Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 223
  1. - Top - End - #151
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Metahuman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rogar Demonblud View Post
    No, it hasn't. Studios only get half (actually, about 48.5%) of the box office. Marketing and advertising is also a thing that isn't included in the production budget; how much it is varies with each film, but given WB's push on Justice League industry pundits are assuming it's a hefty 60% increase.

    So the movie cost ballpark $480 million, which means they need the box office take to get north of $960 million before it turns a profit. Current projections are that it likely won't get much past $700 before Last Jedi shows up and eats its lunch.

    edit:

    "Oversight" apparently doesn't exist, because it's just control. Ross stated outright that the Avengers and/or any other registered people will only deploy when higher authority gives them permission to. Oversight and accountability would follow more like what Cap did in his first movie, where he took off to raid the factory and free the prisoners, returns to camp and walks right up to his superior and says "I'd like to surrender myself for disciplinary action."
    Precisely.

    And further, ROSS IS ONE OF THOSE AUTHORITY FIGURES! AND HE HAS A LONG HISTORY OF DOING WHATEVER HE WANTS AND GETTING AWAY WITH IT!!!!!! Geez he straight up created The Abomination! WE KNOW for a FACT he CAN'T be trusted to so much as be a messenger and he has authority to straight up tell the Avengers were and when they can or will deploy.

    And you can tell me about his UN oversight the moment you can point to screen time of Ross saying do A, the UN reps saying do B, and everyone Doing B because the UN outranks Ross. It's not a valid defense before that happens.



    As for being able to take them cause Thor and Hulk aren't there, yeah, Ross straight up said that there Nuclear weapons to be kept track of. I promise you he's gonna try to do it if the Accords are still in effect when New Asguard sets up on earth. He's going to try and tell both of them to register and submit to his authority. He's wanted Authority on Hulk for years and the UN just GAVE IT TO HIM ON A SILVER PLATTER!!!!!!!!

    The only good thing that might happen is we might get World War Hulk out of the deal. Or that scene from shortly after Civil War when Thor comes back to earth, hears about Starks BS, gives him a dressing down and ends it on a note of "Your a man, who wears a metal suit, that runs on electricity. I. Am. The. God. Of. Thunder. Do you think this was wise?" And proceeds to slag Starks armor and make it clear to him the only reason Stark was surviving this was because this was his warning to back off if he valued his life.


    The only way they are gonna avoid this is if they scrap the accords before he get's his chance, or he does, it happens, the UN takes one look at this and decides it chooses not getting vaporized form orbit, and resends the Accords.



    Because we know, flat out, the only thing they've got that has a fighting chance against Hulk is Starks Hulk Buster, and it had to outright get lucky against Hulk the first time. And that was JUST Hulk. If he's gotta deal with Thor as well, yeah, this goes badly for Stark VERY fast.
    "I Burn!"

  2. - Top - End - #152
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Metahuman1 View Post
    Precisely.

    And further, ROSS IS ONE OF THOSE AUTHORITY FIGURES! AND HE HAS A LONG HISTORY OF DOING WHATEVER HE WANTS AND GETTING AWAY WITH IT!!!!!! Geez he straight up created The Abomination! WE KNOW for a FACT he CAN'T be trusted to so much as be a messenger and he has authority to straight up tell the Avengers were and when they can or will deploy.

    And you can tell me about his UN oversight the moment you can point to screen time of Ross saying do A, the UN reps saying do B, and everyone Doing B because the UN outranks Ross. It's not a valid defense before that happens.



    As for being able to take them cause Thor and Hulk aren't there, yeah, Ross straight up said that there Nuclear weapons to be kept track of. I promise you he's gonna try to do it if the Accords are still in effect when New Asguard sets up on earth. He's going to try and tell both of them to register and submit to his authority. He's wanted Authority on Hulk for years and the UN just GAVE IT TO HIM ON A SILVER PLATTER!!!!!!!!

    The only good thing that might happen is we might get World War Hulk out of the deal. Or that scene from shortly after Civil War when Thor comes back to earth, hears about Starks BS, gives him a dressing down and ends it on a note of "Your a man, who wears a metal suit, that runs on electricity. I. Am. The. God. Of. Thunder. Do you think this was wise?" And proceeds to slag Starks armor and make it clear to him the only reason Stark was surviving this was because this was his warning to back off if he valued his life.


    The only way they are gonna avoid this is if they scrap the accords before he get's his chance, or he does, it happens, the UN takes one look at this and decides it chooses not getting vaporized form orbit, and resends the Accords.



    Because we know, flat out, the only thing they've got that has a fighting chance against Hulk is Starks Hulk Buster, and it had to outright get lucky against Hulk the first time. And that was JUST Hulk. If he's gotta deal with Thor as well, yeah, this goes badly for Stark VERY fast.
    I think youre greatly flanderizing Ross here. He isn't a moron, he isn't going to just pick a fight with Thor and Hulk and cause destruction on an untold scale because that is exactly what the accords are meant to prevent. He would get fired faster than you can say "It seemed like a good idea at the time". Furthermore, Thor is the leader of a sovereign nation. The UN has absolutely no authority over him, so Ross wouldn't even be allowed to look in his direction in the first place.
    “Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”

  3. - Top - End - #153
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Rater202's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    The Underworld
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    I think youre greatly flanderizing Ross here. He isn't a moron, he isn't going to just pick a fight with Thor and Hulk and cause destruction on an untold scale because that is exactly what the accords are meant to prevent. He would get fired faster than you can say "It seemed like a good idea at the time". Furthermore, Thor is the leader of a sovereign nation. The UN has absolutely no authority over him, so Ross wouldn't even be allowed to look in his direction in the first place.
    MCU Ross must be radically differant from the main comic Ross then.

    Since Comic Ross is the guy who on dozens of occasions came up with plans to capture the Hulk that boiled down to "intentionally piss off the Hulk."
    I also answer to Bookmark and Shadow Claw.

    Read my fanfiction here.

    Awesome Avatar by Emperor Ing
    Spoiler: Ode To Meteors, By zimmerwald
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by zimmerwald1915 View Post
    Meteor
    You are a meteor
    Falling star
    You soar your
    Way down the air
    To the floor
    Where my other
    Rocks
    Are.

  4. - Top - End - #154
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    MCU Ross must be radically differant from the main comic Ross then.

    Since Comic Ross is the guy who on dozens of occasions came up with plans to capture the Hulk that boiled down to "intentionally piss off the Hulk."
    MCU ross hasn't been in the spotlight too much, and the main movie that he was in is only pseudocanon, but he does seem to have a more level head than comics ross, not that that's a particularly high bar.
    “Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”

  5. - Top - End - #155
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kitten Champion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2012

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    The thing about Ross is that it doesn't matter if you dislike him, question his competence, or interpret his presence as overtly politically motivated, he's the Secretary of State for the United States and apparently given direct authority in this situation -- I don't know how that would work in reality but that's irrelevant as it's certainly how he's positioned in the film.

    Saying "I will follow the law only if I personally approve of those enacting or enforcing it" doesn't work in a liberal democratic society, particularly for those in positions of great personal power.

