Its hard being a DC fan. (Rant)

[Cicada 5]

You know the first thing we saw of an adult Clark is him saving some people from an oil rig. Lois flat out states the only reason she was able to track him down is because he kept saving people. The second film has him dying to save the world while telling the woman he loves how much she means to him.

Don't know why people ignore this.

Because most of that is telling us what a hero he is instead of showing us, and the other 5 hours of movie paint a different picture.

Him saving the bus fool of kids, his saving Lois from death after the ships' security attacks her, him surrendering to Zod and the fighting him when he threatens Earth, the montage of him saving people, the sacrifice at the end. How are the not showing? What exactly is it you're expecting here?

Superman doing Superman things is what we want to see. He fights Zod with little to no regard for his surroundings. He straight up kills a guy 2 minutes into BvS when he could've easily disarmed him and saved Lois. There was also no fucking reason for him to sacrifice himself. There really, really, really, really wasn't. Wonder Woman or Batman could've poked Not-Doomsday with the magic stick.

I don't know how many fights you've been but it's very difficult to pay attention to anything other than the guy bashing your face in. We don't know if the guy in the opening is dead. Batman was too weak to fight Doomsday and Wonder Woman was holding Doomsday so no, neither could use the spear at the time.

In the comics Superman goes out of his way to ensure there's not a lot of collateral damage. I'm pretty sure he's dead, no human could survive going through a few reinforced walls with that kind of force, and even if he survived he'd be paralyzed or fatally injured, which still goes against Superman's character. Are you telling me that Superman couldn't hold Doomsday while Wonder Woman got close enough to poke him? Because he easily could have done that.

The Superman in the comics had experience this one did not as well as an army of other superheroes to back him up. And besides he avoids collateral damage in BvS. I already explained why either of them could use that spear on Doomsday. Did you even watch the movie?

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

You know the first thing we saw of an adult Clark is him saving some people from an oil rig. Lois flat out states the only reason she was able to track him down is because he kept saving people. The second film has him dying to save the world while telling the woman he loves how much she means to him.

Don't know why people ignore this.

Because most of that is telling us what a hero he is instead of showing us, and the other 5 hours of movie paint a different picture.

Him saving the bus fool of kids, his saving Lois from death after the ships' security attacks her, him surrendering to Zod and the fighting him when he threatens Earth, the montage of him saving people, the sacrifice at the end. How are the not showing? What exactly is it you're expecting here?

Superman doing Superman things is what we want to see. He fights Zod with little to no regard for his surroundings. He straight up kills a guy 2 minutes into BvS when he could've easily disarmed him and saved Lois. There was also no fucking reason for him to sacrifice himself. There really, really, really, really wasn't. Wonder Woman or Batman could've poked Not-Doomsday with the magic stick.

So what about when they were rocking each others socks in Smallville and crashing through buildings that clearly had people in it? BvS clearly shows people in buildings that Zod and Superman were fighting through. He couldn't save the people he wasn't there to save, but he also couldn't be assed to try to save the people who were still around when he got there?
I don't know how many fights you've been but it's very difficult to pay attention to anything other than the guy bashing your face in. We don't know if the guy in the opening is dead. Batman was too weak to fight Doomsday and Wonder Woman was holding Doomsday so no, neither could use the spear at the time.

In the comics Superman goes out of his way to ensure there's not a lot of collateral damage. I'm pretty sure he's dead, no human could survive going through a few reinforced walls with that kind of force, and even if he survived he'd be paralyzed or fatally injured, which still goes against Superman's character. Are you telling me that Superman couldn't hold Doomsday while Wonder Woman got close enough to poke him? Because he easily could have done that.

I guess the only answer is for Superhero movies in general to stop having their big epic fights in Cities.

And Marvel is guilty of this aswell. I mean why did Ultron need to cut a chunk of land that had a city on top of it in the first place if the point was to basically make a Meteor big enough to destroy the world? Why does he need the city on top of the Rocky Chunk if it would be blown up anyway?

In the Marvel films the heroes clearly go out of their way to save as many people as possible and try to keep the fight contained. In the DC films they can't even do that.

