kind of left worse-off by "Celestial" being the specific name of a specific race of super-cosmic-beings. Celestial is such a great term for all manner of heavenly and gradiose phenomena and beings, so having it pinned down to mean one specific tiny subset of beings is really limiting.
I mean, it being a "Celestial Destructor" as Strange would call it and that being something from some other dimension, more akin to something like a Many-Angled One or some Lovecraftian entity than a common "Celestial", an entity that destroys planets (celestial orbs as they've been called), would be perfectly fine, but no, "Celestial" means you have a teacup head and fuck around with mutants and eternals, so...