  6. - Top - End - #156
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitten Champion View Post
    The thing about Ross is that it doesn't matter if you dislike him, question his competence, or interpret his presence as overtly politically motivated, he's the Secretary of State for the United States and apparently given direct authority in this situation -- I don't know how that would work in reality but that's irrelevant as it's certainly how he's positioned in the film.

    Saying "I will follow the law only if I personally approve of those enacting or enforcing it" doesn't work in a liberal democratic society, particularly for those in positions of great personal power.
    This is, in some ways, a central problem of superheroes. Liberal democratic society depends on base assumptions of equality between persons to function, but superheroes are explicitly not-equal by definition, and insofar as their powers are inherent to their personal capacity (which doesn't apply to tech-based characters, the legal principles applied Iron Man or Ant Man are very different from those dealing with Thor or the Hulk even though the movies aren't really in a position to interrogate that) the legal framework of modern liberal democracy brakes down when trying to contain them.

    Comic-book universes generally try and hand wave these issues and pretend that the existence of beings who can do things like smash tanks with their bare hands doesn't require any reconsideration of exiting norms in the same way that they pretend that the technologies invented by Tony Stark or Reed Richards have no functional impact on society at large (or when they do take things a bit more seriously, like any time Superman attempts to rule some alternate Earth they just ratchet up the grimdark so they don't have to consider anything complicated). This is a piece of willing suspension of disbelief that they demand, which is why discussion of the minutia of the Accords is largely pointless - the universe can't support the discussion.

    Note that universes that have tried to wrestle with the implications of superpowered people versus democratic law tend to fail massively - the Star Wars EU spent thirty years running in circles around the problem of what duties, rights, and privileges should be accorded the Jedi without reaching any appropriate answers. The various attempts by the Heroes TV show to deal with the consequences of supers in a more realistic way collapsed inwards in a huge hurry. Watchman - a rather on point parallel for this discussion - provides the answer that god in the form of Dr. Manhattan has to leave the world behind in order to save it, but that's not a viable option for mid-level supers.

    The proper moral and functional system of governance in a world where gods actually do walk amongst us is a truly difficult problem. Marvel, smartly, has largely avoided trying to offer a real answer and has instead utilized moral satisfying hand-waves. DC made the mistake of taking it just seriously enough - by having Superman kill Zod in Man of Steel and having Batman seriously consider whether the only viable option was to try and kill god - to have everything crumble.
    Resvier: a P6 homebrew setting

  7. - Top - End - #157
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Metahuman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    MCU ross hasn't been in the spotlight too much, and the main movie that he was in is only pseudocanon, but he does seem to have a more level head than comics ross, not that that's a particularly high bar.
    His plan the first time in that movie, that is most assuredly Canon, was send in vanilla commando guys and Tell them nothing about there target other than "He's a dangerous fighter.". To people who LIVE to draw out fights against dangerous fighters to see how well they can hold up. This was a disaster.


    His second plan was to deliberately piss off the Hulk in a populated civilian area so he could throw weapons at it to show his daughter she was wrong to have feelings for him. Cause proving to your daughter that father knows best is what matters damn it!



    His third plan compounded with the damage from his second plan and managed to create and unleash on Harlem, New York City, The Abomination. And then he had to let Hulk Loose and throw more weapons at it to fight it. Ergo Banners line in Avengers 1. "Last time I was in New York I sort of Broke, Harlem.". Incidentally, Shield had to cover this one up for him cause he couldn't even do THAT part right he'd buggered the whole affair up so badly.


    Next time we see him he's Secretary of State, Working for the UN as one of there big decision makers and policy makers for how to control, register, deploy and regulate people with super powers, given authority over all super powered beings categorically including Vision, Hulk, Dr. Strange and Thor, informing the Avengers he will be deciding when and if they deploy and were and how, and that Thor and Hulk are Nuclear weapons to be kept track of.




    More level headed nothing. You have to dismiss more of his screen time then you keep included to reach that conclusion. It's not Flanderization if it's both consistent with his original and entirely consistent characterization form moment one on screen onwards.


    It would be perfectly in character for him to send a massive force + Whatever Avengers he's got and straight up ORDER Thor and all the other Asguardians to Register, under his authority and the logic that Asguardians are here and appear to have what humans consider super powers (Superhuman strength, durability, so on.), and Order Hulk to De Hulk, turn himself in, Register, and comply with whatever further Orders Ross personally has for him. And the UN have given him this backing now so legally he can do it with the weight of the UN behind him. And when he had less then 100% of JUST the US government, US military, and US intelligence behind him, he did the above, so yes, this would be so fitting, it would be brazenly out of character for him NOT to do it. Hell, it would be brazenly out of character for him not to do it even if the UN are on the Radio SCREAMING ORDERS NOT TO DO IT AT HIM AT THE TIME OVER A DAMN LOUD SPEAKER!!!!!!!!!
    "I Burn!"

  8. - Top - End - #158
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kitten Champion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2012

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mechalich View Post
    {Snip}
    I agree, I have an issue with these recurring debates because they seem to want it both ways - as in they want to apply "realistic" standards but use the unrealistic standards of comic depictions which work on drama and fictional hand-waves - whereas a universe where superpowers exists would be a fundamental paradigm shift from our present civilization into a markedly different world as the base assumptions of humanity would be folly there. There would be - at minimum in the Marvel Universe - several generations of legal precedent to look at and countless laws passed on this subject of Superheroes, the lawmakers would not suddenly wake up one day after decades to decide to do something because a specific incident made headlines.

    That's irrelevant as far as the comics and especially the movie goes though - all of it. They need a conflict, they need a conflict that comes to fighting because fighting is the core of the genre, and they want something where both sides can have a point without falling on the Good/Evil scale and Lawful/Chaotic works well conceptually. Add in some topical stuff just for good measure.

    ... but as Moviebob pointed out in his review, Civil War isn't about the Accords - that argument falls by the wayside as the characters progress through the narrative - the point is to raise the emotional stakes until they supersede the rationale behind the conflict in the first place, because these things have inertia and people don't function on cold Reason all the time. In a style not dissimilar to the often self-absorbed deities in various mythological pantheons who act purely out of passion to large dramatic effect. It became about the characters more than the plot, and that's where Marvel movies shine.
    Last edited by Kitten Champion; 2017-11-28 at 12:29 AM.

  9. - Top - End - #159
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tyndmyr's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    MCU Ross must be radically differant from the main comic Ross then.

    Since Comic Ross is the guy who on dozens of occasions came up with plans to capture the Hulk that boiled down to "intentionally piss off the Hulk."
    MCU Ross is much like comic Ross, yes.

    Let's review the hulk movie, shall we? Banner's living a non-harmful life in the middle of nowhere. Ross finds him, and sends a spec ops team to take him in/down. He hulks out, wrecks everything. This was horribly predictable, and was kind of a dumb move on Ross's part.

    When this fails, he creates the Abomination to fight the Hulk. This happens in two stages, and it's pretty obvious that with the power comes uncontrollable rage/madness. Going ahead the SECOND time was pretty GD dumb. Ross never really took responsibility for his creation, and had to be convinced to let the hulk take him down, despite the Abomination obviously being worse in every way.

    Oh, and he tries the first plan again, in a populated area, because...I have no idea. It was pretty obviously stupid.

