What's the appeal of evil Superman?

Such a shame. It was such a generic predictable mess and it had such a nice concept.

The boy from Brightburn is relentlessly handsome. I want to kiss him relentlessly.

I like evil Superman since Batman can show up to stop him

What if superhero was actually supervillian? Who would watch the superhero?

Attached: akira-11.gif (500x259, 1.48M)

>super heroes but they're actually bad

Attached: 39817645544_9e7aed7e5c_b_bnh675tg4.jpg (1024x672, 237K)

whoa buddy

Attached: 1524322799006.jpg (640x640, 43K)

This is a fucking badass idea.

10/10 flick

An invincible villain is better than an invincible hero.

>It subverts common superhero tropes!

Attached: 1563424514098.jpg (435x471, 52K)

The Boys brought the and it’s “one hell of a ride”. Don’t miss out this weekend. Watch The Boys now on Amazon Prime Video

superman really only works in two situations, honorary human, or villain, outside of these he's trash like the snyder films

What a massive dumbass

Not quite the same. Having a bad clone is just a trope that's always in comics. This is more about investigating how they would behave and interact in their own story vs the evil clone essentially being the monster of the week.

That's just an angsty anti hero in a cape with different powers. Not the same

Who is paying you? Are you a marvel shill or just a massively autistic neet?

Because a being rocking Superman’s power who’s not on the side of mankind is fucking terrifying.

Also, Superman would kick all their asses.

being able to sit down with my girlfriend, crack open a brew, and watch an unpredictably mindbending episode of the boys is payment in itself for me

The original “evil” Superman was “King Superman” back in the Silver Age.

the original evil superman... was Man...

Superman hasn't been portrayed as a noble selfless hero for decades. What are these "evil superman" stories even subverting?

>unironically defending the boys

They want to take down the "ideal" of Superman. They're depressed, and cynical, and want to toss mud at what is perceived as an innately "good" figure.

>Subtlety spoils Black Noir
kek

who is they

the boys

Jews

The "grey/ morally ambiguous protagonist" or "everybody is actually a shitty person" bullshit infected fantasy literature so bad that when i read Way of Kings for the first time it hit me like a fucking bag of bricks to the face.
I didnt even realize how tired of this trope i got, it took a good book with people that were ones i myself would be willing to fallow to show how retarded this way of thinking is.

I think we like to project our flaws onto others, the idea that there might be people who dont have them scares us. It points a mirror at us and shows that our flaws are nobody fault but ours and not some generic "nature of man" or other pathetic excuse. After all, nobody can be a superman right? Its not a matter of superpowers, its a matter that nobody is good inside, right?

... whoa

He’s invariably portrayed as noble and selfless, but he’s also aware of his role in a far bigger picture.

How so

You’re spot-on. It’s a combination of cynicism on the part of the writers and perhaps actual, concrete agenda on the part of the publishers. Wouldn’t want to give the public actual paragons of moral virtue. You might inspire them.

Why is that one tard just shooting his beam at the other beams?

its not a subversion. a real child with all the powers of superman becomes a power-mad sociopathic god-king of the earth. the fantasy element to superman is he has these superhuman parents who are capable of saying exactly all the right things at all the right times in order to raise a literal god who isn't a corrupt asshole.

Superman was originally evil in the story that actually spawned Superman (which was "Reign of the Supermen"). Considering Superman comes from the ubermensch concept popularized by Nazis, and Superman was created from two Jewish writers, it makes sense.

You're relentlessly a faggot.

Attached: faggot.png (220x319, 182K)

i think people imagine he does more/is more powerful than he's usually written, when really he just helps as he can

I think this kind of trope can be wonderful if done well, and there are definitely many films and stories made where the protagonist is “morally good”. If you don’t like the trope I guess I understand, but I think films shouldn’t necessarily be escapism and I don’t project myself into the stories I watch, so I’m totally okay with watching a group of people that I find to be horrible. I like it also because it affirms my moral standards when I hold them in judgment when I watch.

You’re as guilty as the writers who insist that noble people simply don’t exist. Be better than this.

Masked and has Superman-like abilities

Power always corrupts. This isn't cynicism. Believing otherwise is hopelessly naive.

laser eyes has to be the dumbest of all capeshit powers.

