I read Red Son today. As Elseworld stories go it was pretty interesting. Definitely a better Luthor story than Superman story, though. Ending didn't make any sense.
I read Red Son today. As Elseworld stories go it was pretty interesting. Definitely a better Luthor story than Superman story, though. Ending didn't make any sense.
The ending was allegedly the work of Grant Morrison.
I'M NOT FINISHED WITH YOU!!!
+1
Options
TrippyJingMoses supposes his toeses are roses.But Moses supposes erroneously.Registered Userregular
Right it makes sense on the level that it's perfectly fine to set up Superman as the descendant of Lex Luthor and you want to create that alternate history and
Well I have a problem with how it recasts Superman as a non-alien force, unless you can argue that an advanced enough human is an alien, but that's not really the bit
By this point humanity has colonized a sizable part of the entire universe and is able to freely travel back and forth to the afterlife. Earth sure as shootin' ain't Krypton. You have limitless options to get your family off Earth before shit goes south. Why send your baby into the past?
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Red Son has my favorite Lex Luthor.
And maybe the only portrayal of a Batman who I thought was actually terrifying.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
Gvzbgul on
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
What citizen of Superman's outstanding society wouldn't want to continue to be useful?
To provide labor and support when your spirit has given up?
I don't buy into the idea of "Superhero fatigue", but I am starting to feel like Marvel is putting out more video content than I have space for in my life now. So, I guess, good on them for matching the MCU division to the comics division. Which is fine, as long as the quality is there, I'm all for them putting out more variety. A little something for everyone.
Damage Control was the obvious one. I can't think of many more non-superhero comedy things from the Marvel U. Superhero-wise, I doubt it'll be a She-Hulk show. Howard the Duck would probably be too costly due to CG. Squirrel Girl maybe?
I'd expect if all of those actually go through a few of them will trade off timeslots or have shorter seasons during breaks, like Agent Carter or Legends of Tomorrow.
Damage Control was the obvious one. I can't think of many more non-superhero comedy things from the Marvel U. Superhero-wise, I doubt it'll be a She-Hulk show. Howard the Duck would probably be too costly due to CG. Squirrel Girl maybe?
Ms. Marvel would make a pretty terrific TV show that you could categorize as comedy (when compared to a straight drama or action show). I think she'd actually suit the TV format better than film.
Lindsay Lohan on
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Right it makes sense on the level that it's perfectly fine to set up Superman as the descendant of Lex Luthor and you want to create that alternate history and
Well I have a problem with how it recasts Superman as a non-alien force, unless you can argue that an advanced enough human is an alien, but that's not really the bit
By this point humanity has colonized a sizable part of the entire universe and is able to freely travel back and forth to the afterlife. Earth sure as shootin' ain't Krypton. You have limitless options to get your family off Earth before shit goes south. Why send your baby into the past?
I think they said it simply:
They wanted to change the past, and hoped their child would be able to do that.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
What citizen of Superman's outstanding society wouldn't want to continue to be useful?
To provide labor and support when your spirit has given up?
I'm sure that's exactly how that Superman saw it. It's basically the communist ideal.
Right it makes sense on the level that it's perfectly fine to set up Superman as the descendant of Lex Luthor and you want to create that alternate history and
Well I have a problem with how it recasts Superman as a non-alien force, unless you can argue that an advanced enough human is an alien, but that's not really the bit
By this point humanity has colonized a sizable part of the entire universe and is able to freely travel back and forth to the afterlife. Earth sure as shootin' ain't Krypton. You have limitless options to get your family off Earth before shit goes south. Why send your baby into the past?
my big issue with it is that it's unnecessary and doesn't add much to the story other than kind of an empty twist
Right it makes sense on the level that it's perfectly fine to set up Superman as the descendant of Lex Luthor and you want to create that alternate history and
Well I have a problem with how it recasts Superman as a non-alien force, unless you can argue that an advanced enough human is an alien, but that's not really the bit
By this point humanity has colonized a sizable part of the entire universe and is able to freely travel back and forth to the afterlife. Earth sure as shootin' ain't Krypton. You have limitless options to get your family off Earth before shit goes south. Why send your baby into the past?
my big issue with it is that it's unnecessary and doesn't add much to the story other than kind of an empty twist
It ties Superman and Luthor closer together. Making them two sides of the same coin. Luthor is Superman, in a way.
