flawed superheroes

get a boy who looks & encourages star the way rob does.

griffins new character!!!!!!!!!!

griffin’s thoughts when creating the boy: 

- he likes spidey!!! (good) 

- acrobatic physical hero 

- obsessed with cowboy bebop 

- watching a lot of ninja warrior 

acrobatic flexy boy! 


- high school gymnast 

- made the olympics BUT then his parents disappeared and he didn’t go cause like, parents disappeared 

- had a rough time 

- has a older brother, and they sorta bonded over ninja warrior 

- because of that they opened up a ninja warrior training gym in the inner city. 

- but remy wiped tHE FUCK OUT on the first obstacle on ninja warrior 

- because of that the gym is failing…and remy has given up on gymnastics, and he’s been doing odd jobs, and one of those jobs was IT for the organization 

- hes a big nerd! geek boy! 

- he’s a candidate cause of his gymnastics stuff

- super agility! has bonuses to athletics, natural weapon, allow him to fight real well. real powerful jumps and kicks “he kicks super good” 

- can do acrobatics stuff without really rolling, cant be hurt by falling, some spidey-like dodging abilities. 

- stunt called “psychologist” he can treat mental stress 

- “popular”

- “ninja warrior themed personal trainer” is basically the concept

- flaw: “family comes first” 

- superhero name: SPRINGHEEL “cause he can jump super good” 

What I love about Danny is that he’s flawed.

Superheroes are often portrayed as perfect people and that gets old quickly. Danny isn’t like that. People can identify with him because he isn’t perfect, because he messes up, because he can’t control his feelings all the time and because he learns from mistakes.

People admire usual superheros, because they save people and yet they cannot really connect with them. I think most people can identify with Danny and that makes him such a great superhero. He’s just a fourteen year old kid and acts like one. Sure, he hunts ghosts and all, but he still has a distinct personality and is by no means perfect and that’s good.

The Mummy would have been so much better if Tom Cruise were the villain

Come to the Dark Side, Tom. They have cookies — and better story arcs

“One of the greatest flaws of modern superhero movies is their tendency to kill off their villains at the end of the story, robbing franchises of the chance to build ongoing rivalries between heroes and their nemeses. Loki in the Marvel Cinematic Universe has become a fan-favorite character for a number of reasons: Tom Hiddleston and the writers behind him have made the character funny, scary, and sexy, with a compelling arrogance and impressive powers. But he also draws fans because he’s lasted long enough to become a complicated character, with his own redemption arc, and his own well-established internal struggles. That kind of longevity and depth are incredibly, frustratingly rare for villains in franchise films.”

Interesting read. I haven’t seen The Mummy and I don’t intend to. I choose to live with the memories of Brendan Fraser and his glorious Mummy cheesefest. Now THAT was fun! Also, this is one good excuse to put these two pics together. They fit quite nicely, don’t ya think?

So, tell me. Think a girl would fall for that? 

Just as long as it’s the one standing in front of you. 

Tony Stark!!

I feel the reason why I sympathise so much with Tony is cause he reminds me of me!!! Not the genius, billionaire, philanthroptist part.

But the part where he is a flawed human being who tries and tries to do the right thing, but sometimes misses it!!

And people judge based on his past mistskes and lord it over his head and he has to live with the fact that maybe he didn’t do the best he could. And that my friend is something I could empathise with all my heart!!!

Hence I’ll protect him with all my heart, like I wish someone had done for me!!

