Half the movie feels like an attempt to do Superman 4, better, and that feels like a necessary step in doing that
-
Welcome to Talking Time's third iteration! If you would like to register for an account, or have already registered but have not yet been confirmed, please read the following:
- The CAPTCHA key's answer is "Percy"
- Once you've completed the registration process please email us from the email you used for registration at percyreghelper@gmail.com and include the username you used for registration
Once you have completed these steps, Moderation Staff will be able to get your account approved.
The DC Comics TV & Movie Thread - A Thread for Talking about Detective Comics Comics Television Shows and Movies
- Thread starter Rascally Badger
- Start date
Underutilized in that they could have done more, but I'm glad they didn't. Could Gunn have spent more time exploring the nuances of these supporting characters? Yes, but it would have been very unwise. Superman (2025) is a lean (in modern superhero senses) 2 hr film. Any more additional exposition and exploration of the supporting cast would have unnecessarily lengthened the film, and pulled narrative attention away from the actual main characters. Ultraman is a legacy character from the comics, but in this movie, he is a glorified lackey. We don't need to see the inner life or thoughts of Bebop & Rocksteady. They're just the muscle that the real bad guy sends out that get in the way. I for one, am very happy and relieved that a film called "Superman" was mostly about Superman, and not an ensemble where everything and everyone was stretched too thin.
That's certainly possible. Sending Ultraman through a blackhole definitely feels like setup for that character's possible return, seeing how black holes theoretically can serve as Einstein-Rosen bridges to other universes. But what I think is more likely, is that as the character's name suggests -- if we see him return, we'll see Ultraman fulfill the destiny of his namesake. Which, for those unaware, is the Superman of "Earth 3". The Earth of a different dimension where all the good guys are bad, and the bad guys are good. Where Superman is an evil villain and leader of "The Crime Syndicate of America". Then and again, this Ultraman is already a synthesis of multiple characters as well (he's called "Ultraman" but he has Kon-El Superboy backstory) so I could easily see elements of Bizarro folded into him as well.
That's why I said he should have been saved for a movie that has more room for him. Lex could have built a mute, faceless robot that punches really hard and it would have had the same impact on the movie (and on Clark's face)
I dunno, with no attachment to the character I was fine with it. Lex is so obsessed with Superman that he CLONES HIM, and such a "use people as tools" asshole that when that doesn't work out like he hoped he weaponizes the clone instead of using this incredible technological advance for anything good. There's not much to the character but it says quite a bit about Luthor.
Nah, hard disagree. This movie was as much a reintroduction to Lex as it was to Superman. And the audience needs to know, in no uncertain terms, who he is. Lex talks a big game about protecting humanity from aliens, but he ultimately doesn't actually care about that, and he doesn't believe in anything or anyone but himself. He's a narcissist who is only out for power and his own ego. And him making a clone of Superman is the ultimate hypocritical, narcissistic move. He talks about how nobody should have the power of Superman, but gleefully takes that power for himself. He talks about how we should reject aliens invading Earth, but then multiplies their numbers. If you just make a faceless robot, it doesn't hit the audience with the same message. It's not enough that Lex simply be an oppositional adversary to Superman, he needs to stand for everything Superman doesn't. The avarice, jealousy, lack of morals, pride, and hatred, all of it is on display when he takes it upon himself to clone Superman.
It's also worth noting that James Gunn knows and loves DC comics, and he knows it better than you or I do. There's a wealth of characters in Superman's menagerie of villains that are just as you describe or could ostensibly serve a similar function. Gunn could have brought in Metallo, or Hank Henshaw to serve the purpose you're describing. He could have had Lex empower a version of Intergang, or make a devil's deal with a version of Brainiac, or had Toy-man in his employ to make a big robot, or brought out Parasite if we're talking about stealing Superman's powers for nefarious purposes. But using the Kon-El story to make Ultraman specifically was to me, a very calculated decision to show the depths of Lex's depravity, and to communicate to audiences his exact level of narcissistic hypocrisy. He will steal everything of Superman's, in order to make his exact opposite - just to soothe his own bruised ego. Picking any of those other options, or creating a faceless robot doesn't accomplish that in the same way.
One thing about this Superman movie that I'm not quite sure what to make of is that apparently, in this universe, the Kryptonians, including Superman's parents, are in fact evil? And Superman only turned out to be good because he wasn't aware of this fact, and was raised by humans. I've read one criticism that claims that this ruins the "Superman as an immigrant" allegory, since now it becomes "Superman rejects his foreign heritage and learns good American values."
I know there's been other stories that asks "what if Krypton wasn't in fact a super nice place?", but those usually at least still make Jor-El and Lara good people who wants their son to become a good person too.
I know there's been other stories that asks "what if Krypton wasn't in fact a super nice place?", but those usually at least still make Jor-El and Lara good people who wants their son to become a good person too.
I saw the Man of Metropolis over the weekend. I really liked it! A few (complimentary) notes on its less fantastical bits...
I really enjoyed how "just have a Superman" enhanced Lex Luthor's characterization. You technically could have had Lex Luthor in a power suit as the "physical threat" going all the way back to the start of the movie. But Ultra Man, even for being a non-entity, subtly featured Lex's own issues. For instance, when he is instantly granted access to the Fortress of (absolutely not) Solitude, it is implied it is because he's a genius. Engineer could not get in there on her own, but Lex walks right in. Why? Because he's got a Superman! But he lets Engineer and the audience think it is because of some masterful plan, and not just that he has a Superman. And you could argue making his own Superman is genius or whatever, but it's basically as complicated as cutting a key in this universe. Brains over brawn, but not as much brains as you might think.
And speaking of which, I really enjoyed the final scene with Ultra Man, and how Lex Luthor is repeatedly demanding "1-A" (or A-1... same diff). For all his talk of brains, the "1-A", designated first and most commonly used move is just "punch Superman in the face". The plan was always just "punch Superman in the face". Bro really wants to punch Superman in the face, and he finally gets there. Congrats, Lex! Similarly, using his dimensional portal as little more than an earthquake machine (that might destroy the planet!) further confirms that Lex is basically just a brute. Or wants to be.
And final compliment: the Lois interviews Superman scene from early in the movie? They should make that a part of screenwriting courses. The whole scene is a masterclass in the characters stating their feelings one way, but revealing what they are actually thinking constantly without the need of narration or some third character/audience surrogate being like "what is wrong with you two?" They are constantly "consciously" coming back to the idea that they should not be doing the interview or even possibly be in a relationship at all, but their questions and answers reveal that they are 100% up each other's asses (complimentary) to the point that they're the center of each other's worlds. It is seamless, and goddamned if it isn't some of the best Lois and Clark writing I have ever seen. And that's impressive, considering we're nearing having a century of Lois and Clark hijinks. It is probably the most mundane scene in the whole movie, and it is just goddamned amazing.
Random Observation of a character introduced at the absolute end: I don't know how I feel about Party Girl Supergirl, as I did grow attached to CW Possibly-More-Idealistic-Than-Superman Supergirl over the course of that show. That said, I currently want more than anything to have this new Supergirl and her jackass dog go up against Lobo for a movie. And "by go up against Lobo", I mean "the plot is that she gets blackout drunk and wakes up married to Lobo, and then they have to deal with that for an hour and a half". James Gunn, call me!
My only "nerd complaint" is Angela Spica is the Engineer, and Lex Luthor plainly states he "created" her by replacing her blood with nanobots. Lex could be lying to impress the government, but I would much prefer Engineer to be closer to her OG Authority comic book origin where she is responsible for her own powers. She can still be a (misguided) Luthor flunky! I just prefer the origin where she was like "I have a neat idea for replacing my blood with robots" and actually survived her own mad science. I doubt she'll return for future films, but I'd like to see more of a "self-made" Engineer than what I feel is another take on the Mercy character.
Anyway, 5/5 stars. Feel kind of bad I am now inevitably going to be comparing Fantastic Four to this fantastic movie.
I really enjoyed how "just have a Superman" enhanced Lex Luthor's characterization. You technically could have had Lex Luthor in a power suit as the "physical threat" going all the way back to the start of the movie. But Ultra Man, even for being a non-entity, subtly featured Lex's own issues. For instance, when he is instantly granted access to the Fortress of (absolutely not) Solitude, it is implied it is because he's a genius. Engineer could not get in there on her own, but Lex walks right in. Why? Because he's got a Superman! But he lets Engineer and the audience think it is because of some masterful plan, and not just that he has a Superman. And you could argue making his own Superman is genius or whatever, but it's basically as complicated as cutting a key in this universe. Brains over brawn, but not as much brains as you might think.
And speaking of which, I really enjoyed the final scene with Ultra Man, and how Lex Luthor is repeatedly demanding "1-A" (or A-1... same diff). For all his talk of brains, the "1-A", designated first and most commonly used move is just "punch Superman in the face". The plan was always just "punch Superman in the face". Bro really wants to punch Superman in the face, and he finally gets there. Congrats, Lex! Similarly, using his dimensional portal as little more than an earthquake machine (that might destroy the planet!) further confirms that Lex is basically just a brute. Or wants to be.
And final compliment: the Lois interviews Superman scene from early in the movie? They should make that a part of screenwriting courses. The whole scene is a masterclass in the characters stating their feelings one way, but revealing what they are actually thinking constantly without the need of narration or some third character/audience surrogate being like "what is wrong with you two?" They are constantly "consciously" coming back to the idea that they should not be doing the interview or even possibly be in a relationship at all, but their questions and answers reveal that they are 100% up each other's asses (complimentary) to the point that they're the center of each other's worlds. It is seamless, and goddamned if it isn't some of the best Lois and Clark writing I have ever seen. And that's impressive, considering we're nearing having a century of Lois and Clark hijinks. It is probably the most mundane scene in the whole movie, and it is just goddamned amazing.
Random Observation of a character introduced at the absolute end: I don't know how I feel about Party Girl Supergirl, as I did grow attached to CW Possibly-More-Idealistic-Than-Superman Supergirl over the course of that show. That said, I currently want more than anything to have this new Supergirl and her jackass dog go up against Lobo for a movie. And "by go up against Lobo", I mean "the plot is that she gets blackout drunk and wakes up married to Lobo, and then they have to deal with that for an hour and a half". James Gunn, call me!
My only "nerd complaint" is Angela Spica is the Engineer, and Lex Luthor plainly states he "created" her by replacing her blood with nanobots. Lex could be lying to impress the government, but I would much prefer Engineer to be closer to her OG Authority comic book origin where she is responsible for her own powers. She can still be a (misguided) Luthor flunky! I just prefer the origin where she was like "I have a neat idea for replacing my blood with robots" and actually survived her own mad science. I doubt she'll return for future films, but I'd like to see more of a "self-made" Engineer than what I feel is another take on the Mercy character.
Anyway, 5/5 stars. Feel kind of bad I am now inevitably going to be comparing Fantastic Four to this fantastic movie.
I enthusiastically agree. That was an incredible piece of... everything.
Personally, I am all about this. Next year seems so far away. The way Supergirl is portrayed in her CW show is really just Clark Kent but a girl. That's kind of what a lot of depictions of her end up being. And I'd be ok with that being something she evolves into, but if she's sharing a world prominently with Clark, then she kinda needs to be her own character and have some personality beyond Superman but femme.
Also, James Gunn just tweeted out a poster for it already:
I didn't come into this film with much knowledge/expectations for who the Engineer was. To me it felt like just how Ultraman borrows from Kon-El Superboy's whole deal, the Engineer felt like she was half Mercy Graves and I felt like that worked fine for what this movie was.
Disney does this to themselves lol. It'll be mildly interesting to see if these summer movies end up cannibalizing themselves.
The thing I find kinda interesting is just kind of the juxtaposition of the two movies against each other thematically. Both Superman & the Fantastic Four represent some of the most earnest, positive, wholesomeness of their respective universes/franchises. This Fantastic Four film's aesthetic diving deep into retro-futurism, to me, kinda feels like the movie is saying through the language of its design that that kind of positivity and wholesomeness is more at home in the past and does not come from a place of modernity. And I very much appreciated how Superman's central thesis from the get-go is that no, these values and ideals belong here, today, in the present.
I don't know if this is part of the marketing around the movie or if it's been around and I just wasn't paying attention, but at the theatre I went to see this, they put up on a sign above the box office "Truth, Justice, and a Brighter Tomorrow" which frankly fits way more with both what I think Superman would be up to and what this movie wanted to present than the original catchphrase.
Superman's parents being evil is a weird move for sure, but personally I kinda like it. For one, it doesn't actually have much to say about how all the other Kryptonians would feel about other sentient species, just what two jackasses with a colony ship of one feel, which is a pretty terrible sample size. For another, this movie's in no hurry to glorify "American" values; the most "American" characters depicted are the Pentagon bigshots who are amoral at best. I don't think Superman is supposed to be rejecting his heritage: he's still using the powers of a Kryptonian, just in a way that protects his new homeland. I can't really argue with the "rejects his heritage" reading given that, again, we have a barely worthwhile sample size, but a big part of immigrating to a new land is wanting to be a part of it, and to make it part of yourself in turn, and that message comes through loud and clear.
"Truth, Justice, and a Brighter Tomorrow" has been Superman's tagline in the comics for almost half a decade at this point. It was part of an editorial shift/mandate to make the character appeal more to international audiences, since, you know, there's not a lot to be proud about the American identity these days. The original motto was an invention of the 1950s TV show that was being made during that era's Red Scare. Glad to see them going with the new motto; they probably should have led with it more though.
My understanding is that this isn't a unique take on the character's origins. This was done in the comics before. I don't know if I'm a big fan of the Goku-style origin, but I think I get the point? The idea being -- immigrants are not defined by where they come from, or the politics of their point of origin. They are people who deserve to be judged based on their individual merits, just like anyone else.
I can get why this might seem or feel bad to some people. Like, Latin America is not sending people to the United States in order to take us over. Nobody is (Russia aside lmao). In an ideal world, this isn't how you frame the debate, and it's insulting that people still frame the issue of immigration in this way. But I personally come from the context of the Japanese-American experience. Where my family is the descendants of a nation that initiated a World War and attacked America. The prevailing sentiment of the time was that people like my family could not be trusted because of "dual loyalties". And the heart of that argument is just illogical/flawed. This was the only avenue we had to fight back against bigotry and discrimination. By simply showing people ourselves. To humanize ourselves. That we are just normal people like them, and that we are not where we came from.
That's the place Superman (2025) is coming from, I think. This is how you tackle bad faith arguments, especially when the other side has the upperhand. You don't argue about abstracts like the intentions of political leaders in far away lands. You can't use statistics because the average person is quite frankly stupid and can't really comprehend numbers, let alone statistics. You focus on the people here and now. You humanize the debate and make appeals to decency and empathy. You undercut their entire line of reasoning that way. If society is made up of mostly decent people, and if you stick true to common morals and values, you'll win in the long run because those decent people will be willing to stand with you and see the bad faith arguments for what they are. That's kind of the thesis of this film. Lex runs a smear campaign in the media and attacks Superman's place of origin. But Superman stands firm, stands by his values, and shows the world Lex is not only wrong about him, but is arguing in bad faith.
I can get why this might seem or feel bad to some people. Like, Latin America is not sending people to the United States in order to take us over. Nobody is (Russia aside lmao). In an ideal world, this isn't how you frame the debate, and it's insulting that people still frame the issue of immigration in this way. But I personally come from the context of the Japanese-American experience. Where my family is the descendants of a nation that initiated a World War and attacked America. The prevailing sentiment of the time was that people like my family could not be trusted because of "dual loyalties". And the heart of that argument is just illogical/flawed. This was the only avenue we had to fight back against bigotry and discrimination. By simply showing people ourselves. To humanize ourselves. That we are just normal people like them, and that we are not where we came from.
That's the place Superman (2025) is coming from, I think. This is how you tackle bad faith arguments, especially when the other side has the upperhand. You don't argue about abstracts like the intentions of political leaders in far away lands. You can't use statistics because the average person is quite frankly stupid and can't really comprehend numbers, let alone statistics. You focus on the people here and now. You humanize the debate and make appeals to decency and empathy. You undercut their entire line of reasoning that way. If society is made up of mostly decent people, and if you stick true to common morals and values, you'll win in the long run because those decent people will be willing to stand with you and see the bad faith arguments for what they are. That's kind of the thesis of this film. Lex runs a smear campaign in the media and attacks Superman's place of origin. But Superman stands firm, stands by his values, and shows the world Lex is not only wrong about him, but is arguing in bad faith.
Okay yeah, I just haven't been very tuned in to Superman lately. Not a big TV/comics person, but sometimes I get into it, and I played enough Sentinels of the Multiverse (RIP) to get enough of the flavor.
I just really like that Superman as a character isn't just about being Very Powerful but about flat-out being a good person, to the point where when the movie kept Superman imprisoned by virtue of locking him in with another inmate who canceled out his powers I immediately knew he'd escape by appealing to his co-prisoner's better nature.
I just really like that Superman as a character isn't just about being Very Powerful but about flat-out being a good person, to the point where when the movie kept Superman imprisoned by virtue of locking him in with another inmate who canceled out his powers I immediately knew he'd escape by appealing to his co-prisoner's better nature.
Oh yeah! I forgot to mention that! Any other Superman movie, Lex Luthor would say "I have a solution for a lack of kryptonite," and it would be synthetic kryptonite, or some new Lexonite, or a red sun heat lamp, or just "yeah we had some extra kryptonite lying around". But no! It's a guy! With a rich DC history that makes perfect sense to have this "power"! And a freaky baby that eventually leads to empathy and cool action sequences! Man, did everyone involved here understand the assignment.
Lex just sucks so perfectly.
He sucks like he had a fridge full of Being Sucky that was about to expire so he had to use it all up at once.
He sucks like he had a fridge full of Being Sucky that was about to expire so he had to use it all up at once.
Waste not, want not.
I think this is the most any comic book movie has benefited from jumping ahead from any potential origin story hijinks and just getting into the brass tacks of "it's been a couple of years, Lex Luthor is well and truly full mad scientist at this point". He started an international war for the express purpose of creating a situation where the only appropriate response is "why are you hitting yourself, Superman?"
So it looks like the roulette wheel of deciding what to combine Batman with has landed on Mesoamerican Indians:
(Wait... So we're getting another Az-Bat now?)
(Wait... So we're getting another Az-Bat now?)
I'm just glad we've got a version of Superman that is as cool and interesting as I've always known the character to be. There's this meme that exists -- both in nerd circles and in the popular zeitgeist -- that it's "hard" to make interesting Superman stories, and/or that he's a boring character. And that's always just been kinda nonsense.
For a character that's getting close to being 100 years old, and quite literally is the Ur-Superhero, it might feel hard to make original or interesting stories about Superman after all this time. But we've spent decades exploring alternatives or trying to deconstruct Superman so thoroughly, that going back to a more classic and earnest representation is, unsurprising, the most fresh and interesting thing you could have done at this point. Especially after decades of crap like Brightburn, or Omniman, or Homelander, or even Injustice, being the most prevalent way we've had to interact with the idea in public.
Real life is shit enough as it is. Do my escapist power fantasies need to be shit too?
The original Superman was born from the Great Depression, and was just a strong dude who could come in and make shit situation better. Be it beating up hoodlems, to stopping corruption, and rooting out the KKK. In *gestures towards the rest of the world* modern times, it feels more than appropriate we have a Superman return to his roots.
For a character that's getting close to being 100 years old, and quite literally is the Ur-Superhero, it might feel hard to make original or interesting stories about Superman after all this time. But we've spent decades exploring alternatives or trying to deconstruct Superman so thoroughly, that going back to a more classic and earnest representation is, unsurprising, the most fresh and interesting thing you could have done at this point. Especially after decades of crap like Brightburn, or Omniman, or Homelander, or even Injustice, being the most prevalent way we've had to interact with the idea in public.
Real life is shit enough as it is. Do my escapist power fantasies need to be shit too?
The original Superman was born from the Great Depression, and was just a strong dude who could come in and make shit situation better. Be it beating up hoodlems, to stopping corruption, and rooting out the KKK. In *gestures towards the rest of the world* modern times, it feels more than appropriate we have a Superman return to his roots.
Last edited:
jpfriction
(He, Him)
Hey they made a really good superman movie! And I watched it!
No real complaints. I agree that some of the supporting characters were underbaked but I enjoyed the fact that there were entire well cast daily planet and justice gang sitcoms happening just off screen while supes was getting punched in the face.
No real complaints. I agree that some of the supporting characters were underbaked but I enjoyed the fact that there were entire well cast daily planet and justice gang sitcoms happening just off screen while supes was getting punched in the face.
Last edited:
I too liked the Man who was Super. To me, one of the central aspects of a good Superman story is the threats and conflicts, because Superman is so damn strong a lot of traditional enemies and comic book conflicts would make for unimpressive threats that Superman could just punch real good. But Lex not only showed he could use his brains as a threat in a fight with the Hammer/Ultraman, he also had a ton of options to put Superman up against the ropes; hitting him where it hurts in the fortress of solitude, threatening things and people he loves, turning public perception against him. In fact, the biggest one probably starts off-screen - orchestrating a war that Superman can solve with his Superman powers, but where doing so gets him into hot water that his powers can't solve. There was a lot of "How is Superman going to get out of this one?" which is where the character really shines. Even in the fights, they came up with ways to get around Superman's powers (like suffocating him). And of course, the actual fight-fights are justified (perhaps somewhat clunkily, in this case, going with the easiest answer) by making his opponent just as strong as he is—another him.
But yeah, the movie was funny and emotionally affecting and the Superman really shined as a character (everyone did, really, except maybe Jimmy). I think Gunn did good.
But yeah, the movie was funny and emotionally affecting and the Superman really shined as a character (everyone did, really, except maybe Jimmy). I think Gunn did good.
Just saw Supes, and it was good. The one thing that really bugged me about the movie was the character of Eve, and in particular her relationship with Jimmy Olsen. She really was portrayed just as the stereotype of the clingy, needy, self-obsessed woman, with nothing to her beyond that. I wish the filmmakers had written and directed her leak of Luthor’s information without leaning on that nasty old trope.
The way I read it, she was purposely taking those selfies to record the information, showing that she actually had a level of cunning and intelligence beneath the surface... But I don't disagree that her portrayal wasn't particularly sympathetic or nuanced. And Jimmy's reactions to her left me feeling a bit uncomfortable, too, possibly for personal reasons.
I saw some discussion about this and regardless of tonal differences, I think completely rebooting your multimedia superhero franchise and also declaring "Hey, that very successful Batman movie and Penguin show aren't part of this" seems like a mistake.
I'm more than fine with it. It honestly seems like the most respectful route to go down. People liked The Batman, but The Batman was also very much a Year One type story. The Batman that James Gunn wants is a Batman that's been around the block many, many times, and has Damian Wayne in his life as Robin, which is rather antithetical to the Batman stories that Matt Reeves wants to tell. Last time a Year One type DC superhero was unceremoniously shoved into a broader world building situation right after, everyone hated it. I'm more than willing to be patient and see out how both of these different things are going to go.
Peacemaker S2 started up this week. The retconned the Justice Gang into the end of S1, which is funny. I'm mildly annoyed that the season long arc seems like it's going to be about regressing as a character as he lives in a fantasy version of his life but I have little doubt the show will end up doing and saying fun stuff so it's just a nitpick as of this moment. Looking forward to the rest of the show, so far so good.
4-So
Spicy
Watched Batman (89) and Batman Returns in the theater tonight. It's been about 10 years since I'd seen either movie, and the first time in 36 and 33 years respectively in terms of seeing them in the theater. Still good movies, turns out, although I never noticed how very "Burton" the second one is. He made Warner Bros. that swollen Batman money and they just let him go make a Burton-ass Tim Burton movie for the second one.
SO PEACEMAKER SEASON 2.
Something weird happened here. I don't have any guesses as to what it might have been but there's no way what made it to screen here was the plan from the getgo.
So the slow build up to PLANET NAZI was genuinely great as an exercise in building tension. Everything about Earth X was just dripping with genuine dread as your brain screams at you that there's something terribly wrong with every crowd shot. I loved that shit right up to the reveal.
And then it got weird.
Peacemaker's whole thing is being extremely good at murder. Hell, most of the 11th Street Kids are. The big finale to season 1 is one of the best "3 guys fuck up an entire army" scenes ever made for the small screen! EVERYTHING WAS IN PLACE FOR THE NAZI SLAUGHTER OF THE CENTURY!
And then it just... didn't happen.
I enjoyed season 2 a lot! The characters all have fantastic chemistry and the writing remains incredibly funny and incredibly heartfelt when needed. It's a good show!
But you can't put the best soldiers ever on Planet Nazi, Then describe in detail Planet Nazi's forced labor camps where the most evil nazis oppress minorities to said best soldiers who we know for a fact are extremely good at just fucking deleting any and all challengers and then NOT doing the sensible obvious thing that literally everyone is now dying to see. That's just not how this shit works.
And then it got weird.
Peacemaker's whole thing is being extremely good at murder. Hell, most of the 11th Street Kids are. The big finale to season 1 is one of the best "3 guys fuck up an entire army" scenes ever made for the small screen! EVERYTHING WAS IN PLACE FOR THE NAZI SLAUGHTER OF THE CENTURY!
And then it just... didn't happen.
I enjoyed season 2 a lot! The characters all have fantastic chemistry and the writing remains incredibly funny and incredibly heartfelt when needed. It's a good show!
But you can't put the best soldiers ever on Planet Nazi, Then describe in detail Planet Nazi's forced labor camps where the most evil nazis oppress minorities to said best soldiers who we know for a fact are extremely good at just fucking deleting any and all challengers and then NOT doing the sensible obvious thing that literally everyone is now dying to see. That's just not how this shit works.
Something weird happened here. I don't have any guesses as to what it might have been but there's no way what made it to screen here was the plan from the getgo.
It was definitely weird, but I trust there's a plan there and that things didn't get editorially rail-roaded. James Gunn does not shy away from showing a bunch of Nazis getting murdered. If you don't believe me, go watch Creature Commandos right now. Everybody should watch Creature Commandos. GI Robot for President! Cheers for the tin-man!
Further, I think:
1) This is perfectly in line with the overarching theme of the show, where Peacemaker slowly rehabs from a ruthless killer antihero whose mantra is "I cherish peace with all my heart. I don't care how many men, women, and children I kill to get it" to a human being with a conscious and being a true hero.
2) This clearly isn't the end of the story, and feels more like a halfway point. I really doubt that we won't be going back to Earth X which this definitely is btw.
Further, I think:
1) This is perfectly in line with the overarching theme of the show, where Peacemaker slowly rehabs from a ruthless killer antihero whose mantra is "I cherish peace with all my heart. I don't care how many men, women, and children I kill to get it" to a human being with a conscious and being a true hero.
2) This clearly isn't the end of the story, and feels more like a halfway point. I really doubt that we won't be going back to Earth X which this definitely is btw.