    He's only in Hulk before Civil War, but he's obviously an antagonist, and isn't particularly clever as one. There is literally nothing about his portrayal that indicates he would be a good person to head up a touchy diplomatic accord.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitten Champion View Post
    I don't think they're going to just give up and sell flowers by the road-side, and who knows what things will look like in a few years. I do seriously question whether their ambitious - to put it mildly - production schedule will look anything like it does now after the studio does a post mortem on this. Which, well, most of the money has been made that will be made at this point and the hype machine has already moved on to Star Wars.

    I can't see how this met their expectations, it didn't meet my expectations and I'm mostly full of cynical detachment.

    I said this in one of my prior posts, but Age of Ultron disappointed Disney (or so it's said) and it made well over a billion dollars with a smaller estimated budget than Justice League. It (supposedly) led to some executive shakeup in Marvel Studios with more power given to Feige.

    I do think that once Star Wars comes out, Justice League is essentially dead. It'll have been out for a bit by then, and Star Wars has huge name power.

    And it's fair to think that their production schedule will have to change. They're assuming a MCU-like success, without...actually building it. This provides a great parallel for why their on-screen characters are failing. They expect them to just work, without doing the effort to build characterization on screen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    I think youre missing the point of the Accords. It isn't meant to give the UN a super powered attack dog, it is meant to give individual nations the right to say "no, we don't want Iron Man shooting missiles in the middle of an urban area" even if there are terrorists with Stark guns involved. We see it in Ultron that there are large numbers of people who don't like that the avengers start fights in their homes.
    Gonna say that the biggest issue of firing a missile in an urban area was a shield missile that Iron Man stopped. Oversight has not, in the MCU, worked nearly as well as the heroes have.

    Hell, watch Spiderman. It's pretty obvious in there that the oversight groups are not doing terribly well in securing safety.
    Back from a lengthy vacation from Giantitp. I've been dabbling with 3d printer technology and game design, PM if you're curious.

    "World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimization."

    New: Tyndmyr has a game shop!

  10. - Top - End - #160
    Titan in the Playground
     
    lord_khaine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Oh, and he tries the first plan again, in a populated area, because...I have no idea. It was pretty obviously stupid.

    He's only in Hulk before Civil War, but he's obviously an antagonist, and isn't particularly clever as one. There is literally nothing about his portrayal that indicates he would be a good person to head up a touchy diplomatic accord.
    The fault for a large part lies with the Avengers though. Had they managed to present a united front and said something on the line of "we will sign the accords.. if you change a few bits here and there.. as well as bring in a replacement for Ross that we can work with.

    If not we are all going to retire. Have fun handling Hydra on your own.
    thnx to Starwoof for the fine avatar

  11. - Top - End - #161
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by lord_khaine View Post
    The fault for a large part lies with the Avengers though. Had they managed to present a united front and said something on the line of "we will sign the accords.. if you change a few bits here and there.. as well as bring in a replacement for Ross that we can work with.

    If not we are all going to retire. Have fun handling Hydra on your own.
    Exactly. They had enormous bargaining power by virtue of their voluntary cooperation being the only way the accords could take off. Had cap bothered to ask his "what if we don't like our orders" question to someone in a position to actually respond, he probably would have found it far more palatable.
    “Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”

  12. - Top - End - #162
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Grey_Wolf_c's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    Exactly. They had enormous bargaining power by virtue of their voluntary cooperation being the only way the accords could take off. Had cap bothered to ask his "what if we don't like our orders" question to someone in a position to actually respond, he probably would have found it far more palatable.
    Indeed. Or even pushing back for more autonomy. "We'll sign, but we get seats and votes in whatever meetings that happen both before and after we are asked to deploy." After that its all political negotiation of how many... but as long as Steve ends with a seat, they'd have remained in control.

    GW
    My Motto:
    Forum Motto:
    There is a world of imagination
    Deep in the corners of your mind
    Where reality is an intruder
    And myth and legend thrive
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant & Yendor View Post
    GIANT IN THE PLAYGROUND: On a saner forum,
    there wouldn't have been such speculation.
    Interested in MitD? Join us in MitD's thread.
    Scientia est similis fluminis te capere non possunt in perpetuum
    (Knowledge, like a river, cannot be constrained forever)

  13. - Top - End - #163
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2013

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    He's only in Hulk before Civil War, but he's obviously an antagonist, and isn't particularly clever as one. There is literally nothing about his portrayal that indicates he would be a good person to head up a touchy diplomatic accord.
    Not true, he was in one of the One Shots, where he was such a raging jerk that Tony bought his favorite bar just to level it. And when is Tony ever malicious in his pettiness?

  14. - Top - End - #164
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Metahuman1 View Post
    His plan the first time in that movie, that is most assuredly Canon, was send in vanilla commando guys and Tell them nothing about there target other than "He's a dangerous fighter.". To people who LIVE to draw out fights against dangerous fighters to see how well they can hold up. This was a disaster.
    How should Ross bring the Hulk in? Either the soldiers kill Banner, or Banner surrenders. Or the Hulk escapes. Those are the three things that will happen. What is Ross supposed to do?
    His second plan was to deliberately piss off the Hulk in a populated civilian area so he could throw weapons at it to show his daughter she was wrong to have feelings for him. Cause proving to your daughter that father knows best is what matters damn it!
    Uh no. They tried to take the Hulk down with gas. Unfortunately, Betty started screaming, which stressed Banner out and caused him to transform.
    His third plan compounded with the damage from his second plan and managed to create and unleash on Harlem, New York City, The Abomination. And then he had to let Hulk Loose and throw more weapons at it to fight it. Ergo Banners line in Avengers 1. "Last time I was in New York I sort of Broke, Harlem.". Incidentally, Shield had to cover this one up for him cause he couldn't even do THAT part right he'd buggered the whole affair up so badly.
    Yeah, he took a chance on the soldier because he literally has *no way* of defeating the Hulk. He created the Abomination, a total disaster which thankfully the Hulk was able to... beat in a fist fight and then just leave there lying on a rooftop lol.

    Ross made a mistake. Kind of like Tony did when he created Ultron. Oops. So now is Tony automatically wrong all the time as well?

    Next time we see him he's Secretary of State, Working for the UN as one of there big decision makers and policy makers for how to control, register, deploy and regulate people with super powers, given authority over all super powered beings categorically including Vision, Hulk, Dr. Strange and Thor, informing the Avengers he will be deciding when and if they deploy and were and how, and that Thor and Hulk are Nuclear weapons to be kept track of.
    Right. For all you know, the nations thought about strong-arming the Avengers somehow, or being more forceful, and Ross is the one that said "Trust me, we can't beat them. The only thing I've seen that works is to have one of them fighting on your own side. So this is what I suggest..." and we got a plan where the Avengers work for the good guys. This would be inline with his experiences from the Hulk movie, and it would gel with his characterization in Civil War.
    It would be perfectly in character for him to send a massive force + Whatever Avengers he's got and straight up ORDER Thor and all the other Asguardians to Register, under his authority and the logic that Asguardians are here and appear to have what humans consider super powers (Superhuman strength, durability, so on.), and Order Hulk to De Hulk, turn himself in, Register, and comply with whatever further Orders Ross personally has for him. And the UN have given him this backing now so legally he can do it with the weight of the UN behind him. And when he had less then 100% of JUST the US government, US military, and US intelligence behind him, he did the above, so yes, this would be so fitting, it would be brazenly out of character for him NOT to do it. Hell, it would be brazenly out of character for him not to do it even if the UN are on the Radio SCREAMING ORDERS NOT TO DO IT AT HIM AT THE TIME OVER A DAMN LOUD SPEAKER!!!!!!!!!
    What?

