Is it weird I got this far in my own thread without noticing a typo in the title? Whoops.
On top of them making Supes being necessary a plot point, they have multiple instances where they demonstrate the redundancy of other characters. Like when Flash is rescuing that family. It's easier to accept when the movie doesn't rub your face in it repeatedly.
I mean, the "slowpoke" scene is funny, but funny at the expense of the movie itself, because it renders a character pretty much completely redundant. And not a Batman or a Captain America, but a man who is too fast for the naked eye...SONIC THE HED...sorry, got carried away.
I saw complaints about inconsistent power levels in Infinity Wars, like the guy who survived being cooked by a star being on the same battlefield as Steve and T?halla, but even then, the momentum of the fight changes when he gets involved. Or even Iron Man vs Hulk when it comes to fighting Thanos...one is fighting smarter, and that seems to be the big differencer.. Is it strictly balanced? I don't know, someone's probably calculated the strongest feats of both characters, but...because they don't go "this is stupid!" I'm willing to accept it.
"Why didn't Thor do X" is another one which is interesting, because it fits with what Seth said in terms of meta knowledge. After Ragnarok, Thor took a serious level increase, and so him not being a megabadass in prior movies makes sense.
One ting that bugs the crap out of me, though, is that they do draw attention too the fact that they're in the time war and it shouldn't be possible. It's kind of like the Superman example to me, except...I guess they were damned if they said anything and damned if they didn't, because someone would be instead mad they didn't explain why the Doctor could suddenly interact with time-locked events.
The whole special makes me wonder if Moffat had planned this the entire time, and given how things turn out, it could have been so. that would mean that the Time Lords had always been there in his run, and none of this is a flaw in the timeline anyway.
Which, I suppose, is another reason I'll cut it some slack. But it's mostly Hurt, Tennant and Smith together. Granddad and sand shoes.
And while it's arguably silly that Cap is on the same battlefield with Thor, they give him something to do with fits with his power level usually and they don't draw attention to it.Hawki said:Avengers has a similar problem, but I think the Avengers films pull this off slightly better than JL. In that:
-As you point out, Supes being OP is an actual plot point in JL. The closest thing to 'god mode' the Avengers has is the Hulk, and using him comes with his own set of risks.
-The Avengers are a bit more vulnerable than JL, least in the films. Stark's a guy in a suit, and otherwise mortal. Cap has significant mobility issues, and still has limits. They've got Thor, sure, but the JL has Wonder Woman and Aquaman, the former of which is the daughter of a god, the latter of which is a metahuman.
On top of them making Supes being necessary a plot point, they have multiple instances where they demonstrate the redundancy of other characters. Like when Flash is rescuing that family. It's easier to accept when the movie doesn't rub your face in it repeatedly.
I mean, the "slowpoke" scene is funny, but funny at the expense of the movie itself, because it renders a character pretty much completely redundant. And not a Batman or a Captain America, but a man who is too fast for the naked eye...SONIC THE HED...sorry, got carried away.
I saw complaints about inconsistent power levels in Infinity Wars, like the guy who survived being cooked by a star being on the same battlefield as Steve and T?halla, but even then, the momentum of the fight changes when he gets involved. Or even Iron Man vs Hulk when it comes to fighting Thanos...one is fighting smarter, and that seems to be the big differencer.. Is it strictly balanced? I don't know, someone's probably calculated the strongest feats of both characters, but...because they don't go "this is stupid!" I'm willing to accept it.
"Why didn't Thor do X" is another one which is interesting, because it fits with what Seth said in terms of meta knowledge. After Ragnarok, Thor took a serious level increase, and so him not being a megabadass in prior movies makes sense.
That's why I said "ostebsibly", because there's definitely wiggle room. So Ten says he's seen it burn, nd it's ambiguous because they establish that Time Lord memory gets fuzzy when it comes to recalling them crossing their own timeline. Did he see Gallifrey burn, or does he remember it from John Hurt's perspective? We don't know.I got the sense that in Day of the Doctor, it was iffy as to whether the Doctor had changed history, or whether this was what always happened - that Gallifrey had never been destroyed at all.
I prefer the second interpretation, at least if it's a must that Gallifrey return to the setting. Much as I like the episode in question, I'm far more iffy about Gallifrey and the Time Lords. Like, the daleks are still around, the Time Lords are still around, so what effect does the war have on the setting now apart from early references to species like the gelth?
One ting that bugs the crap out of me, though, is that they do draw attention too the fact that they're in the time war and it shouldn't be possible. It's kind of like the Superman example to me, except...I guess they were damned if they said anything and damned if they didn't, because someone would be instead mad they didn't explain why the Doctor could suddenly interact with time-locked events.
The whole special makes me wonder if Moffat had planned this the entire time, and given how things turn out, it could have been so. that would mean that the Time Lords had always been there in his run, and none of this is a flaw in the timeline anyway.
Which, I suppose, is another reason I'll cut it some slack. But it's mostly Hurt, Tennant and Smith together. Granddad and sand shoes.