Why is DC sucking so much?

[GloatingSwine]

As Moviebob himself points out in his skewering of the general DCEU, there's no reason a film couldn't introduce the Justice League in something shorter than two and half hours, and then have everything spiral out from there. You can ably introduce a half dozen or so people and make a good film with the right structure. Seven Samurai does it, it's Western knockoff does it, Fellowship of the Ring does it, along with a number of other extremely well regarded films that delineate their characters.

If you're making a point about how a movie can introduce an ensemble in a reasonable amount of time, a three and a half hour and then a three hour movie are possibly not your optimal examples :P


That said, sure, Justice League could have introduced all its characters in a proper well structured two hour movie if it hadn't started out as a three hour movie and been cut down for time.

Especially because all it really needed to introduce were Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg (and Cyborg has never really been an individually interesting character in the comics, even in the Teen Titans cartoon he was clearly the one they never had a handle on and episodes that focused on him tended to be the weakest).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

That said, sure, Justice League could have introduced all its characters in a proper well structured two hour movie if it hadn't started out as a three hour movie and been cut down for time.

If MovieBob is to be believed, it is actually two films cut down and combined into a single one. Superman would've been dead for the entirety of the first one, and only resurrected in the second, or at the end of the first as the Hope Spot.

GW

[Piedmon_Sama]

And Martian Manhunter is from, well, Mars but that doesn't stop either of them from being as American as apple pie.

What on earth is particularly 'American' about J'onn or Logan? o__O

[Legato Endless]

If you're making a point about how a movie can introduce an ensemble in a reasonable amount of time, a three and a half hour and then a three hour movie are possibly not your optimal examples :P

Heh, fair point. They're the first things that come to my mind, but picking shorter ensemble films would certainly be more illustrative.

[Rater202]

What on earth is particularly 'American' about J'onn or Logan? o__O

In Logan's case, he smokes, drinks, and isn't afraid to kill the bad guys if they need killing.

[2D8HP]

Technically, but he's typically treated as American by the narrative of the stories, and he almost always stays in America. He's not exactly what you'd think of when you envision your typical Canadian.

.
It appears that you NEED!!! an expert on Canadians.
Despite my STUNNING HUMILITY!!!, I'm FORCED!!! to admit that not only did I spend most of a day in Montreal, I also spent nights in Ottawa (thank you Miss Chartrand) in 1988 and I watched the films Canadian Bacon and Strange Brew (which featured eminent Canadian actor Max von Sydow), thus I AM AN EXPERT!! on Canadians (but still HUMBLE).

I cite dialogue from the 1983 filmThe Wolverine:

Jean Grey: Wake up, wake up, wake up.
[Logan awakes turns and sees Jean Grey in bed next to him.] Where were you?:

Logan: I don't know. Nagasaki.

Jean: That's far back. [starts kissing his shoulder]

Logan: You're here?

Jean: Of course.

Logan: Can you stay?

Jean: You know I can't.

Logan: Oh, Jean. I'm so sorry.

Could only be proven more Canadian if he also said, "je suis vraiment désolé".

-Your welcome.

[Avilan the Grey]

In Logan's case, he smokes, drinks, and isn't afraid to kill the bad guys if they need killing.

So he's Scottish? Finnish? Russian?

[Mikemical]

I enjoy their stuff anyways, but I think it's because they're not taking their time to build up the story with their movies. They're just rushing through it.

Pretty much this. Compared to MCU, which took years of laying down foundations before they went and made The Avengers, the DCU has been several hits and misses one after the other ever since Nolan's Dark Knight films without giving people the chance to get attached to the characters before they scrap them for a new one. So they went and retconned everything with The Man of Steel, then Batman VS Superman, then Suicide Squad, now Justice League. Come next year, we'll probably be seeing advances of something like Injustice only so they try to compete against Infinity War(and fail miserably).

Wonder Woman was amazing though. Literally "how to make a good superhero movie". Shame it's in the same bag of cats as BvS, SS and JL.

[Piedmon_Sama]

I'll just say that while Canada generally deserves its reputation as a very law-abiding country, it has a truly ENORMOUS amount of wilderness, and plenty of low-population fringe communities, and more than its share of wild men, biker societies and general roughneck types.

e: something to consider, Canada and the USA share a very similar 'frontier' past and culture with the big difference that in much of Canada the environment itself was far more likely to kill you.