Black Noir isn’t in that photo my nigga

It's /our show/ faggot

So overrated. I can’t imagine anyone who isn’t a teenager finding it anything over a 7/10

Hi Lex. No, we’re not all as shitty excuses for human beings as you are. Some people choose to rise above their base nature.

>TV has been posting about how great it is for a month before anybody started talking about it.
>omg it's overrated bruhs!

Please go back.

Cuz dude truth and justice are lame lol
bad = cool
good = booooring
>chucks beer while fucking a hooker and contracts several STDs instantaneously

I think you're going way overboard here, and have a (you) for it. It's not about saying that nobility doesn't exist... The archetype has to exist first. It's just saying.. what would cause a noble person to change, or what would happen if their upbringing was tweaked or they had another perspective? It's just good story telling.

Not sure what point you’re trying to make. The people posting about it here overrate it, including you, is what I’m saying. You have the taste of a retarded zoomer, I’m afraid.

Noble people may exist, but once they're in power and they have to make hard decisions, they have a tendency to become progressively less noble. Because power corrupts. Once a person is in a position where other people are simply a resource to be exploited, it becomes impossible to maintain any sort of peasant morality. Which will result in the peasants revolting.

And we aren't even talking about superpowers yet. The only reason people grow into noble, healthy adults is because they learn they're not invulnerable, that the world owes them nothing, that they can't just do whatever they want, and that other people's wants and desires matter. Toss godlike power onto a child and they'll learn none of this. You don't even need to give a child godlike power to spoil the shit out of them, as we see it every day with the children of the rich.

Another important to remember that corruption doesn’t always mean self-serving, amoral hedonism. It can also take the form of authoritarianism, where you enforce your will to the exclusion of all else because you think no one could ever be “righter” or more righteous than you. You can become like that and still think you’re acting in everyone’s best interests. Hell, you might even really be right. There are some incarnations of Dr. Doom that follow that model.

people "rise above" their base nature because they don't have a choice.

Teaching children to respect the feelings of others is not as hard as you make it out to be. You start by teaching them to respect your own.

you have to just assume the vast majority of humans wants superman around and that he's a net benefit for the sake of the stories

>cynicism: the post

The problem was that.. in the 80s because of goofy and childlike interrpretations of comics like the Batman TV show.. there was a real thirst to make "adult" comics. And that's pretty much influenced every movie made since the late 80s.

Tim Burtons Batman. Nolan's Batman. The Punisher's many, many attempts. Versions of Spider-man. The X-men.

Everything was about being gritty and dark because "noble bright" characters like Superman and Captain American don't sell. But really it's just a lack of imagination from the authors. And hell this was a decade or two before the cynicism of the internet. We know too much to think that anybody could be perfect and only really relate to flaws.

State why it's overrated? It's well written with lots of great plot payoffs. It's well acted. It has beautiful visuals. It's funny and dark and violent. It's meta in a meaningful way and pokes fun at all the shit about Marvel that we hate.

It's based on a well loved piece of fiction and has that authors blessing. It's actually really well adapted for the times.

You're just a contrarian piece of shit.

This garbage is just Jewish deconstructionism. Stop watching this filth in the first place, it has absolutely no benefit to you.

Attached: Mad Men - deconstructionism.png (1312x325, 98K)

teaching normal children to develop empathy and a healthy respect for others is pretty easy... because they can't fly, shoot lasers out of their eyes, they don't have infinite strength, and they won't be completely invulnerable.

But if you go out of your way, you can teach a child to be an absolutely irredeemable piece of shit.

>stupid shill can't read to see that user was on his side
Did you just read shill and feel you were being attacked??

It started way before the 80s. Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Returns” is a thinly veiled criticism of the grit and violence that had found their way back into comics over the preceding decade, courtesy mainly of a particular group of characters. Think about the story in the abstract:

>Old Bruce Wayne comes out of retirement because of a hyper-violent “gang” called “The Mutants.”
>Their signature futuristic shades are basically Cyclops’s visor.

Don’t misunderstand - Miller has no problem depicting extreme violence. He just doesn’t think it should be marketed toward children.

