Oh. So that's why the superman fandom is dying and people like evil superman better.
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Oh. So that's why the superman fandom is dying and people like evil superman better.
Oh. So that's why the superman fandom is dying and people like evil superman better.
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
|
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
on god
No, both of these are only the first description in the images.
cope
usa is piloted by israelites
you misspelled chinese, wumao homosexual
Where Captain America?
Cavil Superman sucks, Homelander is based.
This is true though. America is turning itself into a 3rd world country with it's recent events.
We should just embrace our inner Homelander
That is more or less what's happening right now.
That’s just called being England
We're more like a washed up celebrity that has become infested with parasites
When does evil Superman die? Dragging this on forever sucks
When good superman stops being a boring mary sue
So never
Evil Superman is a boring Mary sue
>superman is le bad and irrelevant!
>thats why I make threads about him every day!
Even in the minds of his haters, Superman is the most important character in history.
There reason there are so many Superman threads is because Supergays are easy to bait.
Shut up deconstructiongays
>Supergays are easy to bait.
It's true.
Shut the frick up, b***h. We're not. I'll cut you, I swear to God.
I hate on Batman, Spiderman, Nova, and Aquaman way more than Superman.
Why Nova?
>Superman is the most important character in history.
This is why you get laughed on
When someone actually makes a GOOD Superman movie again.
>again
>implying they ever made one before
The only man to do so died just last year.
Oh I see so you're an 80 year old moron blinded by nostalgia
>nostalgia
I'd hope nostalgia is involved if you're consuming superhero media.
Bryan Singer died? Did he catch AIDS from a twink?
Snyder didn't die you silly goose. His career did.
That’s never going to happen because the value superman represent are abhorrent to everyone in Hollywood who has a shred of creative authority.
ban crt, it creates a pessimistic outlook on patriotism
>When does evil Superman die?
get used to it amazon is squeezing all they can out of this even though they could have killed him in the second season
> a show didn't kill off one its most interesting main characters because they wanted people to keep watching
Heaven forbid
That's not how the story goes.
It's gonna end like Oz then, peter off over time and end with a whimper
Have the actual Superman BTFO it
I fricking wish.
I thouth the part where he defened the blind guy was based and I clappt
So did he
This. Frick blind people, the fact that the left convinced people that blind people are to be considered "disabled" is the dumbest shit I've ever heard. Based as frick when somebody doesn't take their pity shit.
Could you try to be edgier and fatter?
He could have written it in braille
Dude's a cheeto away from a heart stop. Give him a break.
t.no legged troony
Good Superman = unrealistic
Evil Superman = realistic
That's why people think evil Superman is better.
Plus a group of ragtag normal humans vs a god is way more exciting and interesting than a god vs petty crooks
That's why Superman should spend more time doing good things and striving to instill hope and kindness in a world where there isn't much.
I don't want to see Superman fight petty crooks either.
>superman should be boring and preachy
Y'know, maybe those evil superman fans have a point
>Preachy
Nah actually do stuff, don't spend a frickton of time talking about it. I don't need him to bellow trans rights or wear a rainbow cape.
Stop a school shooting or something, save people around the word from fires and natural disasters. How many times do anons post the time Superman stops a girl from jumping off a building? More of that.
He shouldn't have a moral highground he should just be there to help in any way he can.
The world is shit and turning the ultimate boyscout into homelander is some edgy family guy cucktier defeatist garbage. He's always been at his best when he's a goofy goody two shoes boyscout.
>Stop a school shooting or something, save people around the word from fires and natural disasters. How many times do anons post the time Superman stops a girl from jumping off a building? More of that.
>He shouldn't have a moral highground he should just be there to help in any way he can.
>The world is shit and turning the ultimate boyscout into homelander is some edgy family guy cucktier defeatist garbage. He's always been at his best when he's a goofy goody two shoes boyscout.
What makea that any more compelling to whatever Spider-Man or Batman doing. Hell all famous heroes do this, especially shonen heroes.
Why does it have to be compelling? It's fricking Superman. The simplicity is what works the most.
I want more dorky good guy supes. Less Injustice Supes and more Multiversus Supes.
Yeah for now but television ages very fast.
>I want more dorky good guy supes. Less Injustice Supes and more Multiversus Supes.
Exactly right, anon. No coincidence that Superman was at his most popular when he was goofy.
Again, what makes Superman any better when Spider-Man and Batman have been goofy and over the top and much more popular for it?
Because he's literally "the man who can do anything"; you could give me *any* premise for Superman and I wouldn't scream that it was impossible. Now if you made Batman or Spiderman some reality-warping god that rides around the cosmos on a dinosaur, I'd laugh at you, but that shit isn't (wasn't?) out of the realm of possibility for Superman.
>Because he's literally "the man who can do anything"; you could give me *any* premise for Superman and I wouldn't scream that it was impossible.
The problem with Superman is because he can do anything. It makes it hard to write a problem for him that he can't immediately solve with brute strength. Captain America at least has to run and regroup when SHIELD starts shooting at him for not following the SHRA because he's not bulletproof. Meanwhile you asked Superman to follow the SHRA at risk of imprisonment he'd laugh in your face and say that he's not following a law that locks up Superheroes and there's almost nothing anyone can do to stop him.
You can’t punch an increasingly jaded world to make it better
Thats literally his purpose.
No that's Batman.
>Why does it have to be compelling? It's fricking Superman.
It has to be compelling because it's Superman. He's the reason all the other Superheroes exist to begin with. There's a standard with him that you just don't have with a Spider-Man or Batman. And if you don't meet that standard, you may as well just change the characters name.
Making him evil god overlord that executed all the brown people cuz Lois Lane got shot doesn’t live up to that standard either.
>Stop a school shooting or something, save people around the word from fires and natural disasters. How many times do anons post the time Superman stops a girl from jumping off a building?
No matter what Superman does. Because he's the most powerful man in the world. The press would always try to frame it as a bad thing. Just like they do with Presidents, Politicians, Celebrities. Etc.
>Superman stops a school shooting
"Superman stops school shootings. Why doesn't he go after the cause of school shootings?"
>Superman stops natural disaster
"Superman isn't doing enough to aid in the recovery in the aftermath of Hurricane Zod!"
>Superman saves suicidal girl
"Superman emotionally manipulates troubled teen and takes away her autonomy! News at 11!"
>Hurricane Zod
Trust me. If Supervillain attacks were a common thing, you could see them naming hurricanes after Supervillains.
That sounds like a problem Superman can’t fix with his super strength
The idea of optimism and trying to do genuine good in a cynical world works for Superman more than it would for Batman and Spider-Man
>That sounds like a problem Superman can’t fix with his super strength
Well Superman could solve it with his Super Strength. Problem is he'd have to hurt or intimidate people to do it. And most people myself included, don't see how you can make people change and be better without intimidating or threatening them. Probably why Batman is so popular these days. Because Batman gets immediate results. Superman on the other hand refuses to get his hands dirty to keep the moral high ground, and the world gets worse.
Solving it that way is the same slippery slope that Batman finds himself in if he kills a criminal. Of course he could threaten or bully the world into doing things his way but that’s not what he believes in or how he was taught
If he does then eventually he would be no different to Homelander
I’m already more interested in this hypothetical moral dilemma than “what if Superman da bad guy”
I mean if superman did take over the world and made it an objectively better place and cure world hunger and prevent war. And never had to kill or brainwash another human being to do it. Is he evil? If we're judging by the 'superheroes don't kill' moral event horizon standard batman follows. Then no he's not evil.
The bigger problem is that the setting has to contrive reasons for why Superman can't make the world a better place. Because the stupid status quo of comic books.
I don't think he'd run into much opposition to it in the superhero community either, like when he asked the world for help finding Dominus.
Superman engenders a lot of trust in the general public and I think he'd acknowledge that by trying to be the best leader possible.
>Superman engenders a lot of trust in the general public and I think he'd acknowledge that by trying to be the best leader possible.
Problem is realistically. Would anyone trust a Superman? Or would they only go along with him because they're afraid he might one day lose it? How far can suspension of disbelief go before you think 'that's not how people would really react to superman'.
>Would anyone trust a Superman?