Or atleast that’s what I feel!!

anonymous asked:

how is tony self indulgent and self serving when 117 nations want to prevent more american interventionism and steve doesn't even consider it! rhodey is right, dismissing the wishes of 117 NATIONS is incredibly arrogant, if anyone's being selfish its steve (im not tryna come at you, im just sick of people blaming tony)

okay let’s go


Alright first of lets not pretend like the proposed oversight for the avengers is not also American led and run; the person they answer to is the American SECRETARY OF STATE. all the sokovia accords propose to do is add the avengers to the imperialistic military arm of the American bureaucracy that polices the world - an industry that Tony used to fund and propagate and that rhodey and his suit is still a part of. Like lmao you really think if the govt of Burundi is like ‘hey can you lend us an avenger to end our military coup’ and the CIA who is backing the dictator is gonna be like 'haha sure we’ll send scarlet witch right away’

The proposal of govt oversight for the avengers/superheroes is flawed because THE GOVERNMENT IS CORRUPT. This is well established in universe (HYDRA!!! FUCKING HYDRA!!!!) it is INCREDIBLY egotistical of Tony to tell all his friends that oversight is the best choice for them when he is a BILLIONAIRE who can EASILY influence the govt and use its very corruption to render that exact oversight moot for himself. Tony will do what Tony wants to do. This is proven time and time and time again (this is the entire goddamn plot of iron man 2. Like literally.). It’s proven IN THIS VERY MOVIE when he goes off after cap on his own in the final third. Tony gets called out by one grieving mother and he’s having a rough patch in his relationship so suddenly he’s like YEP WE NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE like really? Hes all for detaining Bucky and refuses to believe that cap could be right, he locks scarlet witch up because she’s a ~danger~ and he’s all for laying the blame of Lagos at her feet but





They’re called the SOKOVIA ACCORDS but I don’t see ANYONE calling Tony what he is: a damn war criminal and literally responsible for EVERYTHING ultron did because he was the one who decided to play god. There’s a world of difference between someone like Tony and someone like Bucky, whose body is used against him and every crime he “”“commits”“’ is a crime against him, too. Like ????

tony legit says that he hopes the accords will provide ‘middle grounds’ for him and pepper like lmfao…… it’s 100% self serving like legit everything he does. ridic. 

Let’s not even get into him drafting spiderman. Like I honestly understand varying opinions on the rest of his characterization in this movie but that shit is just straight wrong lmao. Kid’s fifteen. Where’s Tony’s accountability on that front

honestly the way this movie and the marvel universe as a whole glorifies and caters to Tony is nasty. It’s in large part due to how much they value rdj of course but like as someone who isn’t drinking the iron man kool aid its just like ugh….. again? Tony’s trauma is given precedent over anyone else’s. Tony is absolved of crimes real and moral that any other hero/character would be judged for. Tony is given a free pass on legit everything and you can only put up for it for so long before his smug superiority makes you wanna punch yourself in the face

Mon-El's origin story on Supergirl

I love all of the CW DCTV superhero shows. And one thing I love is that many of them seem to be origin stories; how did this superhero become a superhero? Where did they come from and who were they before? What are the formative events that define their character, and how did they respond and grow in a way that made them worthy of the title of superhero? Do powers make you a superhero? Can superheroes be flawed and make flawed decisions? Can they learn from them and grow into their fully realized iterations?

I’m not a comic reader, but it’s my understanding that Mon-El in the comics becomes the superhero named Valor. Wow. That’s a big name to live up to. And it appears to me that the Supergirl writers decided to give Mon-El a 180 turnaround storyline, so when they introduced his character to the series this season it was as a person who is about as far away from worthy of the title “valor” as you can get. A spoiled prince (that’s not a spoiler anymore, is it?) used to getting his way, objectifying women, and not caring about anyone but himself. An “intergalactic frat boy.” Apparently even as a child on Krypton Kara had heard of his escapades enough to say that he was “the worst.” Even he admitted that the prince (himself) was nobody worth admiring and he doesn’t want any of his new friends to know that he is THAT GUY. There are probably even worse things that we don’t know about, seeing as the slave-trading Dominators recognized and bowed to him while on Slaver’s Moon. We will likely get a taste of more of his previous life when whoever is hunting him shows up. How could this guy become worthy of the cape and of the name “Valor?” That’s exactly the story that the writers are going to tell us.