    Since the Hulk movie... what has Ross learned? Well, he saw his daughter almost get killed but the Hulk saved her life. He made a huge mistake in unleashing the Abomination on the world and, once again, Banner saved the day. After that, Tony approaches him about the Avengers initiative, so Ross has known about the formation of the team and the intent behind it since before the team existed. And what have they done? They saved the world, twice. But in doing so, they killed people and left a lot of destruction in their wake. The nations of the world don't want this team running around unchecked. Now Ross is secretary of state, and he's been a part of this Accords.

    It could be that this is all a secret Ross conspiracy to finally gain control of the Avengers. But I don't think that is what the movie was going for. Ross wasn't a villain in Civil War and I don't think he was meant to be seen that way.
    Quote Originally Posted by lord_khaine
    The fault for a large part lies with the Avengers though. Had they managed to present a united front and said something on the line of "we will sign the accords.. if you change a few bits here and there.. as well as bring in a replacement for Ross that we can work with.

    If not we are all going to retire. Have fun handling Hydra on your own.
    Agreed about the bargaining. Part of the reason they didn't is because Cap didn't give it a chance to begin with. But it was also sprung on everyone. Had Tony given the team a head's up about the intent behind the meeting with Ross, they could have come to some agreement before the meeting.

    I'm not sure about the bit about Ross. Without Banner there, I don't know what relationship the others have with Ross that would justify asking for a replacement, with the exception of Tony, who seems to be working with Ross.
    Guiren Baotsu IC OOC DOC


    Formerly Khan the Destroyer on the WotC Forums.

    Awesome Pun-Pun Avatar by the incredible AsteriskAmp!

  15. - Top - End - #165
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    By imprisoning the majority of Avengers that aren't following it, the Accords are working to keep private citizens from rampaging across the world and leaving death and destruction in their wake.
    At the end of Civil War, which private citizens are being kept from rampaging across the world? Captain America still can. Iron Man still can. Scarlet Witch still can. Black Widow still can. Hawkeye still can. Falcon still can. And on the other hand, you've got War Machine and maybe Vision? That's a very low success rate.

  16. - Top - End - #166
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by theNater View Post
    At the end of Civil War, which private citizens are being kept from rampaging across the world? Captain America still can. Iron Man still can. Scarlet Witch still can. Black Widow still can. Hawkeye still can. Falcon still can. And on the other hand, you've got War Machine and maybe Vision? That's a very low success rate.
    I don't know why people are inferring that Tony has changed his mind completely on the Accords. He is back at the compound at the end of the movie. He wouldn't be there if he was a fugitive. Which he would be if he was rampaging around the world. The compound would be either taken over or destroyed. Ross wouldn't be calling Tony expecting him to help out if Tony was a fugitive.

    I don't know how much time has gone by for Rhodes to get an exoskeleton and be fit enough to start walking, and for Cap to plan and execute a break out of the highest level security prison on the planet. But some time has gone by and Ross still thinks Tony is on his team.

    Tony, in my estimate, is going to try and play both sides.

    The Accords are an attempt to prevent the Avengers from doing whatever they want. That Cap does whatever he wants and breaks out the rest doesn't really seem like a good argument against the Accords. More like a confirmation that something has to be done.
    Guiren Baotsu IC OOC DOC


    Formerly Khan the Destroyer on the WotC Forums.

    Awesome Pun-Pun Avatar by the incredible AsteriskAmp!

  17. - Top - End - #167
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    The Accords are an attempt to prevent the Avengers from doing whatever they want. That Cap does whatever he wants and breaks out the rest doesn't really seem like a good argument against the Accords. More like a confirmation that something has to be done.
    If, as you say, the Accords are an attempt to prevent supers from doing whatever they want, then the degree to which supers have actually been kept from doing whatever they want has to be the measure by which the success of the Accords is judged. In order to argue that the Accords should be judged by some other measure, you have to argue that they have another purpose besides that one.

    Cap and others defying the Accords is a problem created by the Accords--saying that's confirmation the Accords are needed is a backwards argument. If one already agrees the Accords are needed, then defiance of the Accords confirms the need for better enforcement mechanisms, but defiance of the Accords cannot be part of the Accords' raison d'etre.
    Last edited by Lethologica; 2017-11-28 at 02:18 PM.

  18. - Top - End - #168
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2013

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    A lot of this argument is based on unknowns, that will probably be cleared up in IW, or at least swept under the rug.

    Ross is not quite presented as a villain in CW, but he is also presented as having all the authority,
    being counterproductive to stopping the villain plot, and the Face of the Accords. I don't think any of those things are coincidental, he's set up as a strawman that even Tony has to circumvent/ignore to get anything done.

    Abomination went rogue, he was not authorised to do most of the stuff he ended up doing.

  19. - Top - End - #169
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    If, as you say, the Accords are an attempt to prevent supers from doing whatever they want, then the degree to which supers have actually been kept from doing whatever they want has to be the measure by which the success of the Accords is judged. In order to argue that the Accords should be judged by some other measure, you have to argue that they have another purpose besides that one.

    Cap and others defying the Accords is a problem created by the Accords--saying that's confirmation the Accords are needed is a backwards argument. If one already agrees the Accords are needed, then defiance of the Accords confirms the need for better enforcement mechanisms, but defiance of the Accords cannot be part of the Accords' raison d'etre.
    I think youre misreading that. The problem is cap deciding that his friends, who committed legitimate crimes against a legitimate authority, don't belong in jail, and uses his abilities to enforce his will above the legitimate law. Yes, the accords accelerated that into direct confrontation sooner than it might have otherwise occurred, but its still a problem that would have come up eventually anyway.
    “Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”

  20. - Top - End - #170
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Velaryon's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    I was disappointed when they originally announced that BvS would basically kick off the DCEU and feature an old grizzled darker Batman. I was like... so the DCEU will have an old killer Batman? Why make that choice? Seems odd that the on-screen representation of Batman for your cinematic universe will be the Batman from the Dark Night Returns. Why not give us Batman in his prime?

    Then, you're giving us mopey grim frowny Superman? At the time I thought they'd change it up from MoS. But he didn't change at all in BvS, and he's still angry and frowny when he returns in JL. Who are these people you are depicting in the DCEU?

    Wonder Woman is good. I was disappointed with Flash in JL partly because his backstory seems interesting. His father framed for the murder of his mother? That's nuts. I don't know the Flash's backstory, so that would have been cool to see in it's own movie. Instead... does he get out of prison at the end of the movie? I don't remember. Anyways, there was more I wanted to add to your post but I'm sleepy...
    Grizzled, darker Batman is a version that we haven't seen before on film, which is reason enough to consider using that one. My problem is that I think we need to see why this version of Batman became the way he did, instead of just starting there. Moviegoing audiences are familiar with the character of Batman already, but not this version. Batfleck is a new take on the character, and different enough from previous versions (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale, and the best-known animated versions) that it's very jarring to see him acting what looks to be out-of-character by using guns and doing things that definitely break the "don't kill people" rule that is known to be one of Batman's core defining traits.