BVS the fight with Doomsday was an empty ruin of a city.

Man of Steel: most of the city destruction was mostly done by the world engine. Superman had to deal with the one on the other side of the world. By the time Superman arrived at Metropolis the city was already 9/11ed.

For some reason my response didn't take. Anyways, Superman couldn't save the people who died when he wasn't there, but he couldn't be assed to save the people still around when he got there?

He could not because Zod was still punching him in the face. And I watched the whole fight carefully and it was Zod that was doing most of the destruction in that fight.

 

[Hawki]

I saw Civil War, where the Avengers are guilty of, ahem:

-Unintentionally causing civilian casualities in Lagos.

-Willfully endangering public life on the German freeway, not to mention carjacking

-Causing willful destruction of property and destruction at a German airport as part of a grudge match (not collatoral, multiple times they shoot right at the structures, such as Hawkeye intentionally sends cars crashing down)

-One of their number bringing a FIFTEEN YEAR OLD BOY to a fight with supersoldiers, psychics, and every other toy from the kitchen sink, whose only record of combat up to this point is street thugs (come to think of it, what did Spider-Man actually add to the movie in terms of plot? Seriously, cut him out, and the chain of events would remain the same)

And yet poor Superman, who's doing his best against an alien bent on erradicating all life on Earth after having been Superman for less than a day, is criticized on the basis that he didn't do better. Or killed Zod. Or whatever. Nevermind that he willingly saves people throughout the film up to this point.

Now, Civil War is a film I actually enjoyed, flawed as it as, but a lot of it is based around the prospect of "assholes vs. assholes," while in MoS, we have one man trying to do the best he can against a monster in every sense of the word. And yet, it's the one that gets criticized for showing that a) Superman isn't perfect, and b) this isn't a perfect world, and you can't save everyone.

 

[minkus_draconus]

...also The Brave and The Bold still cheers me up even if it is a tad goofy and silly, but thats what happens when you pilfer from the Silver Age I guess

It doesn't cheer you up even though it's a tad goofy, it cheers you up because it is a completely goofy. Brave and the Bold is a show about super heroes doing super things, and everything else can be damned. It's a show made for the sole purpose of being fun, and that was fantastic. And it featured probably the last truly new thing in the DC universe worth a damn.

I dare the movies to come up with something as brilliant, entertaining, and new as the Music Meister. Hell, I dare the comics to do it too.

It also goes kinda dark at times. Blue Beetle and Booster Gold, Starro, other things that escape my mind.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

...also The Brave and The Bold still cheers me up even if it is a tad goofy and silly, but thats what happens when you pilfer from the Silver Age I guess

It doesn't cheer you up even though it's a tad goofy, it cheers you up because it is a completely goofy. Brave and the Bold is a show about super heroes doing super things, and everything else can be damned. It's a show made for the sole purpose of being fun, and that was fantastic. And it featured probably the last truly new thing in the DC universe worth a damn.

I dare the movies to come up with something as brilliant, entertaining, and new as the Music Meister. Hell, I dare the comics to do it too.

It also goes kinda dark at times. Blue Beetle and Booster Gold, Starro, other things that escape my mind.

The episode 'The Chill of Night' where Batman confronts Joe Chill and at the end the villains (including the Joker) are implied to kill him because it's his fault Batman exists.

 

[FillerDmon]

I saw Civil War, where the Avengers are guilty of, ahem:

-Unintentionally causing civilian casualities in Lagos.

-Willfully endangering public life on the German freeway, not to mention carjacking

-Causing willful destruction of property and destruction at a German airport as part of a grudge match (not collatoral, multiple times they shoot right at the structures, such as Hawkeye intentionally sends cars crashing down)

-One of their number bringing a FIFTEEN YEAR OLD BOY to a fight with supersoldiers, psychics, and every other toy from the kitchen sink, whose only record of combat up to this point is street thugs (come to think of it, what did Spider-Man actually add to the movie in terms of plot? Seriously, cut him out, and the chain of events would remain the same)

And yet poor Superman, who's doing his best against an alien bent on erradicating all life on Earth after having been Superman for less than a day, is criticized on the basis that he didn't do better. Or killed Zod. Or whatever. Nevermind that he willingly saves people throughout the film up to this point.