When Mon-El arrived on Earth to discover that he was apparently the only one spared from Daxam’s destruction , he got a chance to reinvent himself. To make his own choices about who he was going to be and how he was going to live his life. It started out with him making some pretty stupid and selfish decisions. Kara tried to push him into becoming like her, and he pushed back. But over time, his friendship with her and the others in his life have started to influence and inspire him, and he’s realizing that his powers give him the ability to help others and that there is a responsibility that comes with that. He’s realizing that his know-it-all attitude and stubbornness can get him in trouble and he’s learning to listen to and trust others. He'a learning that sometimes putting yourself in danger to help others is the right thing to do. He’s on his way.

He’s still got a long way to go. This is his first season and if becomes Valor too fast, his origin story on this show is over. It’s going to happen over time that he becomes the guy worthy of the cape, the name, and the girl. Right now we still don’t know if his move to become a superhero is really about protecting and working with Kara, or if it’s truly what he feels called to. I think his intentions are good, but in order to be a true superhero he can’t just be doing it for a girl. At some point he’ll have to figure out who he is without her.

Is he worthy of dating Kara, a superhero who is much closer to the fully-realized version of herself, someone we all respect and love? I think it’s still yet to be seen. She sees something in him, believes in him, and has given him a chance but she also doesn’t give him a pass on some of his bad behavior. He seems to be recognizing that he has some areas to work on but real change takes time and some of these issues - not trusting her calls in the field, choosing to protect her over others, trying to make decisions for her- are going to keep causing conflict in their relationship until they are either resolved or cause a breakup. We saw last week that they could fight, call each other out, and make up, so maybe that will be how they will continue to work on these issues for now while still developing their romantic relationship. I don’t think Kara has to have a perfect guy- and btw she’s not perfect either- and I think she deserves happiness and a relationship as much as anyone else if that’s what she wants, so I am rooting for them at this point.

I think it would be unusual to see an “endgame” couple to get together and stay together in season 2. Mon-El may end up to be Kara’s great love in this series or he may be a temporary relationship - possibly even one that ends tragically. They may stay together and work things out over time or they could break up and grow separately, I don’t know. I think he probably has a lot more growing to do before we can really see him as being Kara’s equal in character and true partner, but I do think that growth is coming. Side note: Kara’s romantic interest from last season is also on a hero-growth arc, and while Jimmy seems to be pretty friend zoned at this point, that could change in upcoming seasons if he becomes the guy that Kara can see as her true partner in life and heroism.

I think Mon-El is a really fun and compelling character. I love seeing him on my screen every week, flaws and all, and I’m enjoying his and Kara’s relationship! I’m interested to see where it all goes from here…

Go see Justice League!

It’s fun, entertaining, and all-around a good time. If you like any of these actors or like the characters you will be super happy.

I went in thinking I was going to be disappointed yet again by DC but I was pleasantly surprised, and might even go see it again because it was so funny and enjoyable!

anonymous asked:

i've been scrolling through your blog for a bit and i just wanna say that i think that D.C. went through a rough stage a while back and marvel took full advantage of that shit and it sucks like DC could make the superhero movie of the century and people would be like :/ it's D.C. tho n not marvel while marvel can crank out some ass shit that they wrote in three days and as long as it has some "cool" actor people will praise that shit like it's fucking jesus himself in movie form n just ughhhhhh

I mean, I honestly don’t think DC’s had much of a rough stage since the unspeakably bad Burton-Schumacher Batman films of the 80s and 90s. Their film studio was just about dead after that and they tried to make a few other things happen but they just sorta fizzled at best and crashed and burned at worst. “Batman Begins” frankly revitalized the superhero genre and the Nolan series maintained relative consistency in terms of tone and story for the seven years it spanned. 

The Nolan Batman movies were a catalyst for change in the genre for a couple of reasons, but the largest of them is that suddenly superhero movies were actually viewed as, like, legit movies and not just shallow popcorn films. DC and Marvel took two very different approaches to this. 