Damage Control was the obvious one. I can't think of many more non-superhero comedy things from the Marvel U. Superhero-wise, I doubt it'll be a She-Hulk show. Howard the Duck would probably be too costly due to CG. Squirrel Girl maybe?
It's probably be a pain to untangle with Sony, but I'd totes be down for a Superior Foes of Spider-Man series.
Damage Control was the obvious one. I can't think of many more non-superhero comedy things from the Marvel U. Superhero-wise, I doubt it'll be a She-Hulk show. Howard the Duck would probably be too costly due to CG. Squirrel Girl maybe?
It's probably be a pain to untangle with Sony, but I'd totes be down for a Superior Foes of Spider-Man series.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
Some people still argue that Kilgrave's powers could be used for good, so I'm more inclined to believe that there are still people who think forced lobotomies can be used for good.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
Some people still argue that Kilgrave's powers could be used for good, so I'm more inclined to believe that there are still people who think forced lobotomies can be used for good.
I mean, Kilgrave's power's can be used for good. In the same way that any sort of coercion by force can be used for good. Making a would-be shooter drop their gun, for example.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
Some people still argue that Kilgrave's powers could be used for good, so I'm more inclined to believe that there are still people who think forced lobotomies can be used for good.
I mean, Kilgrave's power's can be used for good. In the same way that any sort of coercion by force can be used for good. Making a would-be shooter drop their gun, for example.
You would need an absolute saint to make it work, but it could happen
There was no safe path to rehabilitation for Kilgrave the person however, it's just too damn easy for him to kill his handlers
Locking him up was the most moral thing you could probably manage
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
Some people still argue that Kilgrave's powers could be used for good, so I'm more inclined to believe that there are still people who think forced lobotomies can be used for good.
I mean, Kilgrave's power's can be used for good. In the same way that any sort of coercion by force can be used for good. Making a would-be shooter drop their gun, for example.
You would need an absolute saint to make it work, but it could happen
There was no safe path to rehabilitation for Kilgrave the person however, it's just too damn easy for him to kill his handlers
Locking him up was the most moral thing you could probably manage
Oh definitely. I don't think Kilgrave could be used for good. I'm not sure anyone with his power would be able to be a long-term hero (I feel like anyone who is morally righteous to wield it responsibly would find the burden of it too great to carry). But the power absolutely has the capability to be used for good.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
Some people still argue that Kilgrave's powers could be used for good, so I'm more inclined to believe that there are still people who think forced lobotomies can be used for good.
I mean, Kilgrave's power's can be used for good. In the same way that any sort of coercion by force can be used for good. Making a would-be shooter drop their gun, for example.
My general concern for mind control powers is that anything that actively overrides free will is terrifying even in the most mundane circumstances.
Passive control or nudging someone to do something is one thing, but being able to completely override a person's ability to reason or some aspect of who they are is pretty evil in my book even if it's just overriding the person's thought process to drop a gun.
Like, if movie theaters pumping in popcorn smell or a store considering using subliminal messaging in the background music are either borderline or unethical then anything that just directly overrides your ability to think or act is miles beyond that.
Damage Control was the obvious one. I can't think of many more non-superhero comedy things from the Marvel U. Superhero-wise, I doubt it'll be a She-Hulk show. Howard the Duck would probably be too costly due to CG. Squirrel Girl maybe?
Ms. Marvel would make a pretty terrific TV show that you could categorize as comedy (when compared to a straight drama or action show). I think she'd actually suit the TV format better than film.
They really shouldn't make a Ms. Marvel show before Captain Marvel debuts in the movies, though.
