Your DC-Only controversial opinions (part II)...

[manwhohaseverything]

I judge people by their actions as well. I don't see the woman who charged into No Man's Land as doing it for the glory. She was working from her idealism but it wasn't for glory, it was because she believed in the Amazon way of life and in humanity.

Sure, i could charge into no man's land with bullets coming in slowmotion and tales of the ghost who walks in my head with a mask and ring worn. Does that mean i am a hero? or does it mean i am fantasised view of the phantom? You decide. Me i am going with the latter. We can agree to disagree.
“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.”

[Frontier]

Sure, i could charge into no man's land with bullets coming in slowmotion and tales of the ghost who walks in my head with a mask and ring worn. Does that mean i am a hero? or does it mean i am fantasised view of the phantom? You decide. Me i am going with the latter. We can agree to disagree.
“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.”

If you use that power to help people, then yes, I think that makes you a hero.

[manwhohaseverything]

If you use that power to help people, then yes, I think that makes you a hero.

I have a little higher standard for a hero. Dan turpin and bibbo is more of a hero in dcau or postcrisis than Superman. Superman himself says it, which is good otherwise he would be a jackass.


Difference between bibbo and diana is that bibbo does know he has no power. Diana on the other hand has an idea of her potential and she know bullets aren't much of threat with her training, especially after the first shot which she blocked very easily. Bibbo goes in to the unknown. He loves supes and adores him. But, he believes he cannot be superman. He is right and wrong. He might not have the ability to leap tall buildings in a single bound(right part) .but, He is superman(wrong part) .
Also, me as the phantom in real life would cool as eff.

[Adekis]

Here's one:

I kind of like the Green Lantern: Emerald Dawn duology more than I like Green Lantern: Secret Origin. I sort of like how much they focus on Hal being a hot mess, but still capable of overcoming his situation.

Now yeah, Sinestro is definitely not as well written in the Emerald Dawn books, he's too cartoonish compared to how well developed he kind of became later on. Maybe Sinestro's evil became more understandable to us as our own world seemed to grow more incomprehensible - so he got a fairly well thought out version of fascism, in contrast to his pure egomania of yesteryear.

Buuut, with just Hal concerned, I just for whatever reason kind of prefer Emerald Dawn.

I think it's interesting that most post-Crisis revamps kind of stick around - Batman: Year One the most, and I think Byrne's The Man of Steel is making kind of a popularity comeback, but others as well. And then there's Emerald Dawn, just totally eclipsed by Secret Origin. It's interesting.

[Frontier]

I have a little higher standard for a hero. Dan turpin and bibbo is more of a hero in dcau or postcrisis than Superman. Superman himself says it, which is good otherwise he would be a jackass.


Difference between bibbo and diana is that bibbo does know he has no power. Diana on the other hand has an idea of her potential and she know bullets aren't much of threat with her training, especially after the first shot which she blocked very easily. Bibbo goes in to the unknown. He loves supes and adores him. But, he believes he cannot be superman. He is right and wrong. He might not have the ability to leap tall buildings in a single bound(right part) .but, He is superman(wrong part) .
Also, me as the phantom in real life would cool as eff.

Well, there's something to be said for people who don't have the powers of the larger-then-life Superheroes but still do their part, but I think it is rooted in the characters they are that the Superheroes would still try and help people even if they didn't have their powers.

[Will Evans]

I think with Jon Kent and Damian appearing across more media coincides with the young generation Z, seeing Superman and Batman as more father figures, than heroes kids aspire to be (how it used to be.)

They see themselves more in Jon and Damian.

Other superheroes like Aquaman and Plastic Man have children too.

But I think since Superman, Batman, their origins and everything pertaining to them has been so ingrained in the past 4 generations of the fans from birth. The shift is only with their 2 characters.

[manwhohaseverything]

Well, there's something to be said for people who don't have the powers of the larger-then-life Superheroes but still do their part, but I think it is rooted in the characters they are that the Superheroes would still try and help people even if they didn't have their powers.

Being nonpowered or not is irrelevant to the discussion. Diana was at that moment totally in control. So, she wasn't a hero through out the movie. She became one only after the choice to Keep on doing it even after her hero fantasy broke, after steve died. Also these characters were written to be liked first and foremost. Ofcourse, they would be going for the heroic choices.

Another thing, i don't think Snyder's aim was to create a likeable superman(maybe it was) . He took all the books. Made a movie according to his leanings. He wants the destruction, killing, superman concept itself ... Etc to be discussed, not blindly embraced.Siegel and shuster never made more out of the character than it actually is. They wanted the character to be this shocking and entertaining figure that's meant to be talked about. Look at, ac#1 and the reaction of people. Do they look like they saw a hero save a damsel? Granted these are all bad guys. But, still superman is, was and always will be controversial one way or another.

So, i don't understand the notion of superman as "role model". He is just a guy doing the right thing with many contradictions. Sure, if you see something worth emulating in the dude that's awesome. But, he ain't it.Moreover,strangely a superman that's not meant to be "Role model" comes of a better hero than those that are designed to.
"This is my world" superman says.
While the world says, "You can go ahead and die for us. We will throw you a parade"
These guys didn't waste one second to nuke superman. Yep! Goldenage superman, silverage guys, astroboy.. Etc all felt the alienation and loneliness of being used by humanity for its own needs. Granted there were good people that didn't. As said, there is no glory or vengeance in being superman. He gets nothing out of it except a good work out.