DC doubled down on the Nolan series’ more grounded, human, artistic take on the superhero genre and tried to showcase their superheroes as flawed and vulnerable, which is great because it’s kind of their comics’ strong suit. Marvel went in the exact opposite direction and created movies that were outlandish fantasies– and this is not a dig, outlandish fantasy is a hell of a lot of fun and it was necessary for them to establish a distinct identity that plays more to their comics’ strengths. 

See, DC is more character-oriented and Marvel is more story-oriented. It’s why DC can basically have a whole graphic novel where Batman just sits around introspecting and have it be good, and why Marvel can tell a more compelling story about characters nobody’s ever heard of. When they try to take on the other’s strengths, you end up with something unwatchably bad, which brings me back to the subject of DC’s supposed “rough patch” and the quality double standard where DC delivering anything short of absolute perfection is marked as a miserable failure while Marvel can phone it in and still have people rave about their movies:

DC’s films, since the Nolan trilogy revived their film studio from the brink, has had exactly one major misstep, and it happened because they tried to emulate the success of Marvel’s smash success “Iron Man” in tone with the Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern film. Believe it or not, Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman, and Suicide Squad were all relatively successful films commercially and were enjoyed by most of their audience. The people who hated them were much louder and more obnoxious about it, but DC’s movies actually do have a passionate fanbase and they’re really only gaining more fans with each movie they release. Their one major flop was “Green Lantern” and the main problem with that is that most people aren’t gonna enjoy a faithful adaptation of Green Lantern comics because Green Lantern comics are by and large inaccessible

Marvel, on the other hand, produces more Misses than Hits. They’ve got some amazing films (Iron Man 1, Captain America, CA:TWS, Avengers 1) but they’ve also got a whole bunch of films that are bland and mediocre at best and soul-crushingly unwatchable at worst (Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3, Civil War, Age of Ultron, Guardians of the Galaxy, the list goes on but so many of their movies have been so forgettable I can’t be bothered)

So this sounds like I’m refuting your point, but I think it really says something that DC’s films are considered to have had a “rough patch” of one movie whose biggest fault is that it was mediocre compared to the more recent superhero fare of Iron Man 1 and The Dark Knight, while Marvel can produce hours upon hours of tangled inaccessible shlock that’s led to people being so fatigued by their universe that the most exciting thing a Marvel trailer can contain at this point is "indications that they’re finally going Off Brand”

Anyway yeah you’re right on most counts, specifically that Marvel’s early successes largely came from an attempt to distinguish themselves from DC’s most popular superhero films, which were very insulated in terms of continuity (Batman Begins and Superman Returns, for example, don’t reference taking place in the same world as one another) and people really liked Marvel’s movies having clear crossovers building to a team-up (Fury mentions the Avengers in “Iron Man,” Tony shows up in “Incredible Hulk,” Tony’s dad is in Cap 1, Natasha shows up in Iron Man 2, etc.) and there was a really satisfying payoff to that in “The Avengers”

The problem is that now every movie just tries to up the ante on that payoff and we get diminishing returns. Do you know how many superheroes need to be in a Captain America movie at all? One. Do you know how many superheroes played a major role in the plot of Cap 3? I count eleven off the top of my head, and that’s for a solo movie! By contrast, Avengers 1, a team movie with an ensemble cast, had seven superheroes playing a major role if you count Fury as a superhero (which IMO you should). And instead of trying to deliver something new in other films, they just keep trying to double down on “look how much continuity!” to the point where I’m honestly fatigued just looking at the poster for “Infinity War” because at my last count there were over two dozen main characters and ScarJo has threatened us with even more cameos and crossovers than that. 

That’s one of the (many) reasons I’m looking forward to Black Panther. You know who I didn’t see in that trailer? Anyone from any other goddamn marvel movie other than Black Panther. It looks like they’re finally trying to deliver something new instead of just trying to deliver something that’s The Same But Louder.