    I as well am extremely disappointed that Man of Steel's version of Superman is the one they went with for the DC cinematic universe. I never saw Superman Returns, but I really can't imagine he could be much less likeable in that film.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sapphire Guard View Post
    Re the DCEU, The thing about 'Darker' Batman was that he had been driven to his lowest point by what happened in Metropolis. He's not meant to be right, and giving him a solo movie undermines that arc and wastes time when your audience already knows Batman. Why spend a movie establishing what everyone knows already?
    So Bruce Wayne turns on the evening news, sees Superman and Zod smashing up Metropolis during their fight, and says to himself "screw it, might as well start using guns and stop worrying about whether I kill people now?" I admittedly only watched the movie once, and wasn't even remotely invested in it, but that's not what I got from it at all. What I got was "Batman sees Superman's apparent disregard for collateral damage in fighting another alien, decides that he's too risky to remain alive on Earth, and decides to take him out."

    Batman being driven to kill Superman we don't need explained, any more than was already done. Batman killing so many other people that someone made a supercut video of all the deaths on Youtube most certainly does need more setup than that.


    Wonder Woman was extremely effectively sold to the audience by her extended cameo in BVS, which contributed significantly to the subsequent success of her solo movie. Civil War did the same with Spiderman and probably BP. It's not that there's something fundamentally wrong with the approach, it's just that JL was cut so badly for time that the characters' full introductions were cut out. All three of our new characters had large sections of their stories cut in the final product, thanks to an executive mandate to limit the huge team up film's runtime to two hours.
    Agreed, Wonder Woman's introduction remains one of the few things DC has done right in their movies so far. But that's just one character, and she still got a solo movie before Justice League.

    Contrast that to the first Avengers film. Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and Hulk had already had solo films (even if Hulk was largely rewritten between the Ed Norton and Mark Ruffalo versions), leaving just Black Widow and Hawkeye as mostly new characters (Hawkeye has an uncredited cameo in the first Thor film, and Black Widow had a supporting role in Iron Man 2). That's still a bit more than the brief glimpses of Aquaman, Cyborg, and the Flash we're given in pre-JL films. As a result, they have three characters that need to be established in this film.

    Executive meddling is certainly a thing, but "audiences don't like movies that are too long" is not something they completely made up. They aren't necessarily wrong to want to keep the film to a runtime around 2 hours. if there were that many character-establishing scenes that got left on the cutting room floor, that seems to support my argument that at least one more character should have gotten a solo film before the big team-up.

  21. - Top - End - #171
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Velaryon View Post
    Grizzled, darker Batman is a version that we haven't seen before on film, which is reason enough to consider using that one.
    I don't mind a different take. When I saw Flashpoint I thought it was cool to see Thomas Wayne running around dual-wielding pistols. But that Batman is cool for a one-shot story, or in an alternative story like the Dark Knight Returns. But for your DCEU, that we're going to be watching for years, I don't know, I don't want that Batman to be the machine gun toting "if there's just a 1% chance, kill them" Batman. I want to see Batman.
    My problem is that I think we need to see why this version of Batman became the way he did, instead of just starting there. Moviegoing audiences are familiar with the character of Batman already, but not this version. Batfleck is a new take on the character, and different enough from previous versions (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale, and the best-known animated versions) that it's very jarring to see him acting what looks to be out-of-character by using guns and doing things that definitely break the "don't kill people" rule that is known to be one of Batman's core defining traits.
    I think you're probably right. If we had a Batman movie depicting how and why he went down that path, I think it would have been better. But instead we're just introduced to killer Batman.

    I think I've mentioned this before in other threads about this, but the scene in Batman Begins where he refuses to execute that man is awesome. It's heroic and principled and you're seeing that despite his pain and guilt and desire to do something, he has a line that he won't cross.

    Nothing in BvS comes off as heroic until Doomsday shows up. My favorite part was seeing Diana cancel her plans because something completely unrelated to her showed up and she felt the need to go deal with it. Superman and Batman just don't come off as heroic really. Even when he sacrifices himself, it seems like the resolution to his conflict; I'm so torn on being a hero to the whole world, but I'll save Lois. It's like... thank goodness you're in love because otherwise we'd be ****ed...
    I as well am extremely disappointed that Man of Steel's version of Superman is the one they went with for the DC cinematic universe. I never saw Superman Returns, but I really can't imagine he could be much less likeable in that film.
    I didn't mind Superman Returns as much as other people, but I can see the complaints that it was a snooze-fest. But that Superman at least liked helping people and smiled. He was dealing with the loss of Lois and seeing her have a family, but he wasn't a miserable grim guy. He managed to, you know, deal with ****.
    So Bruce Wayne turns on the evening news, sees Superman and Zod smashing up Metropolis during their fight, and says to himself "screw it, might as well start using guns and stop worrying about whether I kill people now?" I admittedly only watched the movie once, and wasn't even remotely invested in it, but that's not what I got from it at all. What I got was "Batman sees Superman's apparent disregard for collateral damage in fighting another alien, decides that he's too risky to remain alive on Earth, and decides to take him out."

    Batman being driven to kill Superman we don't need explained, any more than was already done. Batman killing so many other people that someone made a supercut video of all the deaths on Youtube most certainly does need more setup than that.
    Agreed. Batman is worried that if Superman decides to go ape-**** no one will be able to stop him, so to avoid that potentiality, he determines he has to kill him. Also, a newspaper clipping with some red letters on it.

    EDIT:
    Missed this earlier...
    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    If, as you say, the Accords are an attempt to prevent supers from doing whatever they want, then the degree to which supers have actually been kept from doing whatever they want has to be the measure by which the success of the Accords is judged. In order to argue that the Accords should be judged by some other measure, you have to argue that they have another purpose besides that one.

    Cap and others defying the Accords is a problem created by the Accords--saying that's confirmation the Accords are needed is a backwards argument. If one already agrees the Accords are needed, then defiance of the Accords confirms the need for better enforcement mechanisms, but defiance of the Accords cannot be part of the Accords' raison d'etre.
    I don't agree. We already have laws in place to prevent people from doing what the Avengers do. The problem is the Avengers were an initiative by a government agency and have saved the world. This has given them credibility. But after SHIELD gets compromised, well, now they're doing their own thing.

    The Avengers created the original problem, which is ignoring state sovereignty and enacting missions without anyone's consent/permission/knowledge.

    Cap breaking everyone out of prison is not revealing a problem with the intent of the Accords. It's showcasing it for everyone to see. They see themselves above the law and do not respect any authority but their own. The Accords suffer from an enforcement problem, but Cap has demonstrated exactly why they are needed. Things will escalate, but that's understandable.
    Last edited by Dr.Samurai; 2017-11-28 at 05:08 PM.
    Guiren Baotsu IC OOC DOC


    Formerly Khan the Destroyer on the WotC Forums.

    Awesome Pun-Pun Avatar by the incredible AsteriskAmp!