[Rater202]

I'll just say that while Canada generally deserves its reputation as a very law-abiding country, it has a truly ENORMOUS amount of wilderness, and plenty of low-population fringe communities, and more than its share of wild men, biker societies and general roughneck types.

e: something to consider, Canada and the USA share a very similar 'frontier' past and culture with the big difference that in much of Canada the environment itself was far more likely to kill you.

To quote a certain comedian, the reason Canada doesn't have as much gun violence is that "a moose doesn't count as a homicide."

[Kitten Champion]

Whenever Logan is being Logan - as in a place of his own preference doing what he wants - he's somewhere isolated, forested, and what few people he chooses to associate with are the hard working blue collar-types. The northern stretches of Canada thematically fits his characterization and power-set that I would say it's a part of him conceptually.

This is why the Logan from Logan being a limo driver living near the Mexico border was so at odds with who he was as a person and getting away from that both physically and mentally was important to the process of rebuilding himself over the course of the movie, and why his grave ending up where it did felt so suitable for him.

[Sapphire Guard]

Don't quite agree with that Moviebob thesis, but I'll agree to disagree.

Re: The DCEU, the Trinity are famous enough that they don't need as much setup time as the MCU did. The intros were fine until Justice League, where time constraints evidently cut a lot of necessary backstory (which is the execs and/or Whedon's fault, as Snyder was long gone by the time the final cut was decided on.)

Given the mandate to stay under two hours, some of the stuff they kept in were very strange choices.

Spoiler: Justice League scenes

Show

Batman on rooftop with random thug...what's the point of this? He could just be drawn in by the kidnappings from STAR labs later. He was already assembling a team anyway.

Diana and terrorists- a good scene, but nothing very important happens in it, it's just -'here's Diana being Diana'

Most of Atlantis and Themyscira could go. Do a reshoot of a Parademon attack on Aquaman to get him involved in the invasion.

Graveyard racism jokes- is this really necessary?

Cutaways to Family in not-Chernobyl- most of this could go without being missed.

Use that time to put back in some Cyborg/Flash/Aquaman, and you might make your two hours without losing too much of the introductions.

[Vinyadan]

Logan is Texan. He never leaves home without his weapons.

As an external observer, I'd say that DC is pushing out much material for the sake of the hype, internet meme overdone hype in particular. BvS as a concept was here. Suicide Squad was so much here that it was embarrassing. Beside the cast choice, there was the whole shipping undercurrent. But, if you only care for the hype, you end up in situations where the story can't hold up, because the ingredients for hype raising aren't the same as those for making a good story, or a good film.

[Kitten Champion]

Logan is Texan. He never leaves home without his weapons.

As an external observer, I'd say that DC is pushing out much material for the sake of the hype, internet meme overdone hype in particular. BvS as a concept was here. Suicide Squad was so much here that it was embarrassing. Beside the cast choice, there was the whole shipping undercurrent. But, if you only care for the hype, you end up in situations where the story can't hold up, because the ingredients for hype raising aren't the same as those for making a good story, or a good film.

And you get stuff like like the BvS trailers, which basically remove any and all surprises - like Doomsday and Wonder Woman's reveal - the movie might've had in store for you because WB wanted to change the tide of negative hype surrounding the production caused quite a bit by their own basic incompetence.

I know I was like "and now I've seen this movie, thanks".

[Anonymouswizard]

At this point I'm just not seeing a DC movie until they do a Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn one. Not only is that much better relationship goals than the two clowns, a superhero film revolving around two villains be interesting. I do mean revolving around them, not just having two villains but having them be the bad guys and focusing on them.

It would at least be different.

[Avilan the Grey]

I REALLY want a Harley and Ivy movie. Not only would that bring back the first openly canon gay relationship in comics, it is also a far healthier relationship for Harley, and it is a far more interesting dynamic BECAUSE they are a good influence on eachother. *

Plus, as said above, having a superhero movie with two villains actually FREE, not under a leash and a whip like in Suicide Squad, would be very interesting.


*As iconic as the Joker is, I have never truly found him interesting. He is... TOO crazy, to the point of becoming one-dimensional.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Don't quite agree with that Moviebob thesis, but I'll agree to disagree.

Re: The DCEU, the Trinity are famous enough that they don't need as much setup time as the MCU did.

That only works if you actually use the Trinity from the comics. You cannot do that and then do emo mopey "darker and edgier" Superman.

