I Marvel...

[Baruch]

Yeah, it's just that I might be reading too much into it.  For all I know, the superhero fan that I'm ascribing all this complex stuff to might just want to see some nazi get punched in the face.

Go Captain America!  Except he is a mind controlled agent of Red Skull ... modernity had to ruin it.

[SGOS]

Yeah, it's just that I might be reading too much into it.  For all I know, the superhero fan that I'm ascribing all this complex stuff to might just want to see some nazi get punched in the face.

OK, the appeal is complex, since we are dealing with human emotion, but for me, I like the fantasy where there is a dependable force of good out there, and Marvel plays to that.  The comics play on the government/superhero divide too.  I think DC more so, where the government officials are often portrayed as idiots with an obsessive need to control or regulate the heroes, even though the heroes surpass them in every area of strength, morality, and sense of fairness, while acting without paybacks and bribes. 

[Munch]

Speaking of punching nazis and marvel, we can't talk about that without talking about... this thing..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2P01Mt_JFmM&t=1201s

There is right now a current generation of people who are so far left leaning, they would look at whats going on in this comic as the ultimate form of progression and their version of reality how they want it to be.

I've been a liberal person for years now, and something I was saying to a friend of mine in sweden the other day, that I feel i'm in such a strange position these days, when i see some of the insanity the far left are producing, its like having spent years on one side of the spectrum, yet I stopped walking left while these others kept going, and going, until they fell off a cliff still yelling their notions of progression to the point of being totalitarian with it.

Its sad because when you see this degree of insane social justice, it starts making some of the things the right say make more sense. Thats why I find myself in such a strange standing right now.

This comic is ridiculous levels of virtue signalling social justice agenda, its like everything that's happening in marvel right now clustered into one comic, from white skinned conservatives robots 'america' battles and beats up, to her stepping in the way of captain america taking his iconic moment away to punch hitler in the face herself. Its a level of cringe I just can't stomach.



Also, the argument that 'this is what modern comic book readers want' is so fucking wrong is hilarious. No this is what modern social justice readers, who hardly even read comics want marvel to be. Everyone else who just wants comics to escape from the bullshit of the real world into are screwed by this current wave of sjw pandering. This is why more people are moving over to DC comics because they remember what made their comics actual comics.

[SGOS]

Just saying Marvel has broad appeal.  People can interpret the art and enjoy the parts that strike their fancy in whatever way they perceive them.  Punching Hitler in the face might be a fantasy, but still fun, just for the heck of it.  Here's this little guy screeching from a podium while waving his arms around in a rant.  You walk right up to him and punch him in the face, and he falls on his ass wondering what just happened.  What's not fun about that?

[Munch]

I'm all for creating abstract political fantasy, like captain america punching hitler in the face, or that scene in inglorious bastards where they burn down the cinema full of nazis and the other two fire off machine guns into hitler even after he's dead. I just have a problem with taking those already established stories, and force hammering political views in for not other reason besides pushing your own political agenda.
Like, if deadpool were to step in place of captain america, hand hitler a bomb, kiss him and run off before it blow up, thats deadpool just being deadpool, and done for comedy or parody. But this current thing with 'america' isn't done for laughs or parody, its done to push an agenda that, by forcing the views of the writer so much it needs to step on already established moments that were badass before. Did we need someone else stepping in place of captain america punching hitler to make it meaningful? No, because it had its meaning, america saying 'we're not taking your shit hitler', it didn't need a latino woman in american garb stepping in doing the same thing, or even overwriting it, because that just makes whatever she's doing look petty, moment stealing.

[SGOS]

I understand, I think.  I'm wondering if you are seeing something in it that isn't intended, or if it's something that I don't see through my American colored glasses?  I think writers are granted a certain amount of license, however, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. 

Incidentally, just so you know I can be pretty forgiving of movies, I have all three parts of the last Atlas Shrugged movie (probably produced by some right wing outfit without great acting or direction, but it kind of follows the book).  I think Ayn Rand is a control freak with a bad case of tunnel vision, and I don't even think she is a good writer, but I still like the story.  I read the book years ago, and was delighted by the little self supporting community of drop outs hidden in Colorado, like some hippy commune.  Hell, it's just fiction.  I know she had an agenda.  The story is shallow, not really worthy of a decent writer, but it's kind of fun in a childlike way.

[SGOS]

And just a word about inglorious bastards.  I don't think I've ever had that much fun in a movie theater than that.  I was so taken by that film, with the introduction of a previously unknown Austrian actor who played the SS commander better than any I have ever seen.  I was on the edge of my seat delighting at the antics throughout, thinking this guy should get an Academy Award, which in fact he later did, and for that role.  I never batted an eye when Quentin Tarintino wiped out Hitler and the entire Nazi high command in one fell swoop.

But I left the theater with something upsetting just niggling at the back of my brain, which took me a few minutes to sort out.  I finally, thought, "Hey wait!  Hitler shot himself in a bunker with just a couple of confidents to witness his final act of madness.  You can't do that to history in a film."  And then it came to me that it was just Tarintino doing his off the wall stuff for entertainment, and then I felt OK.

[Munch]

first time I saw inglorious bastards was when round my brothers house, my nephew was only a few weeks old, in a cradle on the floor, and he had the movie on with the kid right there in front of it, dozing away. Does make me wonder about sending subliminal messages into the mind of an infant, but we're have to wait and see.

[Baruch]

I'm all for creating abstract political fantasy, like captain america punching hitler in the face, or that scene in inglorious bastards where they burn down the cinema full of nazis and the other two fire off machine guns into hitler even after he's dead. I just have a problem with taking those already established stories, and force hammering political views in for not other reason besides pushing your own political agenda.
Like, if deadpool were to step in place of captain america, hand hitler a bomb, kiss him and run off before it blow up, thats deadpool just being deadpool, and done for comedy or parody. But this current thing with 'america' isn't done for laughs or parody, its done to push an agenda that, by forcing the views of the writer so much it needs to step on already established moments that were badass before. Did we need someone else stepping in place of captain america punching hitler to make it meaningful? No, because it had its meaning, america saying 'we're not taking your shit hitler', it didn't need a latino woman in american garb stepping in doing the same thing, or even overwriting it, because that just makes whatever she's doing look petty, moment stealing.

She should definitely been in a Mexican flag outfit.  Aye, carumba!  Next she should say to Capt America ... you next, gringo!

[Baruch]

I understand, I think.  I'm wondering if you are seeing something in it that isn't intended, or if it's something that I don't see through my American colored glasses?  I think writers are granted a certain amount of license, however, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. 

Incidentally, just so you know I can be pretty forgiving of movies, I have all three parts of the last Atlas Shrugged movie (probably produced by some right wing outfit without great acting or direction, but it kind of follows the book).  I think Ayn Rand is a control freak with a bad case of tunnel vision, and I don't even think she is a good writer, but I still like the story.  I read the book years ago, and was delighted by the little self supporting community of drop outs hidden in Colorado, like some hippy commune.  Hell, it's just fiction.  I know she had an agenda.  The story is shallow, not really worthy of a decent writer, but it's kind of fun in a childlike way.

Old Ayn Rand fan here ... back in the day.  Did you ever see the movie version of her earlier novel, The Fountainhead?  1949 with Gary Cooper.

[SGOS]

Old Ayn Rand fan here ... back in the day.  Did you ever see the movie version of her earlier novel, The Fountainhead?  1949 with Gary Cooper.

No, I never read the book either.

[SGOS]

first time I saw inglorious bastards was when round my brothers house, my nephew was only a few weeks old, in a cradle on the floor, and he had the movie on with the kid right there in front of it, dozing away. Does make me wonder about sending subliminal messages into the mind of an infant, but we're have to wait and see.

You probably won't be able to tell until he's about 20.

[Munch]

You probably won't be able to tell until he's about 20.

Well today, after getting a fidgit cube as a present from his grandma, he threw a tantrum, threw it at the TV and broke the screen. So looks like he's well on his way

[Gawdzilla Sama]

An unabridged Marvel library...pardon me while I wipe up the wad I just shot, thinking about it...

Seems like it wouldn't be hard. I've done 200 gigabytes of WWII document, all scanned first.

[Hydra009]

OK, the appeal is complex, since we are dealing with human emotion, but for me, I like the fantasy where there is a dependable force of good out there, and Marvel plays to that.

True.  But I really like the stories where there's a little bit of a gray area, like in Armor Wars.  The Iron Man design has been stolen and sold to all comers.  Tony Stark is understandably upset since he considers himself complicit in any atrocities committed with his technology, and vows to eliminate any Iron Man-derived technology.

This becomes a bit problematic since not everyone using his technology is villainous, but Iron Man strips it from them anyway.  Some people say he went off the deep end, some people say his actions were justified - that he had to go to extraordinary lengths to protect the world from the reckless dissemination lethal technology, and really cynical people say he's an ill-tempered child too selfish to share his toys.

There are plenty of other examples of times when heroes aren't all on the same page.  Both sides usually have good reasons and good intentions.  But not everyone agrees on the right course of action and sometimes there just isn't a clear-cut right and wrong.

Once, War Machine decided to take on some North African warlord.  Morally, he's totally in the right.  Legally, not so much.  An American citizen can't just go into another sovereign country with guns blazing without getting the go ahead from the Pentagon.  That's unlawful and arguably reckless as hell.

That'd be like me climbing into a mech and going Rambo on Kim Jong-un.  If I could pull it off, it'd probably be a good thing in the long term.  But it'd be one hell of an international incident and could also have some serious negative repercussions, especially with civilians in the crossfire.  Things just aren't as simple as the good guy clobbering the bad guy.

The comics play on the government/superhero divide too.  I think DC more so, where the government officials are often portrayed as idiots with an obsessive need to control or regulate the heroes, even though the heroes surpass them in every area of strength, morality, and sense of fairness, while acting without paybacks and bribes.

Eh..I dunno about surpassing them in every area.

Even the best of them wreck Times Square so badly that I'm surprised anyone bothers to rebuild it.  (They may save the world in the process, but I doubt the public is always aware of the situation - all they know is the capes are throwing punches and that's why half of daddy's paycheck goes straight to home/car insurance)

Plus, plenty of heroes have oopsie daisies that end up on the nightly news.

And then there are "heroes" with extremely high body counts like the Punisher and Venom.  Anyone can call themselves a hero, but that doesn't necessarily mean they act like it.  And the public might have a hard time distinguishing who's good and who's not in a lot of situations.  They might mistakenly call the good guy a menace (Spider-Man) or be duped into thinking that the bad guy is a hero (Norman Osborn during Dark Reign)