Anyway point is you’re right that Marvel spent their first five years setting up a payoff and have spent the five years since delivering that payoff trying in vain to get lightning to strike a second time, and unfortunately their formula is treated as the scientific standard for superhero films to the point that making a movie that doesn’t adhere to that formula is seen as a failure for some ungodly reason

video: the show’s biggest flaw, to the point that it’s almost a plot hole, is the fact that no one has figured out ladybug or chat noir’s identities

me, rolling my eyes and closing the tab: anyway

In defense of Supergirl and Karamel

I try not to ship on shows because of all the drama and disappointments. I do ship though sometimes hardcore and sometimes not hardcore at all. On Supergirl, I don’t really have a ship I am attached to. i like Maggie/Alex and Kara/Winn, Kara/Mon’el, Kara/James and even Kara/Lena, or Kara/ Cat because Melissa has believable chemistry with any of them. Sometimes ships I like work out and sometimes not. If not, I still ship anyway in fandom. 

The reason i made this post is not because I hardcore ship Karamel although I like them, it is because a lot of misinformation is getting out about them and about the show. 

Supergirl is a fun show with good messages about not prejudging people and about showing compassion to others. Kara is not perfect but she is strong and compassionate which makes her a good but sometimes flawed superhero. She is a role model and despite any of her relationships, she has grown as a person. 

A poster put a meme up showing Mon-el, Kara’s current love interest, as belittling her and making it seem like he hasn’t changed and he still belittles her. That isn’t true. That meme shows lines from when they were enemies. Kara as a kryptonian was brought up to hate the Daxxam’s because she was told they were animals who were decadent, owned slaves, and basically were a mar on society. Mon-el was brought up to see kryptonians as self-righteous hypocrites. When she met Mon-el, they were enemies but Kara put that aside as soon as it was determined he was no threat and tried to help him adapt to earth which he did reluctantly because all he knew was the life he grew up with. Eventually, he began to change and realize that the way his people acted and believed was wrong and he and Kara became friends and eventually lovers but this was after he began to change. Up until than, they were rivals and Kara took no shit from him. When he told her he was the prince, something he concealed, which I agree was wrong, from everyone because he knew Kara’s kind hated his kind, she broke up with him briefly and they reunited in time to deal with his parents and his people. He didn’t want to be prince of Daxxam because he knew they were expecting things to go on as is but he did say that if he was forced to take the throne, he would change things. In the end, because of his mother’s threats to the planet he called home, he agreed to let Kara and the organization she works on poison the air against his kind and told Kara that she inspired him to be a better man and would take what she taught him with him and keep aspiring to be better.

Subsequent replies claimed Mon’el isolated Kara from her family and friends and that couldn’t be further from the truth because there were many scenes of Kara and him with her friends and family and Kara alone with her friends and family.

This upset me because the posters made Kara seem weak and compared her relationship with Mon-el to be like OUAT’s Emma’s relationship with Hook and that couldn’t be further from the truth. Kara always was strong and made hard decisions even if it cost her and Mon’el never took that from her or broke her down, or belittled her.  When they first met, and he was being an ass to her, she never took crap from him. Saying she was diminished by this relationship does a disservice to Kara/ Supergirl and the show.

Supergirl is a great show and really shows women empowerment and it is a fun show to watch. I like the way the show portrays their varying relationships and balances with action and fighting! 

Let me say right now I don’t agree with the cast mocking kara/Lena shippers and that is something they should sincerely apologize for. If the show doesn’t address this, than they deserve to lose viewers and be cancelled. It would be a shame because it was a really good show.

Also, if you haven’t watched something, don’t judge it without seeing it for yourself.

anonymous asked:

Do you think Natasha or Nick Fury ever kick themselves because they've been proven correct in their initial assessment that Tony would be a danger if he was allowed into the Avengers? They basically knew he was so unstable that he'd do some shit like Ultron and Civil War. And now he has.