GW

[Metahuman1]

Assault, theft, obstruction of justice, interfering with police in the lawful execution of their duties, resisting arrest. And that is only in one scene.

There are moral ways to protest the Sokovia Accords, just like there are moral ways to protest some laws. See, for example, Ghandi, Rosa Park and MLK. But Captain America employed none of those. He unilaterally decided he was right and everyone else was wrong, and therefore that he could do whatever he wanted. That whole "The world tells you to move, you tell it you won't" speech? That is terrifying, when you consider who might decide that applies to them (Frank Castle, for example).

*Snip*

Grey Wolf

I feel the need to point out that Agents of Shield showed the Accords being implemented.

We saw supers being registered. Those that refused were being locked up for not registering. Unless, or course, they were willing to work for a shadowy government organization that spent most of it's time existing being a cover and operating arm of Hydra doing black ops.

We also saw that that database apparently took mere weeks to get hacked into by genocidal nuts, and then found out it wasn't even hacked, it was leaked by a government official with a bend toward Identity Racial Politics who evidently RAN on that platform and got elected.

A system like that is something I'd say it's generally fairly moral to take a stand against.


And that's not even getting into the fact that these people put freaking general ROSS in charge!

Or that, shockingly, the good treatment of prisoners Tony talked up didn't happen.

Or that they were perfectly ready and willing to let T'Chala kill under the accords with impunity for whatever personal reason he happened to have. While objecting to Rogers NOT wanting to rack up a body count for no other reason then Ross. Specifically that Ross wanted to prove he was swinging the biggest male anatomy on the planet, cause he has a pathological need to have the biggest male anatomy on the planet, and always has had that need.

Hells at the rate this is going After Infinity War, Asgaurd is going to set up shop on earth, Ross is going to lead humanity into War with Thor and Hulk to get them under his thumb no matter the body count.

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly? That's not exactly how the accords were presented in the film. While I'm all against the idea of registering people who are different (with the potential exception of highly dangerous powers*) and agree that it'll create problems even without people going on killing sprees (employers discriminating against those with low level powers for one).

The core idea present in the film, oversight of superhero activities, is a great big can of 'good in theory, depends on who's in charge in practice'. While we can agree that most of the Avengers are moral people that's highly unlikely to be the case for most people who choose to put on a cape (look at how Tony began his caping days). It really depends on how far the oversight extends, and also if it's preemptive or retrospective. I honestl don't remember the film having much discussion of how it would work.


* Which in this case includes powers on the level of a gun for quickly and easily harming another, pre-enchanced Scorch from Agents of Shield would be borderline but I think on the not registered side, and I don't think Captain America would come close. But I'm also a big believer in firearm controls in real life, which influences my view.

[Metahuman1]

The film told you what you needed to know when Ross stepped in and gave the Avengers a Dressing down for not being able to tell him were Thor and Hulk were, in exact coordinateds, right that second, on the grounds that they were nuclear weapons that needed to be kept track of.


And then proceeded to order kill on sight for Winter Solider. Cause, you know, questioning or looking through what are now suppose to be public records on the guy or listening to the guy you got the info out that your boss use to be Hydra and they nearly murdered you a couple of years back is for suckers. Let me repeat that. Even after the movie he was in with Hulk and seeing what his thinking caused, even after seeing what they could do, he thinks Hulk, a guy who can brawl at a level worthy of gods, and Thor, an ACTUAL god, are just Nukes for him to order about and deploy as he sees fit and that's all.

And then was totally ok with Letting Black Panther Murder him with impunity for no other reason than Revenge and Black Panther had some political connections which means the rules don't apply to him.

And with Stark opting that revenge fueled Murder is something he's also allowed to do because the rules don't apply to him either. Never mind letting the guy who's mastermind every death so far on screen this movie freaking get away wtih it and that I'm playing right into his hands, I want what makes me feel good inside and that is literally the only thing in the universe that matters to me damn it!

And Stark opting to just straight up imprison Wanda for the crime of having been a successful Hydra experiment that has powers.





This was never ever going to have a chance of being the version Stark talked up. The Presenting? That was all it ever was. Talk. PR. It wouldn't work in the reality they lived in and could only end one way. Badly. Very, Very, VERY badly.


As I said, we saw what happened after the movie as well. We know those weren't isolated incidents while things were new. This was what that thing Stark was harping at Cap to sign was designed to do from the ground up and all the way to it's very core. These things were not bugs. They were freaking features. Because the people that wrote it weren't actually Stark, and anything they didn't put in up front they left themselves the room and power to change with out Stark's OK after the fact. Hell's they did it when Ross made it clear to Stark HE was calling the shots now near the end of the movie after the airport battle.

We saw more of this on the show. See the bit about An Elected Government Official giving a genocidal racial supremicist Group a list of the names, powers and addresses of all the super humans in the USA and the weapons tech to try a coordinated effort to murder all the one's who'd registered but opted NOT to become Government Black Op's Agents. She ran on a wipe them all out Platform and got elected on it and got away with it. (Sure, Karma and Supervillans later got her but in the eyes of the law, she was never proven to have done a damn thing wrong. Legally, she was still untouchable.)

I got news, she could do it, anyone and everyone in the government can now do it, any time. Or they can go the other way, they can look up the family's of the registered and black mail them with there continued safety and well being. (That latter part? "Oh, ok, I can just call my buddy at the IRS and your dear mother can spend the rest of her life in jail for Tax Evasion if you don't want to play ball for my personal gain." Hells it would be even easier than trying to kill them while remaining the image of being clean.)




This is canonically what Cap was opposing and Stark was pushing.

[Anonymouswizard]

Stuff.

This is canonically what Cap was opposing and Stark was pushing.

Except that's not how it was presented in the film, which was more 'oversight versus freedom' with a dash of 'saving my friend'. All the stuff you mentioned was right, but taking the film on it's own (and if we're discussing the film, not the Accords, that's what we should do) then it does show that there are problems with oversight but doesn't explain why the Accords cause more problems than that.

[Drascin]

Except that's not how it was presented in the film, which was more 'oversight versus freedom' with a dash of 'saving my friend'. All the stuff you mentioned was right, but taking the film on it's own (and if we're discussing the film, not the Accords, that's what we should do) then it does show that there are problems with oversight but doesn't explain why the Accords cause more problems than that.

No, a lot of that is definitely implied in the film.

I don't know Agents of Shield or whatever, but I did watch the movie, and while IRL I'm a fervent proponent of oversight, in the movie the Sokovia Accords smelled clearly of rat.

Like, it instantly made me twitch when Ross threw a huge document on the table and went "you have three days to agree or we remove you", with clearly nobody around the table having the slightest idea of what was going on. A giant UN resolution takes time to make. It has a process. A public process. Where experts are brought in and diplomats decide on things carefully and stuff. And yet none of the Avengers seemed to know anything about it. The world's only superhero team was not even consulted when drafting legislation that would affect superheroes? With no public process? Sprung from nowhere what, a week after a highly visible incident that would help public opinion forget all these facts?

Yeah, that smelled a lot less like "we want oversight" and a lot more like "we want control of this superpowerful weapon for our own interests". Which is, if you remember, Cap's biggest sticking point. He worried that it would make the Avengers more or less a gun to be pointed at things. And seeing how things were developed, who is advocating for it (Thunderbolt Ross is a known psychotic control freak, and any plan he spearheads instantly loses multiple points of credibility), and the fact that Cap just got done removing a literal nazi conspiracy from the seats where this plan would by necessity have come from? His misgivings about the shape of this oversight seemed rather reasonable.

[Keltest]

Except that's not how it was presented in the film, which was more 'oversight versus freedom' with a dash of 'saving my friend'. All the stuff you mentioned was right, but taking the film on it's own (and if we're discussing the film, not the Accords, that's what we should do) then it does show that there are problems with oversight but doesn't explain why the Accords cause more problems than that.

For that matter, a non-trivial argument by some of the pro-accord people was "yeah, its distasteful, but theyre going to do it with or without us, so if we cooperate, we can at least try to keep it as much on our terms as possible." They aren't oblivious to the fact that they aren't going to just be "the avengers, with official badges". But if they have to get dragged kicking and screaming into playing ball, theyre going to have a lot less leverage.

[Metahuman1]

Except that's not how it was presented in the film, which was more 'oversight versus freedom' with a dash of 'saving my friend'. All the stuff you mentioned was right, but taking the film on it's own (and if we're discussing the film, not the Accords, that's what we should do) then it does show that there are problems with oversight but doesn't explain why the Accords cause more problems than that.

i sited several things that throw that claim out the window that were in the movie. Prominently displayed in fact.