Attached: 8E71D94B-F9FD-42A5-A5DF-234A360E8F79.jpg (210x240, 7K)

Why do you think that would make a child any different emotionally? There are already children incapable of feeling pain, yet they still learn empathy.

Oh marvel definitely pushed the bounds of Gritty - But Miller capitalized on it with Daredevil and then going to DC to rework Batman. Regardless of the intentions or the artistic shots being thrown around, the 80s are generally considered the popular boom that led to all the films we have now.

Watchman and the Dark Knight Returns is why the X-men wore Black suits, and why BVS exists.

That said, you are right. The Punisher got popular in the 70s and cynicism was creeping into comics because of Vietnam. It was that whole Dirty Harry and Charles Bronson attack on crime that filtered into comics and movies. It's basically what Robocop became.

I dont project myself into every movie ether.
Im just saying such cynicism is stupid and comes from ignorance of history and politics. People arent evil or indifferent, they are ignorant and easily manipulated. Commies wanted an utopia, nazis wanted to stop the economic crisis and were told Poland invaded them, and finally burgers were sold on the weapons of mass destruction lies to invade middle east. As a whole people wanted good, but it came out as always.
Ask any individual person and he would never want Syrian children to be murdered in their sleep, meanwhile Obama sends drone strikes on civilian targets since Assad opposed the petrodollar and supported Russian gas lines while telling people he bombed to fight for democracy. So were medieval times. Good people created bloody war.

Those movies and books tend to ignore then the average man and jump into influential people just to show the muddiness of history,
Im just getting tired of this weird outlook on life. Or i might be getting to redpilled, as im starting to realize few people are responsible for majority of suffering in human history.

Probably go actually read about the shit CIPA kids have to go through, be put through, in order to survive to adolescence.

Because they can't understand why someone with all of that power would use it for good.

God isn't real and Jesus was just a cult leader.

It's the Hollywood's reflexion about Trump.

Do they learn empathy or don’t they?

YOU'RE LIVING A FUCKING DREAM WORLD DUDE as the genius Snyder once taught us

The Plutonian from Irredeemable was pretty based.

I like how your argument is "being unable to feel pain equals flight/invulnerability/super-strength."

seriously, go read.

My argument is that you don’t have to feel pain to learn empathy, rules, and boundaries. Yours is essentially that you do. My parents instilled a sense of empathy in me by simple virtue of making me understand when I’d disappointed them. It started by them expressing it as being sad.

not the guy you're responding.

>It's well written

Well written what? Stephen King novels and the ASOIAF shit have good technical writing, the problem is that the stories they're conveying are valueless trash.

>It's well acted. It has beautiful visuals.

Completely true. Again though, well acted what?

>It's funny and dark and violent.
I watched the first 4 episodes and while it's "dark and violent" (not sure why that's inherently a positive), the humor at no point extends beyond anything I wouldn't expect to be made by the atheist, nihilist freak who made the Crossed comics Garth Ennis.

>It's meta in a meaningful way and pokes fun at all the shit about Marvel that we hate.
It's very tired, worn out "meta" deconstructing and critiquing Christian/western mythology and morality. It's produced by fucking SETH ROGEN and EVAN GOLDBERG.

You can watch whatever you want but the show is nothing but condensed Jewish filth. It's not even being a contrarian, it's about having standards and regardless of it's fine technical qualities you shouldn't bother watching this, it's bad for your soul.

Brightburn was awful and Superman isn't evil, the director is just tone deaf. Homelander is the only actually good anti-superhero there.

superman has super-senses, he feels things normally

>ctrl+f
>people need to feel pain to learn empathy/rules/boundaries
>zero results

Did you realize you had manufactured a strawman or do you just have poor reading comprehension?

When are Apollo and the rest of The Authority coming to the big screen? Or even whatever the fuck you call streaming services. It should be "progressive" as fuck.

And then the following reinvention by the same authors was made in the image of the Jewish Messiah: A powerful man who will come and liberate the oppressed peoples from their cruel masters ('cept instead of Pharaohs or aliens it was bankers and gangsters). It's a story of power being used to help instead of control, of great individuals being servants instead of rulers

If you’re too obtuse to pick up on what they’re using the supes for metaphorically, why the fuck should anyone care what you think?