Bit of a rant, but bear with me:

To me, Tony has always been an anti-hero, which makes it very hard for him to solidly join an initiative like the Avengers. He has heroic qualities and good intentions, but these are often hindered by selfish motivations, skewed ideals, or just dark personality traits. So even if he wants to, Tony almost prevents himself from fully joining a group. He’ll always stand slightly outside of them, which we see in the Avengers.

Tony’s admitted that his personality – “compulsive, self-destructive, and narcissistic” – doesn’t allow him to play well with others. He always does what he thinks is best for people but he never discusses it with them; it’s classic antihero behaviour and makes Tony interesting and relatable… but not quite a superhero. Not in the conventional way that Steve Rogers or Superman would be, anyway. 

Don’t get me wrong: classic Superheroes have flaws and conflicts in being a hero, too. But they have an unwavering moral compass, are predictable and trustworthy, and will always think of the world outside of themselves. These are also traits that make for good group dynamics (Steve has been part of six: Army, Howlies, SHIELD, Sam/Nat/Fury/Maria, both Avengers, and Team Cap). Anti-heroes, however, only join a group when their interests align – but they’ll never stay in one for long, because anti-heroes are often on a road to redemption (…or revenge). They’re also very unpredictable, changing their minds and their code with new information. This makes it difficult for them to join with other people because their motivations are very personal. Tony definitely falls into this category. 

You want an anti-hero on your team, though, because they’ll do anything to get things done, and that makes them an extremely powerful player. Think of Batman, Rorschach, Deadpool, or Wolverine – their help can turn the tides of a battle, but they’re not good for a team in the longterm. You take a major risk in asking an anti-hero to join your group, which I think Fury realized. At the time Tony was absolutely worth the risk, and proved it in the Loki battle. But now? Maybe not so much.

Tony’s got the right idea, he legitimately wants to help people… but his actions have always been a little suspect. This is why Tony wants government oversight in “any form it takes”; he basically doesn’t trust himself to be a hero without a team. Which, again, is understandable, but this road to redemption is selfish – Tony needs the team to stay together for himself, not really for the group, and in doing so he steps outside of them. Even in CW, ‘Team Tony’ is really just Tony, Rhodey, and Vision – Natasha, Spidey, and T’Challa have their own motivations (interestingly, they’re also considered anti-heroes in their comics).

But what I find really interesting is that SHIELD approved Iron Man for the Avengers Initiative… but not Tony Stark. The government doesn’t see them as the same person. That ties directly into the Accords, as Tony can wander around freely after signing, but Steve, Wanda, Hulk, and other enhanced individuals would have their freedoms threatened if they were to sign. They cannot be separated from their powers. I think Tony can’t fully grasp how dangerous it is for them to sign because Tony has trouble seeing outside of his own perspective, even if his perspective has good intentions. Like most anti-heroes, Tony wants the morally right end result (accountability for superheroes), but how they get to that result can be a grey zone. And that’s really the heart of a lot of Tony’s Avengers storylines.

tl;dr: The problem lies in Tony thinking he’s a superhero, but the films showing us that he’s really the more gritty, relatable anti-hero. That twist makes Tony far more interesting than your average anti-hero (who often revel in their status – like Deadpool, for instance), but it skews audience perception. The viewer has to dig deeper than what Tony says and instead look at what he does. He’s not a superhero, he’s never fully part of a team, but he’s also not a villain. He’s the antagonist of this tale, and he’s not “right” in CW – even if his idea is right. That’s an anti-hero, and they’re always a risk.

  • Marvel: [makes a flawed superhero movie]
  • critics: wow...a masterpiece. Joss Whedonatello has done it again...
  • DC: [makes a flawed superhero movie]
  • Critics: the GALL... the AUDACITY....... A disgrace...unbelievable,.. .. Who is clork kant