Edit: Regarding the "Were going to do it with or with out you." point.


I so dearly want to see them trying to tell Thor, Hulk and Dr. Strange that one. I want to see them manage to create World Breaker Hulk while picking simultaneous fights with The God Of Thunder AND The Sorcerer Supreme.



Really stop and think about exactly how poorly THAT one would go.

And don't even think of telling me Ross wouldn't jump to do it with a giggle and a grin.

[Keltest]

i sited several things that throw that claim out the window that were in the movie. Prominently displayed in fact.





Edit: Regarding the "Were going to do it with or with out you." point.


I so dearly want to see them trying to tell Thor, Hulk and Dr. Strange that one. I want to see them manage to create World Breaker Hulk while picking simultaneous fights with The God Of Thunder AND The Sorcerer Supreme.



Really stop and think about exactly how poorly THAT one would go.

And don't even think of telling me Ross wouldn't jump to do it with a giggle and a grin.

I'm sure that's relevant for Bruce Banner and Steven Strange, but for Clint or Wanda? Or Steve? Even without the Avengers who signed on, that's still not a winning scenario for them.

Also, theres been interested parties after the Hulk ever since he was created. Notably, the world has not yet ended because of it.

[RossN]

I have a lot of sympathy for the recent tragedy Zack Snyder suffered and I greatly respect his stepping away from the films.

That said I think a lot of the ploblems with the DC films can be lain at his door. I once saw Batman vs. Superman described as 'the Superman film Lex Luthor would make'. Synder really, really doesn't get Clark Kent and if you don't understand Clark you don't really understand Superman.

[Dr.Samurai]

The film told you what you needed to know when Ross stepped in and gave the Avengers a Dressing down for not being able to tell him were Thor and Hulk were, in exact coordinateds, right that second, on the grounds that they were nuclear weapons that needed to be kept track of.

He didn't ask for exact coordinates, and it was a rhetorical question because he already knew the answer; no one knows where Thor and Banner are. Cap is saying "we made the world a safer place" and Ross is saying that Cap's "we" includes an uncontrollable Hulk that went ballistic in the previous film and had to be taken down, and a god from another planet (that happened to come to Earth with his brother who invaded with an army of aliens). Ross is asking Captain to qualify the claim that the Earth is safer when these powerful beings are running around and no one knows where they are. He's talking about oversight.

And then proceeded to order kill on sight for Winter Solider.

The Winter Soldier is an already known enemy of the United States, with an almost mythic reputation. He was implicated in Hydra's takeover of SHIELD (and Ross showed the eventual consequences of that in the DC footage) and now he's returned to assassinate the king of Wakanda. The Winter Soldier has evaded capture for decades, almost a century, and is a hyper-lethal vector. A kill on sight order seems pretty reasonable.

Cause, you know, questioning or looking through what are now suppose to be public records on the guy or listening to the guy you got the info out that your boss use to be Hydra and they nearly murdered you a couple of years back is for suckers. Let me repeat that. Even after the movie he was in with Hulk and seeing what his thinking caused, even after seeing what they could do, he thinks Hulk, a guy who can brawl at a level worthy of gods, and Thor, an ACTUAL god, are just Nukes for him to order about and deploy as he sees fit and that's all.

Banner struggles to not hulk-out, and Thor fought against his brother to save Manhattan (or rather, the world lol). So yes, if it is an option to have oversight on these people (read: some control) then of course Ross is going to try that. They are super powerful but display a respectable character.

If Banner hulked out whenever he felt like it and didn't care about harming people, Ross would be trying to destroy him or trying to contain him forcibly (like a collar that depresses their abilities or something). Ross has a job. He isn't in the movie to be a hero.

And then was totally ok with Letting Black Panther Murder him with impunity for no other reason than Revenge and Black Panther had some political connections which means the rules don't apply to him.

Black Panther supported the Accords, so presumably he signed on. Further, Ross doesn't care *why* Black Panther is killing the Winter Soldier, only that the Winter Soldier is killed. If Black Panther is working within the Accords to do it, Ross could care less about his motives.

And with Stark opting that revenge fueled Murder is something he's also allowed to do because the rules don't apply to him either. Never mind letting the guy who's mastermind every death so far on screen this movie freaking get away wtih it and that I'm playing right into his hands, I want what makes me feel good inside and that is literally the only thing in the universe that matters to me damn it!