Years and years of selfless public service? From a being easily capable of forcing his will on those around him trivial effort? What world leader could match that for trust?
>Years and years of selfless public service?
I mean. Bill Cosby and plenty of other examples of 'selfess' people really being pieces of shit who exploit others. And unlike Cosby, Superman can do literally anything to anyone and nobody would find out about it until decades later. Once you get a certain amount of power no matter how good you are, that lack of accountability or consequences if you did commit bad actions, is always going to make people uncomfortable.
That’s a big if because I don’t believe even Superman could fix the world
He could help it he could protect it from galactic invaders he could even change it in minor to major ways
But to completely fix it? Not happening.
>But to completely fix it? Not happening.
Silver bullet starting point is introducing Kryptonian technology so we could have a post food-scarcity world.
isekai manga are kind of the same, I don't really want to watch you try to create a realistic threat to what is otherwise a god you put in the story, I just want to watch that god bumblefrick around doing what they want to do.
I always find the stories of the powerful living their lives more interesting than the road up to them being powerful.
See
Can't handle other people's opinions? Don't post on a bulletin board.
That goes both ways, wienersnot.
I'm just worried about your mental state bro. If you don't have fun, don't post.
Drink meds.
Every time...
>Superman is boring
Problem is the boring Superman is the one I want and enjoy but everyone wants to turn him into something else.
>something else.
It's called a character. Everyone wants to turn him into a character.
And I think every attempt shows that that's lame for Superman.
This picture was made by someone who has never been in a Spider-Man thread
>noo superpowered good guy is boring
Saitama is better written than Superman though.
more like Mumen Rider is better written than Batman
Saitama is poorly written. They do nothing interesting with his personal conflict and just threw him to the sidelines once the joke got old.
>One Punch Man has been around for 10 years.
>Sells better than any comic from DC or Marvel that has been around for 100 years.
Those are the facts.
> Saitma kills several mostly innocent monster people who haven't hurt or killed anyone on camera.
Nobody cares.
>Superman kills Zod. Who actually deserved it.
OUTRAGE! HOW DARE YOU HAVE SUPERMAN KILL!
Violence is cool in fiction. But you can't have Superman be violent or else he's not superman anymore.
Saitama has a strong supporting cast, DC aliened Superman from his.
America literally fought to end slavery, uses it's navy to ensure all nations are safe from pirates, protects Europe during crises (Yugoslavia, etc), and still has the most influence globally through media (European top songs replicate American trends). It's a republic, so of course it will often be run by greedy dickheads looking for their own self-satisfaction (banana republics, assassinations); but unlike Canada or the UK the USA could never go fash or Communist because of the checks and balances in the system. Canada's "Checks" like the Senate are appointed by the PM...
Rather than homelander, America is just an butthole. America could go through a redemption arc, it just takes time. Canada can never be redeemed due to the PM having overwhelming legislative power compared to the US President.
>America could go through a redemption arc
due to how the us economy is set up, and how its hands are in every country's economy, it can't go though a redemption before absolute collapse.
Poor getting poorer.
Middle class barely getting by.
High-rollers lighting Habanos with Franklins.
im talking more the petrodollar, wealth inequality has little to do with that.
That's why they can't make a good Superman movie. Because the only ones with the money to do so are composed entirely with people like Lex Luthor. If lex owned exclusive film rights to Superman. He'd be producing nothing but documentaries and movies about how evil Superman is and why they should support Luthors twisted big city morals and not supermans small town morals. That's pretty much what's happening in real life with WB failing to make a good Superman movie and Amazon making two tv shows with evil Superman expys as main characters.
Agreed
And all of this self-deprecation becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The US has major issues but the potential for greatness is still there.
America is less Homelander and more Soldier Boy ( the show's soldier boy, not the comic one)
For me, Soldier Boy (show ver.) a equivalent of Winter Soldier.
A drug addicted womanizer with PTSD and no self-awareness?
Superman fans are the most insufferable homosexuals on the planet.
When you're completely obsessed with seething over Superman, I can see how it would seem that way.
Homelands is more like how US history is taught to be honest
I want to frick Homelander. What is wrong with me?