  22. - Top - End - #172
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    I think youre misreading that. The problem is cap deciding that his friends, who committed legitimate crimes against a legitimate authority, don't belong in jail, and uses his abilities to enforce his will above the legitimate law. Yes, the accords accelerated that into direct confrontation sooner than it might have otherwise occurred, but its still a problem that would have come up eventually anyway.
    Yes, the problem is exactly the same as it was before the Accords, which demonstrates that the Accords are ineffective right now since in Dr.Samurai's own words they were an attempt to fix the problem. Instead, all the Accords have done is created a new set of statutes for the supers to disregard. This is evidence that the Accords are not what's needed to fix the problem--unless the problem is something other than what Dr.Samurai said it was.

    Quote Originally Posted by Velaryon View Post
    Grizzled, darker Batman is a version that we haven't seen before on film, which is reason enough to consider using that one. My problem is that I think we need to see why this version of Batman became the way he did, instead of just starting there. Moviegoing audiences are familiar with the character of Batman already, but not this version. Batfleck is a new take on the character, and different enough from previous versions (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale, and the best-known animated versions) that it's very jarring to see him acting what looks to be out-of-character by using guns and doing things that definitely break the "don't kill people" rule that is known to be one of Batman's core defining traits.

    I as well am extremely disappointed that Man of Steel's version of Superman is the one they went with for the DC cinematic universe. I never saw Superman Returns, but I really can't imagine he could be much less likeable in that film.
    Snyder seems to want both Batman and Superman to have a multi-movie arc of struggling to overcome a grim subversion of themselves and become heroic (again, in Batman's case). It's not a terrible idea in itself, but it's a terrible way to introduce the DCEU because it means the characters are not themselves until long after many people have thrown up their hands at the subversion and lost interest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Velaryon View Post
    So Bruce Wayne turns on the evening news, sees Superman and Zod smashing up Metropolis during their fight, and says to himself "screw it, might as well start using guns and stop worrying about whether I kill people now?" I admittedly only watched the movie once, and wasn't even remotely invested in it, but that's not what I got from it at all. What I got was "Batman sees Superman's apparent disregard for collateral damage in fighting another alien, decides that he's too risky to remain alive on Earth, and decides to take him out."

    Batman being driven to kill Superman we don't need explained, any more than was already done. Batman killing so many other people that someone made a supercut video of all the deaths on Youtube most certainly does need more setup than that.
    The moment that broke Batman was almost certainly the implied death of Robin at the hands of the Joker.

  23. - Top - End - #173
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2013

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Velaryon View Post
    Grizzled, darker Batman is a version that we haven't seen before on film, which is reason enough to consider using that one. My problem is that I think we need to see why this version of Batman became the way he did, instead of just starting there. Moviegoing audiences are familiar with the character of Batman already, but not this version. Batfleck is a new take on the character, and different enough from previous versions (Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale, and the best-known animated versions) that it's very jarring to see him acting what looks to be out-of-character by using guns and doing things that definitely break the "don't kill people" rule that is known to be one of Batman's core defining traits.

    I as well am extremely disappointed that Man of Steel's version of Superman is the one they went with for the DC cinematic universe. I never saw Superman Returns, but I really can't imagine he could be much less likeable in that film.

    .
    Yeah...about those previous Batmen, from the same channel...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psVIG7YvdjM

    Every screen Batman has killed except Clooney (and Michael Keaton's positively took joy in it).

    I do not like it. But's it's unfair to count one and not the others. In Batman begins he drives over occupied cop cars and gets away with 'It's a miracle no one was killed.'

    The BVS Supercut, btw, includes the dream sequence and overestimates a bit (it's two henchman per car, not four, as far as I can tell)

    So Bruce Wayne turns on the evening news, sees Superman and Zod smashing up Metropolis during their fight, and says to himself "screw it, might as well start using guns and stop worrying about whether I kill people now?" I admittedly only watched the movie once, and wasn't even remotely invested in it, but that's not what I got from it at all. What I got was "Batman sees Superman's apparent disregard for collateral damage in fighting another alien, decides that he's too risky to remain alive on Earth, and decides to take him out."
    Aside from that he was actually in Metropolis at the time, it's all over the film that this drove him to his new harshness.

    "Nothing's changed."

    "Oh no, sir. Everything's changed."

    "The feeling of powerlessness that turns good men cruel."

    "New rules?"

    "There's a new kind of mean in him."

    Cop and Papers being surprised at the branding. And so on.

    Contrast that to the first Avengers film. Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and Hulk had already had solo films (even if Hulk was largely rewritten between the Ed Norton and Mark Ruffalo versions), leaving just Black Widow and Hawkeye as mostly new characters (Hawkeye has an uncredited cameo in the first Thor film, and Black Widow had a supporting role in Iron Man 2). That's still a bit more than the brief glimpses of Aquaman, Cyborg, and the Flash we're given in pre-JL films. As a result, they have three characters that need to be established in this film.
    Three introduced, three to be introduced v four introduced, two to be introduced. Not so very different.

    Executive meddling is certainly a thing, but "audiences don't like movies that are too long" is not something they completely made up. They aren't necessarily wrong to want to keep the film to a runtime around 2 hours. if there were that many character-establishing scenes that got left on the cutting room floor, that seems to support my argument that at least one more character should have gotten a solo film before the big team-up.
    Depends how late that runtime was fixed. That story broke in early November, so it might well have been imposed very late in development after all the work was done. And given the super troubled production that was JL, I'd be more inclined to blame that than a fundamental flaw in the model.

    Snyder seems to want both Batman and Superman to have a multi-movie arc of struggling to overcome a grim subversion of themselves and become heroic (again, in Batman's case). It's not a terrible idea in itself, but it's a terrible way to introduce the DCEU because it means the characters are not themselves until long after many people have thrown up their hands at the subversion and lost interest.
    MoS was essentially 'Superman Begins'. Audiences are more cynical now, they're less inclined to believe in the 'Big Blue Boy Scout'-see Superman Returns. Audiences are often inclined to mock optimism, 'that's not how the world works'. So to make them believe in your hero, you have to show how he arrives at his worldview in the real world. So we have to show that yes, Superman can and does understand the consequences of his actions because of how past experiences shaped him. He's doing his best, but not infallible, aend can't do cheap copouts like 'reverse time' every time something bad happens. Superman lives in the real world,. where his actions have real consequences, and yet still tries his best (and his best is saving everyone he possibly can and being optimistic about humanity even if they don't like him, even if everything he does gets twisted to agendas, and so on. So when he proves his sincerity in saving the world by dying in its defence, that finally wins over the world. So when he comes back, the respect given to him feels earned.

    Rand al'Thor in Wheel of Time has a somewhat similar journey

    Spoiler: Wheel of Time full spoilers
    Show
    His transformation near the end into a messiah figure only works because we saw everything he had to go through to get there.



    Batman's arc is in one movie, and its as far over the edge as he goes, so he can be pulled back from the brink by the end. I don't like the killing, but I'm not sure they could sell Batman as wanting to kill Superman if he can't even bring himself to kill (sometimes) henchmen. How could they sell a Batman v Superman film convincingly with the traditional characterisations?

    He could've just wiped out everyone in the warehouse with the Batwing if he wanted, but he fought them hand to hand instead, and as a result most survived.

    It just seems like these films are being judged often on different metrics than the ones they're being compared to.

