Bevendre
-
What do you think about there being so many superhero movies from hollywood nowadays? Everything seems to be a trilogy or... a tetralogy. Is it overdone?
Anonymous
It’s not a question of how many are being done, but how well they’re being done. Superhero movies have been pretty common since the late ‘90s, and not necessarily rare before that. The advances in technology, and interests of the viewers have shifted enough to make superhero movies generally very profitable ventures. If they’re done well.
I have no problem with revisiting characters throughout movies, it lets us as the audience experience their growth, and see the changes they go through that can’t necessarily be covered in the few hours that a single movie allows.
Trilogies and tetralogies can work so long as the character progresses and doesn’t face the same internal struggles again and again, and I think for the most part this is what the Marvel Cinematic Universe has succeeded in. The movies are all interconnected, and the characters act and interact in a way that shows that very well.
Captain America is a great example of this. I don’t much care for Captain America as a character, for some of the same reasons that I don’t care for Superman. The first Cap movie didn’t grab me, though it was okay. His interactions in Avengers however I found to be really good. The writers knew what they were doing with the character, and he grew through the movie, becoming closer to people he would have loathed in his first flick. This is continued in Winter Soldier where we see his views and values challenged much more heavily, but it still feels natural.
DC thus far hasn’t managed series as well, largely from a general lack of experience in inter-connectivity, but that may change in the next 5 years or so as they release more movies. -
i don't see batman beyond hitting the big screen with live actors or anything sadly
I can see it happening nowadays. We have the technology, and I believe there was a script floating about at one point in the past few years. Batman Beyond was pretty popular when it was on, and has remained popular enough to get representation in several games and comics, so DC is still willing to support it to an extent.
The only question is whether or not they’re willing to push a character that’s not Bruce Wayne Batman, or Superman. That’s the greatest hurdle to overcome, what with the terrible reception of the last non big-3 DC movie (Green Lantern) and DC’s reluctance to make one of their biggest franchises into a movie (Wonder Woman).
DC could do it. They should do it, I’d say. The only thing keeping them back is their own issues and stupid marketing decisions (though many of those are on the shoulders of distributors and networks. I’m looking at you Cartoon Network) -
If it’s not clear, I can be rather opinionated, and I welcome argument against the opinions I post, so long as people are ready and willing to have their own critiqued. On that note I’ve had an idea that will help me kill time, and hopefully encourage more people to argue and debate rather than just disregard others opinions.
How would people feel about me reviewing shows/episodes/movies/games/characters etc. here?
I’ve done it a couple times before, but I’m happy to look into games, movies, what have you that I haven’t experienced before to give a (hopefully) informed opinion about it, and ideally get some discussion going.
If you would have an idea or suggestion you could put it in the askbox, ideally with an idea of where to get access to it cheaply and legally, and I’d look into it as soon as I could.
Yay or nay? -
prime example being Terry interacting with the Joker by laughing at hime, while Bruce just kinda stood there brooding.
Exactly.
Terry is a teenager, cocksure, confident, snarky, and to a point deluded by his youth. Because he’s younger and less experienced he was more likely to take on a little too much, and relied on Bruce to help him out with the details. Terry was a scrapper, a fighter, not a detective.
That being said, his methods were effective, and his personal life and the balance between it and his ’(k)night’ life made him compelling. He was like a good balance between Paul Dini written Kevin Conroy acted Batman, and Spiderman. He was serious, but witty. He was dark, but knew how to lighten up and approach a problem from different, or even unorthodox positions.
Because he was so different from his father (Yeah, apparently Bruce Wayne is Terry’s biological father, spoilers.) in upbringing and attitude he separated himself from his predecessor and redefined Batman for a new setting.
Now, we need a Batman Beyond movie. Now. Do it. DO IT DC! -
even if not number one, the fact batman is there twice, albeit two different batmans, but still, is flipping awesome.
I put two Batmans on the list because both made up a large part of my childhood, and remain dynamic characters even now. They’re separate not only because they are different people, but because their mannerisms, tactics, etc. are wildly different and at times even opposite to one another’s.
-
DC did a a one-shot a few years ago called "All-Star Superman" wherein he flies too close to the sun, absorbs WAY too much energy and is now dying. As a consequence he becomes SUPER super powerful (way more so than is normal for him), but deteriorates over the course of the comic until he becomes so weak he can barely move. I think it's an interesting look at a once immortal man and how he stands up for his ideals when he can't in the way he did previously. I encourage you to look it up.
I may do that, but this again raises an inconsistency with the character, which is inevitable given writer differences. In other publications Superman comes in immediate contact with the sun, at times going within it to recover and recharge, such as in DCU Online, and Superman Prime to an extent.
As far as the All-Star series goes (at least according to the Wiki, so take it with a grain of salt) Supes over-absorption of solar radiation is from Luthor’s interference, after which he exhibits abilities exhibited in other series upon being exposed to the radiation from a blue star without harmful effects. It doesn’t help that even though his supercharge drains him to the point of collapse in “All-Star”, it doesn’t kill him and if anything makes him stronger as he becomes a solar being.
Comic characters are generally wildly inconsistent as there’s no cheat sheet for their powers or limitations between writers. Iron Man is inconsistent in his own stories (though this is more easily explained away with the technological aspect and advancement) but to my knowledge, Superman is among the most, if not the most inconsistently written hero DC or Marvel has. -
Why do you like Iron Man as your #1? Is it because Stark is just a rich man who made himself into a superhero? Anonymous
Not really, if that was the case then Batman would be higher. I like Iron Man more because I see him as being more human. He deals with vices and is very flawed, often fighting criticism with sarcasm and narcissism.
He has reasons for his actions, he has guilt, he knows loss, and he deals with them in a relatable, albeit destructive manner. It is these reasons that drive him to better himself through his Iron Man persona, but that comes at a cost.
Iron Man’s a character of give and take, of failure and of success. He’s a man in a metal suit, but he’s still a man, and that’s why I like him. -
So, not a fan of Superman? I can dig it. Who would you classify as your top 5 super heroes?
5. Batman (Terry McGinnis)
4. Batman (Bruce Wayne)
3. Wolverine
2. Spiderman
1. Iron Man -
(real quick, I should note that superman is so overpowered that he admits he has to constantly keep himself in check to make sure he doesn't break anyone too badly. he likened it to "living in a world of cardboard." that's all I have to say.)
That’s a constant issue he has, and his only real weakness. Kryptonite, depending on the writer, doesn’t hurt Superman, it just drains his solar powered plant battery. He doesn’t resist magic, but it doesn’t stop him.
Superman’s only real weakness is that he holds back. That’s it. He’s limitless, but limits himself to keep from breaking everything or solving everyone’s problems.
For an example of Superman not holding back, see Robin with superpowers in Teen Titans GO! (Why DC? WHY?!?) -
As much as I love the music that accompanies Superman properties, and as much as I enjoyed the animated series growing up, I cannot bring myself to like Superman as a character, and it’s not just because he’s overpowered.
To me, Superman is an excellent example of a character created to solve a problem, and one held back by its creation. Superman was created to instill a sense of hope, goodness, and to a point patriotism in a population facing the Great Depression, and then World War II. He was meant to be ideal, and insurmountable, and he has remained that way but while it is good that his goals have been met and maintained, it is perhaps worrying that he has been unable to change as a character in his tenure.
Superman’s the boyscout who will do no wrong, or he’s the dictator who prevents all things he sees as wrong. Unlike other heroes with a ‘tragic’ backstory, Superman has little to motivate him into going down the right path besides ‘it’s the right thing to do’, and this isn’t bad, but it is bland. On the occasions that his beliefs are pushed, most often in Otherworld timelines, his ‘right thing’ mentality supersedes reason and right to make him a controlling force in the world, rather than a protecting one. This is clearly shown in the recent Injustice line, but also in earlier storylines in comics and cartoons alike.Superman is severely overpowered, and as you say he’s meant to be so. This is great for an ideal character meant to inspire, or a Messianic character as Supes is often portrayed. It’s not a particularly good trait for a character though, at least not one that is meant to mingle with the common folk, or who would need assistance which, depending on who’s writing the story and determining the limits of Supes’s powers, renders the JLA a rather moot point.
Perhaps my greatest issue with Superman is that if he wasn’t one of DC’s big 3, or wasn’t such a long standing character, he probably wouldn’t be accepted by many fans today. If taken out of the DC universe, or considered an OC Superman embodies most every aspect of a Mary Sue character that is close to being justified. He’s a perfect character, and that’s not a good thing. Perfection is unattractive, it is unattainable, and it is unrelatable.
Superman, at least to me, stands as a great role model, but a terrible character because he’s the perfect ‘character’. His flaws are self-imposed rather than being dynamic or organic. His personality is generally one sided and tends to be either black or white with little moral grey area in between. He’s a great character to introduce kids to, and to idolize but a poor one in many other regards.
As always, everyone’s entitled to their own opinions, and to support them as Nathan has done, but every opinion is open to debate and counterpoints.
This has been a random rant.
