DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
The early review bombing was cringe
Iron Heart official Trailer
- Thread starter DeafTourette
- Start date
yet_another_alt
Member
He didn't? So how did Sam have that base of operations of his in his movie?
Last edited:
LegendOfKage
Member
Which movie was this? If it was released already, then yeah, it's hard to imagine some context that would have made that understandable. If it was a preview or comments about a movie he went on to watch later, that would be more understandable.
He did like Prey, though, so I didn't really get the impression he was just auto-criticizing every movie with a female protagonist.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
It was provided by the government. Sam was being paid by the US government at that point in time.
yet_another_alt
Member
I see. I was working on the assumption that Sam was working with the goverment, not for the government. Actually now that I think about it why do the Avengers need to be reformed? Did Pepper just cut off the funding?
March Climber
Member
Apologies, it was a show, not a movie.
The Boys Season 4 review. He didn't watch the season at all, then used Rotten Tomato lower scored user reviews as a basis for his entire critique of it, and blatantly said this on his video.
There have been other moments afterwards where he has gotten tons of details wrong on movies, but it essentially solidified for me that he was phoning it in. Not 100% phoning it in, but doing it enough to where he was not being a good enough of a reviewer to take seriously. I have compared him to Dunkey before because that's how I picture him now. A Dunkey-like youtuber for that specific movie/TV audience. Someone I can't take seriously anymore.
Last edited:
kpopSuperstar
Member
Imagine if the show was her fixing her suit in the first episode and then use it to solve crime and do cool shit. It could have been solid if they played it straight. She could have gone after gangs and whatever in her community, actually doing good.
Using her brains to outsmart everyone, making crazy gadgets.
Using her brains to outsmart everyone, making crazy gadgets.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
The avengers never got back together... After Endgame. Tony funded them ... I think HQ had its own power source so Steve and the others could stay and work from there. Pepper wasn't actively funding anything
March Climber
Member
It was implied in Falcon and the Winter Soldier that the Stark funding had stopped. It's why Sam and his family were struggling with funds during that time.
CastorSoze
Member
Yeah, after 3 episodes, I was wondering why they went the route of making her a villain.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
It's part of her hero's journey. And a certain demon shows up later
Doom85
Member
-Tony in his origin realized he failed to see how his weapons were falling into the hands of the terrorists he was supposed to be providing protection against, and had to change his ways
-Thor's arrogant actions nearly escalated into a war that would have cost two realms untold lives, and he has to be sent to Earth to learn some humility
-the Guardians of the Galaxy are a bunch of directionless criminals before they meet and become a team
-Scott Lang was in jail for committing an unarmed robbery despite knowing it could jeopardize his relationship with his daughter
-Stephen Strange was full of himself and he drove recklessly (which could have potentially cost another person(s) their life) and paid the ultimate price for it and had to rebuild himself as a person
While it doesn't apply to all Marvel heroes, plenty get started off doing rough things. The show still has half its episodes left, we shouldn't be acting like it's already over. Even if the show does decide to side with a stance she was justified given the companies she stole from (but that's unlikely, as Riri herself has questioned multiple times if these heists are justified, and again, Anthony Ramos' character is blatantly shown in a sinister light in the trailer, I don't know why people think the show will agree with him), but even if it does? Matt Murdock continued to be Daredevil even after people he knew found out and called him out on it. The Punisher's very concept in terms of his actions has him completely ignore due process and various rights. Jessica Jones frequently does minor illegal things to fulfill her cases snd such. This is hardly new territory for certain Marvel heroes.
GateofD
Member
There's a difference between characters that start off bad/flawed and characters that are just unlikable.
Tony/Thor/Scott stared off 'bad' but still likeable because the way they portrayed their traits was entertaining.
You can't have a character where they start off their introduction kicking puppies and everyone hates them and go 'Nono, your suppose to dislike them, there's their character arc'
No one likes a character that whines and plays victim, and their solution they come with is to get involved in killing and stealing from other people. And their character arc is that they whine and self victims bit less.
Tony/Thor/Scott stared off 'bad' but still likeable because the way they portrayed their traits was entertaining.
You can't have a character where they start off their introduction kicking puppies and everyone hates them and go 'Nono, your suppose to dislike them, there's their character arc'
No one likes a character that whines and plays victim, and their solution they come with is to get involved in killing and stealing from other people. And their character arc is that they whine and self victims bit less.
Doom85
Member
And I'm going to stop you right there. Riri doesn't kill anyone in those first three episodes aside leaving ONE guy to die who tried to kill her FIRST, and she wasn't even the one to leave him, the AI took her in her suit out of the area, leaving the guy to die.
And Tony and Thor likewise hardly stop killing their enemies (I'm pretty sure trying to kill her qualifies that guy as an enemy to Riri) after their character development, and Scott? Scott Lang?
Straight from Ant-man 1:
Scott: "My days of stealing shit are over. What's the plan?"
Hank: "…I need you to steal some shit."
This is what I'm talking about. How are we supposed to take the criticism of the character seriously when objectively incorrect assessments of the events of the show are being given out, as well as equally incorrect assessments of prior MCU characters?
