Started By
Message

re: New Supergirl poster

Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:11 pm to
Posted by molsusports
Member since Jul 2004
37521 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:11 pm to
quote:


Even though it's based on her portrayal in Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow?


I haven't read that so I won't comment specifically about the series.

But there's a lot of material in comics written by people who have the intention to destroy something that they hate but other people liked.

An easy example seems like the Captain America was a Hydra agent storyline.

In recent history the deconstruction approach to many things (probably the least of which are cartoon characters) has become a fetish of many people who IMO are too low in character or maturity to resist fricking up something out of petty or sadistic enjoyment
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:13 pm to
You’re falling into exactly what I just pleaded with you not to. Double standards and tactics. I mean tearing down a previous movie is as ham fisted, lazy and wrong as it gets. It’s a meme at this point especially when nobody’s made any comparisons. You said you weren’t doing this but you are and it’s disappointing. I thought we were having a real discussion.
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:14 pm
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:15 pm to
Bro, everybody is talking about a Superman that they want. I have yet to see it in any interpretation. That’s what I’m trying to understand. Lol. I’m not putting down those movies. I love those movies. It’s a representation of a non-perfect Superman.

Why, because he fixes that shite. And becomes what he should be. Except for the end of two when he goes back childishly and gets back at that idiot at the bar.
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:17 pm
Posted by wesfau
Member since Mar 2023
2355 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:17 pm to
quote:

If you want a different Superman watch stuff with Homelander. If you want a party girl Supergirl then watch the She Hulk series instead


Cool.

My comment was about Thor.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:22 pm to
You’re comparing Clark being emotionally devastated by Louis’ death to him throwing a temper tantrum over being asked simple questions he, as a reporter, should easily answer. Then you say the Reeves SM is less stable. Cmon man
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:23 pm
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:23 pm to
How is it not? People were going to die. That’s not worth getting emotional about? When your girlfriend seems like she doesn’t care that people were going to die?
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:31 pm to
People weren’t going to die in the interview. WTF?
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:31 pm to
quote:

Then you say the Reeves SM is less stable. Cmon man
I mean, I’m not gonna sit here and say which one is more or less stable. I’m just saying they’re both imperfect. Reeves attacked a guy at a bar. Cavill didn’t even do that when a guy was being an a-hole at a bar.
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:33 pm to
When did I say that? His girlfriend was interviewing him in a way that she didn’t care about the people who could’ve died. He got a little emotional about it. Oh my God. Put him in a firing squad.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:37 pm to
He a journalist, like Louis said he should’ve been prepared. The entire point was Clark’s pretend interviews were silly and suspicious. His actions pertaining to the actual conflict were pure, Superman is supposed to be confident, her questions shouldn’t rattle him. The only dumb thing was him threatening a world leader when all he had to do was simply prevent the military action. On top of that you’re comparing tough questions to someone dying. You’re wrong here and if you take a step back and remove your bias you’d see it easily.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:37 pm to
“I mean, I’m not gonna sit here and say which one is more or less stable”


But you already did
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:39 pm to
What am I wrong about? I agree with you that those are things that make him imperfect. Reeves is also imperfect. But he risked the entire world in doing so multiple times. If you include the Donner version of two.

Superman is imperfect. And his wrist lives in doing so. In multiple interpretations. That is what I am saying. This Superman is imperfect in a different way. But not unlike in someways in past interpretations.
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:40 pm to
Which one risked the entire world?

Which one childishly attacks a guy in a bar for revenge? which gives his powers up and defies his parents just because he wants to have a human life? Some of these things don’t have anything to do with stability. But they do have more to do with a certain way people perceive Superman to be. And Reeves was worse. It’s the reality.

Still waiting on the best Superman interpretation btw. I know it’s out there somewhere.
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:46 pm
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:45 pm to
I’m not arguing he isn’t, some other poster says that. I’m saying his imperfections are that he’s uncompromisingly good and that can be used against him. Failing to answer softball questions isn’t an example of that. And about the world reversal in the 78 movie, that’s silly but it’s spectacle and you’ve argued against the silliness of nerfing his powers when he’s fighting a clone which is silly. That’s what I mean by double standard. Let’s compare MOS because that’s the best representation of the character. That movies issue is it didn’t give us the hopeful, lighter side of Superman. Bringing in Zod and the collateral damage then just ending was probably too heavy a resolution for an origin story but Superman was done nearly perfect in that one.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:47 pm to
Already said that was dumb and I never used the OG movies to defend anything. You injected that
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:47 pm to
quote:

Superman was done nearly perfect in that one.
in a man of steel? You just proved my point. It is completely opinion on who Superman is.
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:48 pm
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:48 pm to
Yes. You’ve given the example of MoS being the perfect Superman. Now all of this makes sense lol
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:49 pm to
No it’s just an example of you wanting to confuse what the character is.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70620 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:50 pm to
I said near perfect and I said the representation of the character not the movie while also giving a clear reason for where the movie got things wrong. It’s becoming clear you have an agenda
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:52 pm
Posted by abellsujr
Member since Apr 2014
38455 posts
Posted on 7/16/25 at 4:51 pm to
What are you talking about? You just said Superman was portrayed perfectly in MoS. Are you just a troll for a living lol. Did I just get trolled here? Lol.

Oh, I’m sorry, near perfect. I apologize.
This post was edited on 7/16/25 at 4:52 pm
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram