KingofMadCows's forum posts

#1 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

X-23 is a trained assassin. She won't go into a fight blind. She'll read up on all the intelligence she can get on Sabretooth and learn all his strengths and weaknesses. She's also practical/flexible enough to use other weapons. She'll have no qualms about starting the fight by crashing a plane full of explosives into Sabretooth or shoving a grenade down his throat.

#2 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

Who still does that? I hear people make fun of Aquaman about as often as I hear people say "for me to poop on" or "all your bases belong to us."

#3 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@SandMan_: But Superman and Power Girl aren't human and they don't get their super strength just from their muscles.

#4 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

DCAU. There's more hope for humanity. There are fewer villains who are unrepentant monsters.

#5 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

Task Force X/Suicide Squad would be great.

Although I'd really love to see a series based on No Man's Land.

#6 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

100 tons seems really low for the power ring.

#7 Edited by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@Outside_85: Where did I do a 180? I was simply talking about the perspective one uses to approach a story. If you approach a science fantasy story as if it's hard sci-fi then you'll end up with a bunch of questions about how things work and you won't enjoy the story. If you approach a myth as if it has nuanced and deep characters, then you'll be disappointed and find the story lacking.

And how is my knowledge of myths rubbish? I'll admit that I made a mistake about Zeus, I meant the other gods that Kronus swallowed. Hades, Poseidon, Hestia, etc. They grew up in Kronus's stomach and yet they did not have to get an education or any training. There's even one version of Zeus's myth that he was raised by a goat. But my point was that gods and heroes in myths are born with a certain set of knowledge, skills, morality that they simply don't need to learn.

If you treat Wonder Woman like it's a myth then there's a lot of things that really don't really need to explain. You don't need to explain why Poseidon was willing to go to war with Hera over an unsubstantiated rumor. You don't need to explain why Hades was willing to give up his desire to take Zeus's throne just so he can torment Wonder Woman. You don't need to explain why Hera started believing that Zeus would return despite having no evidence. You don't need to explain why Wonder Woman was able to grow up to be the person she was despite being raised in a depraved society.

So it's a question whether you treat this series more like a myth where things are simple, emotions are exaggerated, and motivations are shallow, or whether you treat the series as having more nuance and depth where there are multiple factors affecting a character's behaviors and societies and cultures have more complex rules of conduct.

#8 Posted by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@Outside_85: I didn't hack up the concept of mercy like that, the story did. Ares didn't go all Cobra Kai on Diana during their training. He wasn't completely ruthless to Diana all the time, so the story clearly shows a separation between showing mercy in practice and showing mercy in combat.

As for Ares being practical during the duel, if he was being practical, he wouldn't have agreed to the duel in the first place since it would have only hurt his goals. If he had killed Diana, he wouldn't have an heir. If he went back on his word and spared Diana, he would be teaching her that she does not have to be ruthless in combat all the time.

Anyway, the real issue is whether or not Wonder Woman should be treated like a myth. If this is a myth, then they don't need to explain where Diana learned mercy since heroes and gods in myths are just born with a certain set of innate morality, knowledge, and skills. For example, Zeus grew up in Kronus's stomach and yet he was able to gain the power and knowledge of an adult god. Similarly, Athena popped out of Zeus's head as an adult god. The gods are simply born that way, they don't need to learn or train or practice, they automatically develop the powers and knowledge of a god. It's the same thing with the heroes of myth. Hera sent snakes to kill Hercules right after he was born and Hercules was already strong enough to kill those snakes with his bare hands.

If this story is to be treated as a myth, then discussion's over. There's no need to explain anything since Diana was just born with the innate morality, honor, inner strength, etc. to be a hero. If this story is not supposed to be treated like a myth then the issues of where Diana learned her beliefs, morals, values, compassion, code of honor, etc. does matter. And it would take a lot more than a few wordless panels or off panel speculation to develop that arc.

#9 Edited by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@sethysquare said:

seriously who gives a shit.

the writer can write anything he wants. in his world harpies are evil and should be slain but minotaurs are humane.

deal with it.

the point is she shows compassion. if you're so self righteous about it, stop eating chicken eggs. "King of mad cows"

Except the point is not that she showed compassion, the point is that there's nothing to suggest that she learned compassion from the Amazons. It would be like if the Terminator in T2 suddenly learned the value of human life without any interaction with John Connor or if Bill Murray's character in Groundhog Day started out as a humble altruistic person.

If you're just going to accept anything the writer writes without considering the implications and the characterization then why even have this discussion in the first place? If your answer to questions about inconsistencies in characterization or plotting is "deal with it" then there's really no point in talking about any story.

And really? Resorting to personal attacks when discussing a work of fiction?

@Outside_85: Which has nothing to do with showing mercy in real combat. Just because Hippolyta stopped Diana from beating someone up doesn't mean she taught her to show mercy in combat. Ares was affectionate towards Diana during all their training sessions, he sparred with her, and he showed her mercy when he told her that their duel would be to the death. Yet, Ares told her to be ruthless towards the minotaur. What is there to suggest that the Amazons are any different than Ares? What is there to suggest that the Amazons don't treat practice differently than real combat like Ares? The only time they showed Diana learning mercy in combat was when Ares spared her after their duel. That suggests Diana learned to show mercy in combat from Ares, not the Amazons.

Of course, you can say that the Amazons taught it to her off panel but considering how this is supposed to be a pretty important arc for the character, it makes no sense to leave a major impetus for this change out of the story.

#10 Edited by KingofMadCows (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@sethysquare said:

Uhm, are we sure that it had an intelligence of a human? Also, there haven't been good harpies, they're known as monsters and pest and would only harm people.

Also, the point is yes Minotaur also kills people according to myths. But, it is probably comparable to a tiger. Minotaurs are known to be aggressive and dangerous, but unlike harpies, they don't actually harm humans and create havoc and are usually isolated like in a cave or what not.

But the point is, if a tiger attacked you and you defeated it, it is no harm to you, would you kill it? Knowing that the tiger is kept in the cave and would not harm anyone.

I mean the creature is already lying there almost dead and you saw it in his eyes that its begging for mercy. Well, a compassionate person would let it live. Unless its a survivor reason, which it isn't, I dont see a point to kill it.

The Harpy was able to talk. How many animals can talk?

And how do you know the harpy goes around harming people but the minotaur doesn't? There's no evidence to suggest that the harpy was any more malicious than the minotaur.

Of course, I probably wouldn't kill a helpless animal but I wouldn't steal the baby of a sentient being either.

If someone has problem stealing the child of a creature who is capable of human speech, why would they suddenly have a problem with killing a beast that showed no more intelligence than a dog?

@Outside_85 said:

Except you actually have proof that the Amazons did teach her about mercy and you see it twice in that issue alone before you get to the Minotaur; the fight with Aleka and the later one with the teacher, if she didnt know about it there she would have killed both and no one would have cared.

But Diana wasn't engaged in a fight to the death with either Akela or her teacher. There's a big difference between killing someone in a sparring match and killing someone in real combat. Not killing your opponent during practice isn't about mercy, it's just common sense since if the Amazons did that, their population would plummet since they practice fighting each other all the time.

The only time when Diana learned about showing mercy in a life or death situation was when Ares spared her after saying that their duel would be to the death.