Talk:Cloak and Dagger (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Material from an alternative article at the mis-spelled location "Clock and Dagger" has been included in this article. The alternative article, with complete history, is available at Talk:Cloak and Dagger (comics)/Old. Noel (talk) 14:30, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Discussion here:

Superhero infobox or Superteam infobox what would work ? - Brown Shoes22
Superteam infobox. With that in mind, it shouldn probably also be suggested that Cloak and Dagger gain individual articles, as there is a lot of infomation that does not involve both of them together. --Jb-adder (through the IP of 23:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Blind Dagger?[edit]

If I recall correctly, wasn't Dagger Blinded at one point, and still blind? Can we get someone more familiar with the characters to address this? ThuranX 22:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Dagger was blinded in the Terry Austin run of Cloak & Dagger, specifically in the first issue, and much of his run dealt with that; her sight was returned at the end of Austin's run.--Gjd001 14:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
She was blinded by Jip but at a later time had her eyesight returned based off of a bargain Cloak made with Jip. Shortly thereafter Jip was killed. businessman332211 (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


Cloak and Dagger also make an appearance in a few of Marvel's Runaways. It should probably be mentioned.--Ryan! 06:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

That is a valid point but it seems someone has already added it in so that was taken care of. businessman332211 (talk) 23:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Cloak and Dagger mutants?[edit]

i was under the impresstion that cloak and dagger are not considered mutants in the marvel universe. as i understand it mutants or " Homosuperior" are a seperate race that all share the x-factor or X-gene. as i understand it cloak and dagger are mutates. mutates in the marvel universe are baseline mutants that have been given powers through artifical means IE genetical manipulation or chemicals. thus should cloak and dagger be listed as human mutates. unless there has been a retcon in one of the handbooks that i am not aware off —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dr noire (talkcontribs) 15:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC).

after reading the marvel comics mutant article clearlyn states my above comments, thus i change the wording of cloak and dagger's species to human mutate while keeping the link to the human mutant marvel universe (comics).--Dr noire 15:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

It's clearly stated in the article that they are, in fact, mutants. Mutants gain their powers through an X-gene, yes, but it must normally be activated by some sort of traumatic experience (usually puberty). In their case, the injection of the drugs was the catalyst, but not the reason for their powers. As such, if there is no objection, I'll be reverting their species to human mutant. 09:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I read somewhere recently that their status as mutants has been conveniently forgotten at Marvel. Hence Cloak's allegiances in House of M (which, despite what some Wikipedians would have you believe, IS part of the continuity of the 616 universe).

i think you are mistaken on this point, the mutant article clearly states theres a difference between mutants and mutates as such, "The term "mutant" in the Marvel Universe should not be confused with its usual usage in reality to describe any organism whose DNA has been altered by an external force. These do exist in the Marvel Universe - Spider-Man, the Incredible Hulk and the Fantastic Four are prominent examples - but are covered by the separate and distinct term "mutates", a shorthand term for "mutated human". Marvel mutants, by comparison, possess the X-gene from birth." has it ever been stated specifically that cloak and dagger are mutants? i dont think we should consider the cover tittle to be an acurate depiction of the charcters origin? it would be the same as claiming that captain america is a mutant because he was injected with super soldier surrem? or perhaps the traumatic experience of the gamma bomb hitting burce banner activated his dorrment x-gene. i think it is perfecly clear that cloak and dagger have there powers because they where given drugs not as a reaction to them. the problem with the term mutant in the marvel universe is because it a term that is oftern defined and redefined.--Dr noire 20:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

DUde, there mutates since there powers were forcefully extracted, but they were still there before that dude gave them the drug. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to reiterate that the catalyst for mutant powers acting on an X-Gene is always a traumatic experience, whether biological (puberty, ingesting harmful materials) or external (falling out of an airplane, being put into a life or death situation) so it is entirely possible that the drugs did not cause their powers so much as activate an X-gene. I'm fairly certain they have been labeled as mutants repeatedly, but as I'm lacking the back issues, can't cite it myself. If someone else could, that would be excellent, but I felt I should put forth the argument that the drugs didn't necessarily directly confer powers to them, as it was implied in the comics that these drugs had been trafficked a bit after they were tested on Cloak and Dagger, and that any instances of gaining powers was rather rare (possibly limited to one other instance). Until, though, someone can provide a cite for them being mutants, though, it is probably best to leave them as mutates for the time being. ArchangelX777 (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC) Needed to add that if concensus is that there is no cite for them being mutants, we should remove any references to them as such in the text (such as that they are unaffected by M-Day). ArchangelX777 (talk) 09:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

You are misunderstanding the basis behind there Origin. Dspayre had manipulated what would have happened. If he had not of interfered then Cloak and Dagger (Tyrone/Tandy) would have changed powers and been activated naturally (because they were naturally mutants). But...Dspayre did something to interfere and switched there roles...also reducing there powers. You find out later on that they are indeed mutants (100%) but the heroine substitute actually modified what they became and made it happen earlier with a slightly different set of powers.. businessman332211 (talk) 17:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Power Pack[edit]

Cloak and Dagger also show up as guest stars with the Power Pack. Cloak hides all of the kids in his cloak, with Dagger in there to protect them from the disorientation and such with her light. GideonFrost 15:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


In my opinion, the 'Afilliations' section should be merged into a history section for the duo. Lots42 19:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Cloak's Cloak[edit]

Should it be mentioned that if cloak has his cloak removed he loses his power as seen in Runaways Vol.1 Issue 12? (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

actually i think it would be a wise thing to put... as it is also evidence that proves that they are mutates and not mutants--Dr noire (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

They are "By definition" mutates...but if the powers had not been activated prematurely (and with Dspayre's intervention) then they would have been formed there powers naturally (albeit in reverse roles). In essence Dagger was meant to have Cloaks powers and Cloak was meant to have Daggers powers. This was something that was made realized during there final battles with Dspayre at the end of the Volume 3 mini-series. businessman332211 (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Separate Pages[edit]

Shouldn't these characters have separate pages? Both have acted independently. The members of Power Pack have independent pages, as do Iron Fist and Luke Cage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Whats with this line?[edit]

"He ran away to New York City when his speech impediment prevented him from getting his friend shot by a police officer who mistook him for a criminal."

Shouldnt it be something like "prevented him from keeping his friend from getting shot" or am i mistaken? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguate at the top?[edit]

I came here looking for the Dabney_Coleman movie. (talk) 03:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I think (comics) disambiguates this enough from a movie. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cloak and Dagger (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:52, 26 December 2017 (UTC)