  24. - Top - End - #174
    Titan in the Playground
     
    lord_khaine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Nothing in BvS comes off as heroic until Doomsday shows up. My favorite part was seeing Diana cancel her plans because something completely unrelated to her showed up and she felt the need to go deal with it. Superman and Batman just don't come off as heroic really. Even when he sacrifices himself, it seems like the resolution to his conflict; I'm so torn on being a hero to the whole world, but I'll save Lois. It's like... thank goodness you're in love because otherwise we'd be ****ed...
    I dont have to much to comment on the other stuff. But we did have Superman litterally risking his own life and safety to stop Luthor from getting smashed by his own abomination. Its about the entire core of Superman caught in that single scene.

    I don't mind a different take. When I saw Flashpoint I thought it was cool to see Thomas Wayne running around dual-wielding pistols. But that Batman is cool for a one-shot story, or in an alternative story like the Dark Knight Returns. But for your DCEU, that we're going to be watching for years, I don't know, I don't want that Batman to be the machine gun toting "if there's just a 1% chance, kill them" Batman. I want to see Batman.
    And the first iconic movie batman we had did mount 2 machine guns on his car.
    thnx to Starwoof for the fine avatar

  25. - Top - End - #175
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by lord_khaine View Post
    I dont have to much to comment on the other stuff. But we did have Superman litterally risking his own life and safety to stop Luthor from getting smashed by his own abomination. Its about the entire core of Superman caught in that single scene.
    I did say "until Doomsday" so...

    As for it being the entire core of Superman... I don't know. He looks pained the entire movie helping innocent people. He's floating over traumatized flood victims lording his power over them as they reach up to him begging for help. He was probably trying to decide if he should save them or not. "Do I owe the people of Earth anything? Martha said no. But dad said I might be a messiah. Decisions, decisions..."

    Did he save Luthor from certain death because it's the core of who he is? I have no idea.
    And the first iconic movie batman we had did mount 2 machine guns on his car.
    Yep, and he stuffed a bomb down a guys pants and knocked him over a ledge. You don't see me championing the Burton Batman as the Batman I want to see in the DCEU in this new era of superhero films.

    If you're doing the DCEU, don't give us an old defeated murderous Batman. Don't give us mopey grim Superman. I don't know, I'm just a comic book superhero fan and a movie-goer. But it seems like common sense not to try and shake things up when you're attempting to establish your own cinematic universe.
    Guiren Baotsu IC OOC DOC


    Formerly Khan the Destroyer on the WotC Forums.

    Awesome Pun-Pun Avatar by the incredible AsteriskAmp!

  26. - Top - End - #176
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sapphire Guard View Post

    Every screen Batman has killed except Clooney (and Michael Keaton's positively took joy in it).

    I do not like it. But's it's unfair to count one and not the others. In Batman begins he drives over occupied cop cars and gets away with 'It's a miracle no one was killed.'
    It's a bit different in movies that clearly aren't meant to be taken seriously. You assume the henchman with the bomb in his pants survives because the entire movie is basically a cartoon with cartoon laws and physics. It's played as a joke. Snyder would have shown the same scene except with the henchman exploding into a pile of gore. You can't really compare the two.

    Likewise, in Batman Begins we're meant to assume that he's just that good that he can intentionally do things like hit a car without killing anyone. Sure, that's not realistic, but nothing Batman does is meant to be realistic. Contrast to BvS where he's clearly and intentionally murdering people. It's a completely different tone. One that honestly has no place in a Batman movie.

  27. - Top - End - #177
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Metahuman1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    How should Ross bring the Hulk in? Either the soldiers kill Banner, or Banner surrenders. Or the Hulk escapes. Those are the three things that will happen. What is Ross supposed to do?
    Something closer to what he tried to do with the 1 survivor AFTER this had become the blown operation is was physically impossible for it to avoid becoming because it was so mind-numbingly stupidly planned.

    Step 1: Warn them what there up against and that fighting is NOT AN OPTION! That any attempt to fight needs to have the fight physically, in real time and the real world, 100% over, with Banner incapacitated and out like a freaking light, before he even knows there's a person on the same block as Banner to fight with.

    Step 2: Don't send dudes with guns. Send an observation team to watch him form FAR, FAR away and not engage under ANY circumstances. Maybe pose as that Mr. Blue guy and send him something. Tell him he thinks it will help and to try it, but it will make him sleep so try it when he's going to bed anyway. Make it a drug that will keep him out for hours.

    Or arrange an operative that can blend in to the area to slip him something in the evening to make him go out in a similar fashion. Or pump an odorless gas into the apartment freaking quietly in the middle of the night when no one's up anyway and Banners been sleeping for a couple of hours, to make sure he'll stay good and dead to the world till you get him were you freaking want him.

    If Ross was in any way, shape or form smart enough to be qualified for any of the job's he's held or to do what you credit him with, he'd have done ANY of these things instead of what he canonically DID do. If, however, he isn't, and he's exactly as I've made him out to be, then he'd send men with guns and no real prior warning. Guess what he did Canonically?





    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    Uh no. They tried to take the Hulk down with gas. Unfortunately, Betty started screaming, which stressed Banner out and caused him to transform.

    Yeah, he took a chance on the soldier because he literally has *no way* of defeating the Hulk. He created the Abomination, a total disaster which thankfully the Hulk was able to... beat in a fist fight and then just leave there lying on a rooftop lol.

    Ross made a mistake. Kind of like Tony did when he created Ultron. Oops. So now is Tony automatically wrong all the time as well?
    Which is why Banner was running for an extended period from men with guns, with potential to Hulk out at any point during that chase and in fact nearly doing so for most of it. Instead of just sealing the whole building and gassing the whole building before Banner knew they were there, and why all the big vehicles and weapons were left behind because of the importance of stealth.

    Oh. Wait. That's not even close to what happened on screen. It's the opposite in fact. Gas was a freaking after thought.

    Every single time Banner Hulks out it's Rosse's Mistake. He could have had her secured by five or six men twice her size with Hand to Hand grappling training. Hell he could have pulled a string to make sure she wouldn't be anywhere near the campus that day for some reason. Shield was working with him at the time, pick a reason they could make it happen to keep her far away from the whole thing and safe. He did NOTHING of the sort and in fact explicitly on screen ordered his personnel to LET HER SEE THIS! He straight up said "Now she'll see." with every implication that what she'd SEE was that HE WAS RIGHT AND SHE WAS WRONG ABOUT BANNER AND THE MONSTER HE WAS NOW, AND THAT HIS WAY OF DEALING WITH THAT MONSTER WAS THE ONE AND ONLY RIGHT WAY!!!!!!!"

    And then he came within seconds of murdering her by accident in the process AND barely covered the whole thing up, after being the direct cause of the 2nd Hulking Out in a densely populated area for that movie, AND created the Abomination and failed to recognize it as anything other then a first pass that needed further work, at worst.

    And then, of course, he blows it letting abomination into the field again that soon when he clearly wants in as a matter of a personal grudge. If Ross was competent that alone would have disqualified Blansky or however you spell his name from being anywhere near that strike. (Were, BTW, he got banner with a Sniper Attack from miles away, quietly, before Banner even knew there was a threat. Which he could have had done either of the first two times but didn't because he's an idiot with a desperate need to prove he has a bigger male anatomy, as I stated before.).