Stark is reacting emotionally at the end of the movie. He is not thinking about the Accords like... at all. Nothing that has happened in the movie matters to him in that moment, because he just witnessed the brutal murder of his mother and father. What exactly is your complaint here? That Tony is human and was successfully manipulated emotionally?

And Stark opting to just straight up imprison Wanda for the crime of having been a successful Hydra experiment that has powers.

Eh, no. He restricted her movement because she lost control of her powers, accidentally caused the murder of dozens of people (which may affect her control over her powers further due to her emotions), and the Accords were in the works and her presence outside where she might cause a fear reaction would not help them in that regard.

Like, it instantly made me twitch when Ross threw a huge document on the table and went "you have three days to agree or we remove you", with clearly nobody around the table having the slightest idea of what was going on. A giant UN resolution takes time to make. It has a process. A public process. Where experts are brought in and diplomats decide on things carefully and stuff. And yet none of the Avengers seemed to know anything about it. The world's only superhero team was not even consulted when drafting legislation that would affect superheroes? With no public process? Sprung from nowhere what, a week after a highly visible incident that would help public opinion forget all these facts?

It is implied that Tony was aware of it.

It's a movie, so no, they aren't going to take months to hammer out an Accords and revise and resubmit over and over and over again, and negotiate and pull out and then re-support, etc. Presumably, the 100+ nations that signed onto it felt strongly about it and agreed to make the Avengers an asset of the United Nations or they get disbanded. They don't need to consult the handful of private citizens. They are US citizens (mostly) and are at the whims of the laws and policies that their elected and appointed officials craft and agree to.

Yeah, that smelled a lot less like "we want oversight" and a lot more like "we want control of this superpowerful weapon for our own interests".

It can be both. I don't think anyone is arguing that the Accords are purely innocent in intent. But obviously the UN will want to control an American group of super-powered individuals, at the very least to say "no, you can't just cross sovereign borders and attack people and cause all types of damage and mayhem at your own discretion".

Which is, if you remember, Cap's biggest sticking point. He worried that it would make the Avengers more or less a gun to be pointed at things. And seeing how things were developed, who is advocating for it (Thunderbolt Ross is a known psychotic control freak, and any plan he spearheads instantly loses multiple points of credibility), and the fact that Cap just got done removing a literal nazi conspiracy from the seats where this plan would by necessity have come from? His misgivings about the shape of this oversight seemed rather reasonable.

I don't think the movie suggests that Ross was spear-heading the Accords. It's the other governments (like Wakanda) that can't tolerate this group of private American citizens running around wrecking ****. And he says "I think *we* have a solution". It's not Ross. Remember, 117 countries signed onto the Accords. Ross is there because he's the Secretary of State and this is a group headquartered in the United States. I'm sure he's chomping at the bit to have the Avengers under supervision, but they will be controlled by the UN, not him. He may be an intermediary but he will eventually have to answer to the UN as well.

[theNater]

It can be both. I don't think anyone is arguing that the Accords are purely innocent in intent.

I get what you're saying here. No rules are perfect, it's always a question of upsides vs. downsides. The basic intent of the Sokovia Accords will have the upside of keeping supers under control, and the downside that supers may be legally compelled to act in ways they find morally questionable. On it's face, these seem like a reasonable set of rules. But they have a particular problem:

Stark is reacting emotionally at the end of the movie. He is not thinking about the Accords like... at all.

They don't actually keep supers under control. There's no upside. So we're trading in this risk of abuse for no benefit. That's not a reasonable exchange.

[Keltest]

I get what you're saying here. No rules are perfect, it's always a question of upsides vs. downsides. The basic intent of the Sokovia Accords will have the upside of keeping supers under control, and the downside that supers may be legally compelled to act in ways they find morally questionable. On it's face, these seem like a reasonable set of rules. But they have a particular problem:


They don't actually keep supers under control. There's no upside. So we're trading in this risk of abuse for no benefit. That's not a reasonable exchange.

In what way don't they keep supers under control? Steve and the others have to go underground or risk being detained again. They are, functionally, retired, which was one of the whole points.

[Anteros]

In what way don't they keep supers under control? Steve and the others have to go underground or risk being detained again. They are, functionally, retired, which was one of the whole points.

Except the like...14 super powered fights that took place in public since then? With presumably a lot more to come.