Lol he's so close to getting it

Yeah, which means the opposing argument makes even less sense.

dude I want to watch the boys but it's so fucking cringe.

>oh the heroes are evil
>but one of them isn't!
>she's our protagonist and also there are some undergrown normies that we will observe
>look at how humble and naive she is, compared to how evil and cynical the other heroes are! what a predicament!

Superman is a literal comic book superhero that is supposed to represent the most morally best of us, while having god like powers. That is his shtick.

>b-b-b-b-but power corrupts
Who the fuck cares, its a fictional character who's supposed to inspire people.
>b-b-but nobody likes dark and gritty
And yet Captain America was one of the most popular characters in the MCU
If they were to make a Superman movie like the Christopher Reeves ones, then it would sell like hotcakes since, unlike 15 years ago, the most different superhero film would be one that actually is uplifting and doesn't throw dirt on everything.

Attached: 1565024166999.png (600x617, 226K)

strawman arguments tend to be totally nonsensical.

CIPA is not a super-power, its an almost crippling disability.

Invulnerability does not mean "can't feel pain."

It lays it on really thick at points.

Just watch it, if you don't have Prime already you're making a mistake

I never said it had to be. Your entire argument is that it would be impossible to teach a being like Superman to be a good, moral person because he’s so far beyond us physically, and I continue to point out that he’s essentially no different from any other person emotionally. You’re saying it’s impossible to teach him those things because reasons.

Wait didn't Watchmen cover everything this show is about

>and I continue to point out that he’s essentially no different from any other person emotionally.
I am also saying the reason it would be impossible to teach a god with the mind of a child human morality/ethics is because said child god would be identical to us, emotionally. Because I still remember who I was as a child.

Have you forgotten who you were as a child or were you simply never a child?

How about Irredeemable?

watchmen was about the effect superheros would have on the cold war. this is about corporate culture + superheroes.

The show made me think, and I believe thinking is good for the soul. Obviously, you won't appreciate the experience if you forget to cut the show at times or focus too much on the filthiness of the show rather than it's messages.

Dr. Manhattan was amoral Captain Atom, not evil Superman.

Leave it to crapitalism to ruin superheroes. Geez lois.

Watchmen was a deliberate deconstruction of the idea of a comic book hero set in the real world/cold war 80's.
It was also one of the most diverse in the real way comics of it's time.

UH OH, you frickin turkey...

Attached: soyjacking.png (917x599, 46K)

40% of superheroes beat their wives

>The Boys did it right with Homelander by giving him depth and not making him a simple brute like in the comics
Fucking retard, he was already deep enough in the comics

You sound pretty low IQ. none of them are evil or good. They all do fucked up shit.. even star light.

Why criticize a show you aren't watching? Fuck off?

Attached: 1565571292175s.jpg (125x68, 1K)

I don't remember Starlight doing anything fucked up. She kinda goes along with the corporate shit a few times but she always comes around before doing anything actually wrong.

>sucks dick to stay employed
>sexualizes herself to stay employed
>Threatens people to get her way
>almost fucks a random guy while drunk
>helps the boys who are basically on the most wanted list.
>shits on her own upbringing in front of a giant crowd of people

She's one of the main characters.. you're suppose to sympathize and empathize with her. I know you're not use to fucking decent writing with characters like Rei running around in Star Wars.. but that's how you do it.

She's far from perfect though.

>sucks dick to stay employed
Nothing morally wrong about that. The situation is fucked up, but that's because of Deep forcing her into it. And she comes around when she comes clean about it.
>sexualizes herself to stay employed
Same as the last one really. She doesn't want to do it. She's coerced into it. Not morally wrong. And she comes around and gets her old costume back.
>Threatens people to get her way
Nothing wrong with threatening the bad guys.
>almost fucks a random guy while drunk
Not morally wrong, and that's getting drunk for you. She comes around when she sobers up.
>helps the boys who are basically on the most wanted list
This is the most fucked up thing she does, but the boys have information on an evil conspiracy inside Vought that has killed a lot of people so from her perspective it's a gray area who she should be supporting.
>shits on her own upbringing in front of a giant crowd of people
That's doing the right thing. It would have immoral for her to lend her support to the religious organization. Are you just salty because you're a christfag?

morality is a funny thing. It's different for everybody.