    This cause the breaking of Harlem and nearly got Ross Killed. And if he'd learned a DAMN thing about it he'd have just shut up and listened to freaking IRON MAN of all people. And his favorite Bar would NOT have been demolished. Spoiler, he didn't and it was so he know he didn't learn a single freaking thing. Again, Canon supports my version of events, but not yours. [/QUOTE]


    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Samurai View Post
    Right. For all you know, the nations thought about strong-arming the Avengers somehow, or being more forceful, and Ross is the one that said "Trust me, we can't beat them. The only thing I've seen that works is to have one of them fighting on your own side. So this is what I suggest..." and we got a plan where the Avengers work for the good guys. This would be inline with his experiences from the Hulk movie, and it would gel with his characterization in Civil War.

    What?

    Since the Hulk movie... what has Ross learned? Well, he saw his daughter almost get killed but the Hulk saved her life. He made a huge mistake in unleashing the Abomination on the world and, once again, Banner saved the day. After that, Tony approaches him about the Avengers initiative, so Ross has known about the formation of the team and the intent behind it since before the team existed. And what have they done? They saved the world, twice. But in doing so, they killed people and left a lot of destruction in their wake. The nations of the world don't want this team running around unchecked. Now Ross is secretary of state, and he's been a part of this Accords.

    It could be that this is all a secret Ross conspiracy to finally gain control of the Avengers. But I don't think that is what the movie was going for. Ross wasn't a villain in Civil War and I don't think he was meant to be seen that way.

    Agreed about the bargaining. Part of the reason they didn't is because Cap didn't give it a chance to begin with. But it was also sprung on everyone. Had Tony given the team a head's up about the intent behind the meeting with Ross, they could have come to some agreement before the meeting.

    I'm not sure about the bit about Ross. Without Banner there, I don't know what relationship the others have with Ross that would justify asking for a replacement, with the exception of Tony, who seems to be working with Ross.
    Both of these two follow the same pattern so I'm lumping them together.

    That pattern, specifically, is now your doing 2 things.


    1: Ignoring past characterization an writing a version that would blatantly favor the side of "There is nothing wrong with registration." in it's place.

    2: Your writing pure speculation not of things that are going to happen in future movies, but of things that happened off screen during movies that have already taken place, and your filling it with this version that oh so conveniently fits perfectly into the mold of "Ross is the ideal person to be running this and thus there is no grounds to disagree with him or the Accords as a whole.".

    In short, your moving the goal posts to try and repaint everything in your favor. To claim anything else requires that again, as I keep pointing out, we ignore EVERYTHING about the man in The Incredible Hulk and more then 50% of what we saw of him in Civil War. That only works if were being informed by his comic counterparts history. Which looses you the argument instantly and out of hand if we are.
    "I Burn!"

  28. - Top - End - #178
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Clertar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ockham
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Here's a video with an interesting idea: DC heroes are good, but they're hardly ever represented well outside of comics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PraUjsClgDM
    "Like the old proverb says, if one sees something not right, one must draw out his sword to intervene"

  29. - Top - End - #179
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anteros View Post
    It's a bit different in movies that clearly aren't meant to be taken seriously. You assume the henchman with the bomb in his pants survives because the entire movie is basically a cartoon with cartoon laws and physics. It's played as a joke. Snyder would have shown the same scene except with the henchman exploding into a pile of gore. You can't really compare the two.

    Likewise, in Batman Begins we're meant to assume that he's just that good that he can intentionally do things like hit a car without killing anyone. Sure, that's not realistic, but nothing Batman does is meant to be realistic. Contrast to BvS where he's clearly and intentionally murdering people. It's a completely different tone. One that honestly has no place in a Batman movie.
    Totally agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Metahuman1
    Guess what he did Canonically?
    Again, Canon supports my version of events, but not yours.
    I know what he did in the movie. I'm not disputing the events. The conclusions that you're drawing from them though, I don't agree with. I'm giving Ross some slack because it's a Hulk and literally no one that we've seen so far (with the exception of the new Thor) can defeat him. Ross doesn't have a Marvel Superheroes database that tells him all of the Hulk's stats. He just knows that Banner turns into an unstoppable force of nature. I don't quite remember that movie, but a military man trying to take down a monster with weaponry seems about right to me. A father trying to get his daughter to understand that she's in love with an out of control monster that can't be killed and that destroys everything in its wake seems about right to me.

    The point is, you are characterizing him as almost completely inhuman, as some type of evil villain machine that simply makes bad choices and wants to do evil things. I don't agree with that characterization. Nothing, absolutely *nothing* in Civil War suggests that Ross is a bad guy. In fact, he shows restraint. He tells Tony he should have him locked up after the incident at the airfield, but he doesn't do that, because Tony was operating under his "oversight" and probably because he still needs him. But if he was the diabolical mad man control freak that you're making him out to be, that probably would have gone differently. If he was the guy you're making him out to be, he wouldn't have allowed Hulk to fight Abomination. He'd just keep shooting, and foaming at the mouth apparently, until Abomination murdered him.

    Ross is up against creatures that cannot be stopped conventionally, and only barely by guys with Tony Stark tech levels. Your hindsight-based implication that he should have handled the Hulk perfectly is simply wrong.
    1: Ignoring past characterization an writing a version that would blatantly favor the side of "There is nothing wrong with registration." in it's place.
    I'm not ignoring the Hulk movie. I'm just not making Ross one-dimensional.
    2: Your writing pure speculation not of things that are going to happen in future movies, but of things that happened off screen during movies that have already taken place, and your filling it with this version that oh so conveniently fits perfectly into the mold of "Ross is the ideal person to be running this and thus there is no grounds to disagree with him or the Accords as a whole.".
    I've never claimed that Ross is the ideal person for the Accords. And I've never made that argument that there is no grounds to disagree with him or the Accords. In fact, I'm the one that initially brought up Civil War as an example of how to do conflict well. Nice try though.

    I'm speculating about Ross because you're speculating about Ross. We don't know what type of control, if any, he would have over the Avengers. They would answer to the UN. Maybe Ross is simply involved to convince them to sign, since they are American (mostly), and then after that he's simply the Secretary of State and has nothing to do with the Avengers. I don't know. The movie doesn't tell us, so you pretending that he's a conspiring power-hungry mad man in the movie is speculation. And I answered it in kind.
    In short, your moving the goal posts to try and repaint everything in your favor.
    My favor? Here's my point. Ross isn't the one-dimensional villain you're making him out to be. I don't need to repaint anything. He's a human with a job to do; bring down the Hulk. He's a father with a job to do; protect his daughter from the Hulk. If you had his resources you would fail at this job a million times over, but by all means sit back and judge away lol.

    He's not a saint. I'm not portraying him as one of the good guys. But you're going to need more to paint the Accords as some sinister chess move to put the Avengers under the thumb of a psychopath. The Hulk movie doesn't really cut it (at least from what I can remember, it's been a long time) and neither does Civil War.
    Guiren Baotsu IC OOC DOC


    Formerly Khan the Destroyer on the WotC Forums.

    Awesome Pun-Pun Avatar by the incredible AsteriskAmp!

  30. - Top - End - #180
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bologna, Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why is DC sucking so much?

    To be honest, I'd die to have a scene in Infinity War where Thanos pops up over the White House, and Cap turns to Tony and says "Sokovia your way out of THIS".

    ^_^

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •