and she recovered from the poison with yellow sun power, but the dog couldn’t?
Maybe this would have been better written with ChapGPT.
Comment on Supergirl 2026 storyline
RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Except the dog was poisoned and sad. It wasn’t “awww doggie” it was “awww sad doggie.” Also Supergirl didn’t have her powers for like 3/4ths of the movie (due to her character’s own stupidity). Like they couldn’t write a decent story if she had powers.
and she recovered from the poison with yellow sun power, but the dog couldn’t?
Maybe this would have been better written with ChapGPT.
Yes! That was plot hole that frustrated me early on.
They said that moving Krypto would accelerate the poison so he would have died before they got to a yellow sun.
Yeah that’s pretty nonsense though. Superman can literally die for days/weeks and come back to life with the sun’s power. Krypto should be able to also.
I think the issue was more DC’ power scaling issues. It’s kinda hard to write a compelling story for Superman or Batman, because they are, for the most part, invincible and flawless according to DC. I suspect that her not having the ability to access her powers for 3/4 of the movie was an effort to make her seem like a Marvel superhero with flaws and relatability. Unfortunately, DC doesn’t know how to do that, as Marvel doesn’t even know how to do that consistently. Power creep is a real problem if you can’t just magic away the hero’s basic invulnerability.
Couldn’t get past season 1 of Invincible. You won’t like what I thought about it. But I’m a Superman fan who doesn’t like excessive violence, so hopefully you can understand where I’m coming from.
Nah, I get it. I wouldn’t have gotten to season 2 if I had watched season 1 before season 2 was already out. Season 1 ended on the WORST POSSIBLE down note that they could, and I think they did that intentionally.
Minor spoilers: it’s not like they ended season 2 on a good note, just that Nolan and Markus do finally find a common ground against Nolan’s objectives.
It won’t end in a satisfying way. They never do. Game of Thrones or The Boys or any violence-focused show. Terrible endings, all of them.
It also kind of made the villains seem a bit daft. The rule seemed to be red sun = no powers, green sun = kills her, yellow sun = super powers and the main villain seemed to be pretty powerful no matter where he was, and they establish early on that there are lots of red sun planets where people live, so literally just hide out anywhere without a yellow sun and you’re 100% safe?
Until she calls her friends in the Lantern Corps, or you know just gains a Red power ring of her own
I think that’s kind of the main issue with any character that has Superman-level powers, they’re so OP that it sort of limits what you can do to keep the story interesting. You basically have:
Try to make the powers irrelevant and embroil them in a complicated psychological/moral issue (great if it works but difficult to pull off and not especially visually interesting for a superhero movie.)
Create an enemy with the same power level as them (then you just basically have two invincible characters bouncing off each other and smashing everything around them (visually interesting but essentially no stakes.)
Have them lose their powers in some convoluted way and then get them back at the climax of the movie to do an ass-kicking scene (which seems to be the default.)
I think it’s the same problem that The Boys TV show had - at first there was kind of a tension about them just being normal people and Homelander being so powerful that he could hear their heartbeats from half a mile away and level the entire city they were hiding in if he knew they were there, but the longer it went on the more preposterous it got that he hadn’t just squished them yet. Especially when the show has them meet face-to-face multiple times and he either lets them go because reasons or they escape somehow.
I don’t think that’s true at all, and there are nearly 100 years of Superman comics full of stuff that doesn’t fit that. I feel like you are commenting on the movies specifically and coming to the conclusion that these are the ONLY choices.
When they make a movie, they are OBSESSED with the 2nd idea. An enemy with equal power. Which is why we’ve seen 2 movies starring general Zod, despite him not being that major of a character. It’s why we got Doomsday in the Justice League movie. Hollywood filmmakers are clearly in love with the idea of two super people bouncing off buildings for 90 minutes. In the comics though, this would be boring as hell. “Essentially no stakes” as you put it. Correct. It’s boring. I hate that the movies always want Superman to become this. Because it’s not what the comics are like at all.
There are many options you have missed. There are limits to Superman’s powers. Remember that these are from detective comics. A good Superman comic involves a mystery for Clark Kent/Superman to solve. Like who is supplying Intergang with weapons. A good episode from the kids cartoon show starts with Clark Kent being assassinated, then Superman trying to figure out who did it and why. Superman Red Son (which has a cartoon movie with some changes), puts Superman in the USSR instead of Kansas, for truth, justice, and the communist way. Again, not remotely any of the 3 plot lines you have suggested.
Superman (2025) did a great job with this. Yes you’ve got an “equal” super-being for him to fight (Hollywood wouldn’t accept anything less), but ultimately it’s about Lex Luthor and the plot behind it all.
The Boys is a poorly written show that loves violence. They ran out of ideas within a couple years. Not surprised at all that everyone hated the ending. They wrote themselves into a corner very early on. They were always pushing the idea that violence was the answer, very unlike Superman in nearly every way. The fact that you see this as comparable to Superman is pretty frustrating. Frankly I think the whole show is a bit of a middle finger to Superman. It’s literally a show about how much they think Superman sucks.
Lumidaub@feddit.org 2 days ago
23-year-old with abandonment and self-worth issues behaves less than reasonably, more at 11.
RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It’s a general complaint I have about some of the mainstream attempts at Superman. “We’ve got to make him/her weaker.” Is a common theme that has been done way too many times. Because in these people’s minds, there is nothing interesting that can happen if Superman/Supergirl actually has their powers and wins. The drama, for these non-Superman fans writing the script, is in the hero losing their powers.
Lumidaub@feddit.org 2 days ago
I know what you’re talking about but here it’s rooted in actual character development. Nobody took her powers away, she wasn’t taking care of herself, was reckless, and suffered the consequences. Sure at some point there was Kryptonite involved but even that could’ve been avoided if she had been more level-headed and less self-destructive.
RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I would like to see a situation that cannot be solved by strength alone. It feels like lazy writing to take that strength away. Kryptonite as a plot device is kinda old. But if you use it for a few seconds here or there, like Superman (2025) that’s great. What I definitely do not want is a movie about Superman without his powers.
dreamkeeper@literature.cafe 2 days ago
I mean I agree with them. There’s nothing interesting about a character who’s invincible and can do almost anything with ease. I always found Superman painfully boring.