[Vampire Savior]

Here's one:

I kind of like the Green Lantern: Emerald Dawn duology more than I like Green Lantern: Secret Origin. I sort of like how much they focus on Hal being a hot mess, but still capable of overcoming his situation.

Now yeah, Sinestro is definitely not as well written in the Emerald Dawn books, he's too cartoonish compared to how well developed he kind of became later on. Maybe Sinestro's evil became more understandable to us as our own world seemed to grow more incomprehensible - so he got a fairly well thought out version of fascism, in contrast to his pure egomania of yesteryear.

Buuut, with just Hal concerned, I just for whatever reason kind of prefer Emerald Dawn.

I think it's interesting that most post-Crisis revamps kind of stick around - Batman: Year One the most, and I think Byrne's The Man of Steel is making kind of a popularity comeback, but others as well. And then there's Emerald Dawn, just totally eclipsed by Secret Origin. It's interesting.

I can understand that. I guess this is a controversial opinion, but I don't like Geoff Johns' Green Lantern at all. It's possibly my least favorite Green Lantern run. If not, it ranks very high in that category. One of the things that might put it at number 1 is simply how long and repetitive it is. Actually, I don't like anything I've read from Geoff Johns. I've tried giving him a fair shake, but nothing lands with me. Granted, I've never read his JSA, because I'm not a fan of the JSA, but I've heard that is his best work.

But yeah, Geoff Johns' work consistently doesn't interest or connect with me, which is fine. It's interesting, though, considering how so many other people seem to eat it up.

[Frontier]

Being nonpowered or not is irrelevant to the discussion. Diana was at that moment totally in control. So, she wasn't a hero through out the movie. She became one only after the choice to Keep on doing it even after her hero fantasy broke, after steve died. Also these characters were written to be liked first and foremost. Ofcourse, they would be going for the heroic choices.

I don't think an issue of "control" or not should matter when it comes to being a hero. If she was using her powers to help people, for the sake of helping people, how does that mean she's not a hero? I don't get it.

Another thing, i don't think Snyder's aim was to create a likeable superman(maybe it was) . He took all the books. Made a movie according to his leanings. He wants the destruction, killing, superman concept itself ... Etc to be discussed, not blindly embraced.Siegel and shuster never made more out of the character than it actually is. They wanted the character to be this shocking and entertaining figure that's meant to be talked about. Look at, ac#1 and the reaction of people. Do they look like they saw a hero save a damsel? Granted these are all bad guys. But, still superman is, was and always will be controversial one way or another.

So, i don't understand the notion of superman as "role model". He is just a guy doing the right thing with many contradictions. Sure, if you see something worth emulating in the dude that's awesome. But, he ain't it.Moreover,strangely a superman that's not meant to be "Role model" comes of a better hero than those that are designed to.
"This is my world" superman says.
While the world says, "You can go ahead and die for us. We will throw you a parade"
These guys didn't waste one second to nuke superman. Yep! Goldenage superman, silverage guys, astroboy.. Etc all felt the alienation and loneliness of being used by humanity for its own needs. Granted there were good people that didn't. As said, there is no glory or vengeance in being superman. He gets nothing out of it except a good work out.

I don't see what prevents Superman from being a role model. Even in his more "radical" Golden Age phase.

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't think an issue of "control" or not should matter when it comes to being a hero. If she was using her powers to help people, for the sake of helping people, how does that mean she's not a hero? I don't get it.

I don't see what prevents Superman from being a role model. Even in his more "radical" Golden Age phase.

That's thing though, she wasn't. She had the romantic view of the past, which our discussion was about. That's the whole reason she is compelled.

For one, violence based Vigilantism is a nasty business. That's more than enough. He is better of running from police, than being seen as the guy who everyone should be like. Moreover, it is incredible restricting. Superman can't be an ******* or a dick or just plane petty. He can't be competitive or ambitious. He can't be bored of bullshit, say eff this nonsense . He can't even make face or be goofy.

[Gaius]

That's thing though, she wasn't. She had the romantic view of the past, which our discussion was about. That's the whole reason she is compelled.

I mean, not really? Movie made it pretty clear her motivation was stop this calamitous war that she just heard about and that she assumed was being caused by Ares.

[manwhohaseverything]

I mean, not really? Movie made it pretty clear her motivation was stop this calamitous war that she just heard about and that she assumed was being caused by Ares.

That assumption wouldn't exist if she hadn't had her head filled with the legends. It's her hero fantasy. You know go on a quest, slay the dragon, rescue the princess,live happily ever after.. Etc.

[Gaius]

That assumption wouldn't exist if she hadn't had her head filled with the legends. It's her hero fantasy. You know go on a quest, slay the dragon, rescue the princess,live happily ever after.. Etc.

Not really, the purpose of the stories she was told was to give her the simplistic view that war came from one source.

[manwhohaseverything]

Not really, the purpose of the stories she was told was to give her the simplistic view that war came from one source.

Then her drive to train and sneak out when she was told no. how is that gonna be explained? It's all connected. She views it as her grand quest.Anyways, let's agree to disagree.

[Frontier]

I mean, Diana's motivation is driven by the ideals and stories she heard from the Amazons but I don't see that any different from Superman's morality coming from being raised by the Kents. How does that make her willingness to save people and help any less valid?