Now, Civil War is a film I actually enjoyed, flawed as it as, but a lot of it is based around the prospect of "assholes vs. assholes," while in MoS, we have one man trying to do the best he can against a monster in every sense of the word. And yet, it's the one that gets criticized for showing that a) Superman isn't perfect, and b) this isn't a perfect world, and you can't save everyone.

I was under the assumption that the main core for "Superman was more responsible for the damage" was partially because of him literally punching his way through, what, 1 or two cities before the Weather Control Device nuked Metroplis, thus making it seem as if his default plan is to just keep punching, rather than attempt to drag it somewhere the fight wouldn't hurt anyone else in or to win it in all of 5 seconds, and in part the idea that Superman -is- stronger than basically everyone else and thus does bare more responsibility for shit going down in the process. That's just the most common complaints I hear, anyway. ...kinda why the idea of "Poor Superman" sounds inherently amusing. He's Superman! There's next to nothing he -can't- do!

(For the record, I'm just not a fan of the darker tone. Grew up watching the Superman Animated Series and the Justice League. That's the Superman I'm a defender/fanboy off.)

Slightly Fanboy Nitpicking, but I also thought that Tony was basically going to rebuild that entire airport and all the cars damaged with his endless money, hence the collateral there not mattering. And he did have evidence of SpiderMan being able to tank Cars and everything, though the point on his age still stands, and is part of why we can note Tony becoming more and more unhinged as he starts losing everything and struggling through all of his problems.

Also, Cap -was- being treated as being a criminal for the stunt he pulled with the cars, at least from what I remember. Arresting Captain Fucking America might be kinda award, but they basically were all but about to do so, weren't they?

And Marvel is guilty of this aswell. I mean why did Ultron need to cut a chunk of land that had a city on top of it in the first place if the point was to basically make a Meteor big enough to destroy the world? Why does he need the city on top of the Rocky Chunk if it would be blown up anyway?

Actually, pretty solid tactical reason to include the city Brawl on top. More time to get his plan into motion. Were it just a standard fight against his Ultron-roids, they'd have had less they needed to do. Adding "save as many people as we can" into it, and suddenly all the Avengers have to deal with fighting the minions, fighting the boss, and limiting casualties. Being a bad guy is easier with a hostage.

 

[Something Amyss]

Can't comment on any of the above shows rather than the Spider-Man ones - original post was only dealing with the comparison. I'm also in the position of not being able to watch either show right now (or really, ever, unless I import DVDs from the US and play them using my PC's software), but my memory, as flawed as it is, does point to the first episode (the only point of comparison) of each series feel less cluttered. Spectacular does introduce us to a lot of characters in its first episode, but it feels more organic - Octavius is a long way from being Doc Oc, Sandman and Rhino are a long way from getting their abilities, Norman Osborne won't be donning his Goblin suit for awhile, Eddie Brock is just a uni student, etc. The only villain that really gets a 'proper debut' per se is Vulture, who remains the main threat in the first episode.

In contrast, as I recall, Ultimate Spider-Man starts with Peter in a street battle, where we're then introduced to Nick Fury, who then introduces us to Iron Man and Captain America (done in a way that it expects us to know who these characters are), and we're then introduced to some weirdos who attack the school, who are acting on Doc Ock's and Osborne's instructions, and this is only the first episode, whereas next episode we'll be introduced to Peter's entire team, and...ugh. Oh, and Mary Jane exists because...she does.

Maybe the approach is just systemic of writing style, but confining this comparison entirely to the first one or two episodes of each series, Ultimate is the one that sticks out in my mind as being far more cluttered. Characters are introduced in both openings, but in Spectacular, I remember characters and one bona fide villain, whereas in Ultimate, it felt like villains, and a few characters.