I’m tired of people saying the US is evil when there’s countries like the rapey Middle East and genocidal, prison camp, organ harvesting China. The fact you can complain about America shows America’s tolerance and it’s true you can say what you want here.
Sure it is. Get back to me in a few decades about how popular the villain from "The Boys" is. I bet he'll make less of an impression on history than Cobra Commander.
Who gives a shit about what's going to be popular in a few decades? Homelander is popular now, Superman isn't.
>Hello class, I'm your fellow white professer, Dr. Shekelburg Subversionstein, and I'm here to teach you how America is evil and bad, except for this breif period of time in the 1940's.
Superman isn't the US. Lex Luthor is the US. Clark Kent is an immigrant.
So what actually is way cooler and more based than what we're told
fun fact: europe would be giga racist again without american support (they cant deal with internal problems such as yugoslavia and bank failure)
I think Superman is neat
>people like evil superman
Fictional characters and the stories they are in are a reflection of the health of the civilization which created them. Keep that in mind. At this point I would not be at all surprised if DC decided to just straight up replace the JLA with the Crime Syndicate.
Frick. The DCEU probably could have worked if they started off with Superman being evil out of the gate. An Evil Superman would be more of a logical justification for the Justice League forming than fricking Steppenwullf.
>evil superman
Awful tier writing
Slightly unrelated, but i can't stand morons who say "Homelander is a realistic Superman".
Homelander is the disaster that happens when you raise the strongest being in the planet as a product while giving the minimum frick possible towards it's mental health as long as it remains obedient or doesn't screw up too much.
Homelander is basically what happens when an evil corporation filled with soulless sociopaths who don't understand what makes Superman a moral character, trying to reverse engineer the character for the sake of profits and not what the character should represent morally.
Perfect metaphor for what went down with the DCEU superman movies come to think of it.
I would cap this, but I'm not a gay who feels the need for Cinemaphile approval by parroting whit that has been said. However you hit the nail on the head.
>thing happens in corporate sanctioned media
haha it really do be like that fr fr
>proceeds to not actually do anything to help the situation
Bill Cosby is 'relatable' too. But i'd much rather he'd have been the good character in real life as much as he played on the big screen. Rather than be a real life supervillain.
Even if you're not religious. Think of it from a purely pragmatic perspective. Would you want to live in a world with Superman a character who tries and succeeds in making things better and behaves unselfishly and tries to inspire people who make the world better, or with Homelander a character who is largely complicit in making thing objectively worse for everyone around him and making everyone around him morally worse?
This is what i'm talking about.
These dumbfricks talk about "relatable" when Homelander is a douchebag with a god complex who complies only because he's too dependant on the attention he gets.
Also
The problem is less that Homelander is 'relatable' and more that he's fun to watch and interesting because he's got so much inner conflict going on under the hood. Superman really doesn't have inner conflict to make up for the lack of physical conflict from normal people and supervillains.
To fix the world, Superman first has to realize the basic problem is Human Nature.
Thus he has to re-mold it, and the first thing to do is create a cult around himself, a religion of the Superman as a selfless, noble servant of humanity, where every man lives to inspire his fellows to follow in their individual footsteps and Do Better, to strive for the Admirable Life.
Sure Superman can divert meteors and save people from disasters and super-crime, but it should be his foremost goal to condition man to fight his baser urges.
Ironically Stardust the Super-Wizard has it right with his 6th Column of loyal children.
Stardust realizes that "reform" is meaningless; mercy towards those who've decided upon a life destructive to the livelihood and well-being of their fellows deserve no mercy.
Stardust doesn't waste his time punishing sloth or self-destructive behavior, he seeks out those who would directly damage Greater Society and deals with them remorselessly, be they High or Low.
Just by existing, Superman would encourage Humanity towards getting their shit together; he's a constant reminder of advanced alien civilizations throughout the galaxy and universe, some of them with incredible innate powers on TOP of high technology.
Now Earth is just some quaint provincial backwater that's centuries behind "everyone else" and better get motivated to put aside petty disputes over sandpeople relics and catch up.
Snyder makes some faint noises towards addressing this rarely explored facet of Superman's existence, but then casts it aside to go play with his 'splosions and DBZ fightan nonsense.