I'm more frustrated with the fact that Superman does all of his evil stuff off camera. The books is showing that Superman is guy who cares and tries hard etc etc and then boom, mind slaves! It feels unsupported and reasonless. Superman could totally be a guy who lobotomises people, the DCAU did it very well and grounded it in who Superman was. But this book just chucks it in and it doesn't gel with Superman as we are shown him in Red Son. There's a bunch of other stuff like that too that I can't remember off the top of my head. Things (especially background details) were happening 'just because', it's a limitation of trying to fit a decades long story into a single book, but it could have been done better. I liked the book initially but the more I thought about it the more problems I saw with the book.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
Apparently, he was able to...un-lobotomize people? Somehow?
Posts
The ending was allegedly the work of Grant Morrison.
Well I have a problem with how it recasts Superman as a non-alien force, unless you can argue that an advanced enough human is an alien, but that's not really the bit
By this point humanity has colonized a sizable part of the entire universe and is able to freely travel back and forth to the afterlife. Earth sure as shootin' ain't Krypton. You have limitless options to get your family off Earth before shit goes south. Why send your baby into the past?
And maybe the only portrayal of a Batman who I thought was actually terrifying.
I always interpreted him lobotomizing folks into his slaves was him providing them another form of punishment than death (and him rationalizing that as a good moral choice).
It also feeds into that Superman's foolishness in trying to save the world by tyrannically controlling it.
Basically it's a death sentence, but one where your body continues to be "useful" after you die. Which, depending on your outlook is either better or worse than a regular death.
What citizen of Superman's outstanding society wouldn't want to continue to be useful?
To provide labor and support when your spirit has given up?
I don't buy into the idea of "Superhero fatigue", but I am starting to feel like Marvel is putting out more video content than I have space for in my life now. So, I guess, good on them for matching the MCU division to the comics division. Which is fine, as long as the quality is there, I'm all for them putting out more variety. A little something for everyone.
Damage Control was the obvious one. I can't think of many more non-superhero comedy things from the Marvel U. Superhero-wise, I doubt it'll be a She-Hulk show. Howard the Duck would probably be too costly due to CG. Squirrel Girl maybe?
Missed one, but yes.
Also no telling how their Netflix plans will expand.
Ms. Marvel would make a pretty terrific TV show that you could categorize as comedy (when compared to a straight drama or action show). I think she'd actually suit the TV format better than film.
I think they said it simply:
I'm sure that's exactly how that Superman saw it. It's basically the communist ideal.
Victory is in a lot of books. It's a popular subject.
my big issue with it is that it's unnecessary and doesn't add much to the story other than kind of an empty twist
It's probably be a pain to untangle with Sony, but I'd totes be down for a Superior Foes of Spider-Man series.
Literally just Always Sunny, but in spandex
Some people still argue that Kilgrave's powers could be used for good, so I'm more inclined to believe that there are still people who think forced lobotomies can be used for good.
I mean, Kilgrave's power's can be used for good. In the same way that any sort of coercion by force can be used for good. Making a would-be shooter drop their gun, for example.
Sure, Marvel. Sure it will
Ordinary people in an extraordinary world is usually a pretty solid concept.
So
It probably will?
Plus, it's January. There's plenty of time for them to cast and film between now and the Fall season.
It's also ABC and not Netflix so it only means that there will be at least one episode / pilot and not a finished season.
You would need an absolute saint to make it work, but it could happen
There was no safe path to rehabilitation for Kilgrave the person however, it's just too damn easy for him to kill his handlers
Locking him up was the most moral thing you could probably manage
Oh definitely. I don't think Kilgrave could be used for good. I'm not sure anyone with his power would be able to be a long-term hero (I feel like anyone who is morally righteous to wield it responsibly would find the burden of it too great to carry). But the power absolutely has the capability to be used for good.
My general concern for mind control powers is that anything that actively overrides free will is terrifying even in the most mundane circumstances.
Passive control or nudging someone to do something is one thing, but being able to completely override a person's ability to reason or some aspect of who they are is pretty evil in my book even if it's just overriding the person's thought process to drop a gun.
Like, if movie theaters pumping in popcorn smell or a store considering using subliminal messaging in the background music are either borderline or unethical then anything that just directly overrides your ability to think or act is miles beyond that.
They really shouldn't make a Ms. Marvel show before Captain Marvel debuts in the movies, though.
Apparently, he was able to...un-lobotomize people? Somehow?