I mean, fair enough on the non-Spidey stuff. Can't comment on what you haven't seen. I can't even go back and look at Ultimate season 1 because it looks like it's been pulled from streaming and there's no way I'm paying for that show. I am kind of forced to go on memory. But we aren't exactly held by the hand and walked through these various characters in Spectacular. In fact, I think this is one of the strengths of Weisman's writing: he world builds in a way that doesn't take you by the hand and say "LOOK! THIS IS A THING THAT IS SIGNIFICANT!" The show establishes a very dense lore very fast, and works with it for the run of its two seasons.

It seems we even agree on that to some extent. I suppose organic fits, but there's a lot there from the first episode. I'd say the difference between Spectacular and Ultimate is that one is good world building, and the other is horrible. One is Greg Weisman, and the other is...Peter Griffen, the Ultimate Family-Guy.

The other shows do stuff to varying degrees. Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes starts In Media Res, IIRC, but goes back and tells the origins of the major players over the next six episodes. I think this works, because it gives you some crunch to get you hooked and then tells newcomers what they need to know. Assemble instead uses Falcon as sort of a viewer avatar, the newbie to an established team, and builds things through his eyes. When other characters show up (such as GotG and Spidey), they tend to give enough info for a viewer to understand who they are. This strikes me as at least functional world building.

 

[Kenbo Slice]

You know the first thing we saw of an adult Clark is him saving some people from an oil rig. Lois flat out states the only reason she was able to track him down is because he kept saving people. The second film has him dying to save the world while telling the woman he loves how much she means to him.

Don't know why people ignore this.

Because most of that is telling us what a hero he is instead of showing us, and the other 5 hours of movie paint a different picture.

Him saving the bus fool of kids, his saving Lois from death after the ships' security attacks her, him surrendering to Zod and the fighting him when he threatens Earth, the montage of him saving people, the sacrifice at the end. How are the not showing? What exactly is it you're expecting here?

Superman doing Superman things is what we want to see. He fights Zod with little to no regard for his surroundings. He straight up kills a guy 2 minutes into BvS when he could've easily disarmed him and saved Lois. There was also no fucking reason for him to sacrifice himself. There really, really, really, really wasn't. Wonder Woman or Batman could've poked Not-Doomsday with the magic stick.

I don't know how many fights you've been but it's very difficult to pay attention to anything other than the guy bashing your face in. We don't know if the guy in the opening is dead. Batman was too weak to fight Doomsday and Wonder Woman was holding Doomsday so no, neither could use the spear at the time.

In the comics Superman goes out of his way to ensure there's not a lot of collateral damage. I'm pretty sure he's dead, no human could survive going through a few reinforced walls with that kind of force, and even if he survived he'd be paralyzed or fatally injured, which still goes against Superman's character. Are you telling me that Superman couldn't hold Doomsday while Wonder Woman got close enough to poke him? Because he easily could have done that.

The Superman in the comics had experience this one did not as well as an army of other superheroes to back him up. And besides he avoids collateral damage in BvS. I already explained why either of them could use that spear on Doomsday. Did you even watch the movie?

Yes I did. But are YOU telling me he couldn't hand the spear off to Wonder Woman (someone who almost rivals him in strength) while he distracted Doomsday and she stabbed him? He literally could've flown to her, handed it off, started punching Doomsday while she stabbed him. Tell me one good fucking reason why they couldn't have done that? Because all you've given me is "she was distracting him". They could've switched roles, easily.

 

[Cicada 5]

You know the first thing we saw of an adult Clark is him saving some people from an oil rig. Lois flat out states the only reason she was able to track him down is because he kept saving people. The second film has him dying to save the world while telling the woman he loves how much she means to him.

Don't know why people ignore this.

Because most of that is telling us what a hero he is instead of showing us, and the other 5 hours of movie paint a different picture.

Him saving the bus fool of kids, his saving Lois from death after the ships' security attacks her, him surrendering to Zod and the fighting him when he threatens Earth, the montage of him saving people, the sacrifice at the end. How are the not showing? What exactly is it you're expecting here?

Superman doing Superman things is what we want to see. He fights Zod with little to no regard for his surroundings. He straight up kills a guy 2 minutes into BvS when he could've easily disarmed him and saved Lois. There was also no fucking reason for him to sacrifice himself. There really, really, really, really wasn't. Wonder Woman or Batman could've poked Not-Doomsday with the magic stick.

