Thanks it was a good interview, Aaron.

Slott is wrong on one thing.  The Hulk did kill a deer in issue # 314. 

The panel of The Hulk ripping a man in two was in what issue?

"So it's out of character for The Hulk to kill because it would muddy the code of The Mighty Avengers?  They wouldn't have a mass murderer join their organization to protect and serve the world."

A follow-up question to this poster's point: Is Namor a killer? Did any of his attempts to overthrow the surface world result in the death of innocent civilian casualties?

Matt Hawes: "I don't know, L. Why don't you consult Stan Lee? It's obvious that the Hulk didn't like Rick Jones knowing his secret, but whether or not the Hulk would've murdered Rick is not stated in any way."

It's implicit. What other intent would you ascribe to him?

Matt Hawes: "After all, L., if Hulk wanted to murder Rick, why did he continue to let Rick live? Explanation?"

Matt Hawes: "One panel, where the barest suggestion is made (never stated by anyone in the book) that the Hulk would "silence" Rick by force, even murder, is not enough evidence to prove that is the way the character should be written."

I'm not trying to prove any such thing nor do I need to. The character, as originally portrayed, included a an amoral drive that would include silencing someone by force. You can shroud that in supposed ambiguity all you like, it still implies murder. Should the character be written as a murderer now? I never claimed any such thing. But he was not originally innocent character seeking isolation, as some have claimed.

Matt Hawes: "Again, if the Hulk was a murderer, why did Rick Jones still live the next time Banner became the Hulk?"

Easily addressed above.

The panel of The Hulk ripping a man in two was in what issue?

****

I assume you are referencing that infamous shot from Ultimate Hulk and Wolverine # 1.  Well, at least he didn't die.

Exactly. No murder threat was actually made, and even the suggestion of such a threat was dropped in the very same comic and never followed up on, as you note.

Hardly, I'd say, a character-defining moment.

When determining if a character is "out of character," you have to judge such things by how the character has been consistently portrayed once the actual characterization had been fully in place.

For many decades, Batman was not a killer, and did not use a gun, and doing so would have been grossly out of character. This, in spite of the fact that Batman had used a gun and killed in his earliest appearances. Batman was still being developed, and those early issues were his formative years as a character. The "real" Batman would not surface until a bit later.

This is the same with the Hulk. The Hulk was not meant to be a killer, once the Hulk was fully developed. Even in that first issue, the Hulk does not kill anyone, nor is there any way of knowing (short of asking Stan Lee) if the Hulk really intended to kill Rick Jones, or would have actually done so, in that first issue. I'd say that the fact Hulk didn't kill Rick when he had the chance to do so later in the same book proves he was not meant to be a killer.

L.Walker wrote: ...But he was not originally innocent character seeking isolation, as some have claimed...

I never said the original Hulk was "innocent." I said he was thugish. I said he just wanted to be left alone, and he did. He wanted to go and hide. Rick followed him. Rick always followed the Hulk in those early issues because he felt responsible for what happened to Bruce Banner. But, yes, according to what is written, the Hulk go wanted to go away from everyone. It's not like he became the Hulk and then decided, "Ok, I'm going to rip Rick Jones in half like a ragdoll."

Sam, did that deer's neck break or was it simply dislocated?

Hmmm?