They were in a fight and weren't familiar with each other's skills and powers. It's easy for us to sit here playing arm chair warrior but in a real fight to the death you don't have time to plan things through.




I don't know how many fights you've been but it's very difficult to pay attention to anything other than the guy bashing your face in. We don't know if the guy in the opening is dead. Batman was too weak to fight Doomsday and Wonder Woman was holding Doomsday so no, neither could use the spear at the time.

In the comics Superman goes out of his way to ensure there's not a lot of collateral damage. I'm pretty sure he's dead, no human could survive going through a few reinforced walls with that kind of force, and even if he survived he'd be paralyzed or fatally injured, which still goes against Superman's character. Are you telling me that Superman couldn't hold Doomsday while Wonder Woman got close enough to poke him? Because he easily could have done that.

The Superman in the comics had experience this one did not as well as an army of other superheroes to back him up. And besides he avoids collateral damage in BvS. I already explained why either of them could use that spear on Doomsday. Did you even watch the movie?

Yes I did. But are YOU telling me he couldn't hand the spear off to Wonder Woman (someone who almost rivals him in strength) while he distracted Doomsday and she stabbed him? He literally could've flown to her, handed it off, started punching Doomsday while she stabbed him. Tell me one good fucking reason why they couldn't have done that? Because all you've given me is "she was distracting him". They could've switched roles, easily.

 

[bastardofmelbourne]

Yes I did.

I believe you, but I've seen the film three times, and...

But are YOU telling me he couldn't hand the spear off to Wonder Woman (someone who almost rivals him in strength) while he distracted Doomsday and she stabbed him? He literally could've flown to her, handed it off, started punching Doomsday while she stabbed him. Tell me one good fucking reason why they couldn't have done that? Because all you've given me is "she was distracting him". They could've switched roles, easily.

At the time you're talking about, Wonder Woman has lasso'd Doomsday and is literally holding on with both hands, her feet wedged against a rock, her body almost horizontal trying to keep Doomsday in one spot. She looks like she's trying to rein in an elephant.

Superman is a hundred metres away with the Kryptonite spear. Even if Wonder Woman could hold Doomsday with the lasso indefinitely - which she can't, because he gets stronger the more she pulls and she has to pull more as he gets stronger - doing a switcheroo in the middle of that would just give Doomsday a chance to break free. And as for "distract him by punching," we've seen how effective punching Doomsday is because Superman's just spent like ten minutes punching him.

That's assuming Superman is capable of communicating to Wonder Woman what Kryptonite is, and why it's dangerous for him to use it, without distracting her enough that Doomsday could break free.

And assuming that he can do all of this in the time it takes Doomsday to shake off Batman's last kryptonite grenade.

It seemed pretty straightforward to me. The film has quite a few plot holes, but this wasn't one of them.

 

[HybridChangeling]

As a fan of DC/Marvel/Any good comic for real, I am sort of dissapointed in the DC movies lately. But the animated movies have been at best awesome (Red Hood) or at worst passable and still entertaining (Son of Batman). For every bad DC movie there are 2 awesome animated movies with more complexity and fun to them. Batman Mask of the Phantasm, Under the Red Hood, Return of the Joker, all of these I consider better then the new batman movies (excluding Dark Knight because Dark Knight its pretty awesome) because of how great they are.

As for comics, sure some of them suck. Red Hood and the Outlaws was such a WASTED concept, Red Hood trying to be a hero with his other friends like Arsenal doing the same sounded like an awesome and complex idea. Instead, it was stupid fanservice that made little sense and ended at 40. Red Hood and Arsenal is doing better but still. But with good comics, I have been enjoying Batman Eternal as well as the Catwoman series where she is a mob boss. It rocks. Gotham Academy apparently pleased some of my friends, which is cool.

If you just see the angsty comics and the new movies, you aren't looking right. It would be like focusing on Agents of Shield and using that as an example for Marvel on it's own. Broaden your DC horizons, you won't regret it.