It's fine to not like the show and/or lead, but I've seen far too many "criticisms" that are factually incorrect in describing the events of the show. This is a serious issue, and why some people are frustrated by this point.
kpopSuperstar
Member
I don't think any of these examples fit in this situation.
She refuses to work to make money for her suit, so she joins a gang that explains to her, in detail, what they do. During the heists, they murder guards, just normal working class guards, she don't give a shit and celebrates by throwing money around.
During the second heist, she tries to cut a piece of cloak while hood murders a whole group of people. And she still helps them after that.
Doom85
Member
She refuses to work for money to make a POWER ARMOR suit?
Ah yes, lots of people in their late teens/early 20's can just instantly afford the materials to make an IRON MAN-level suit with the sort of job they can get.
Like, dude, do you think Tony's entire Iron Legion army cost him only like $200,00 or something? Come on now.
And she flat out says she won't kill people when she joins, and she clearly questions working with them as the show progresses. Do you honestly not see it's going to end with her versus Robbins?
Of course, you should probably read up on U.S. law, because these fictional companies you're defending against Riri and her team are likely breaking laws by having security systems designed to kill intruders (not to mention some of them seem like potential lawsuits if they malfunction and causes deaths of their own security force). So those "innocent" security guards aren't so innocent, at least from a legal standpoint (and if you feel, regardless of the law, that lethal force is always justified against intruders, okay, but the show doesn't have to agree with your moral stance, the same way the Daredevil or Punisher series doesn't have to agree with some people's moral stances with their various ways they deploy vigilantism even if it breaks various laws and violates certain rights).
And again, Thor essentially illegally entered a foreign nation and began intensely attacking people at the start of his first movie. How many of those people were just "innocent guards" and had nothing to do with the attempted theft in Asgard prior to that? So why is Thor allowed to break laws and kill potentially innocent people before he starts to become wiser and more heroic, but Riri isn't (and she hasn't directly killed an innocent person yet, so Thor is actually worse here)?
StreetsofBeige
Member
Fatality.
StreetsofBeige
Member
The dumb thing about Ironheart stealing shit is brought up by streamers who grilled the show. If she's got connections to Wakanda people who are loaded and know tech, why not just ask them for some money and gear to help out.
If they wanted to cash in, they should had released this series in 2020 to early 2023 when the world was still in full racial/gender DEI mode. I still got to find some clips sometimes where streamers make fun about people in Ironheart going around saying "Hey black people" and everyone has to know businesses and whatever else are all owned by black people..... just to make sure you know black people can do things in life. Sounds hilarious.
If they wanted to cash in, they should had released this series in 2020 to early 2023 when the world was still in full racial/gender DEI mode. I still got to find some clips sometimes where streamers make fun about people in Ironheart going around saying "Hey black people" and everyone has to know businesses and whatever else are all owned by black people..... just to make sure you know black people can do things in life. Sounds hilarious.
Last edited:
Doom85
Member
Because she mainly knew Shuri and Okoye from the events of that movie. M'Baku presumably is current ruler based on the ending of the movie, and he had no real interaction with Riri. Shuri is still Black Panther, but if she's no longer the ruler, she's likely not authorized to just send out the massive amount of money it would take to fund the building of a fully functioning power armor suit. And Okoye definitely wouldn't have that sort of political pull.
StreetsofBeige
Member
Ironheart cant ask or network around?
Doom85
Member
What do you expect to happen? Them give her a ton of money? Yes, she helped them in the final battle, but part of the reason the events of the film even happened was her inventing a vibranium detector (sure, the US government stole it from her but still, oh, that's another hilarious detail, this is a world where her OWN GOVERNMENT has stolen her work, but people criticize her when she steals from wealthy companies with insurance coverage). And tons of people participated in the final battle and aren't asking for a ton of money.
Based on what we saw in Wakanda Forever, only Shuri and Okoye knew her that well. The former is no longer in a position of political power, and Okoye is head of their armed forces but not a political figure or such.
They also probably want to avoid much interaction with anyone in the U.S. given the rising political tensions between various nations in that film. This is why Shuri and Okoye proved how much they value Ross (the Ross played by Martin Freeman, not to be confused with the General then President Ross who is a separate character) not just as an ally but a friend, because Shuri has Okoye free Ross at the end of the film despite the risk that if Okoye had been caught it would have possibly resulted in an international incident between the U.S. and Wakanda.
Jinxed
Member
There's no point, the mental gymnastics are strong with these two.
Doom85
Member
Jinxed
Member
Sure bud, sure. Keep going with your mental gymnastics and your gifs if it makes you feel better.I'm sorry that I accurately remember the events of prior MCU entries.
The general consensus is that she's a badly written character, a criminal and unlikeable. You can cry and try to defend it however you want, it won't make any difference.
In other news, I especially loved her stupid quote, Tony Stark wouldn't of been Tony Stark if he wasn't a billionaire lol... Girl he made his suit in a cave with basically nothing and bailed out in it, he became a billionaire because he was Tony Stark. How fucking dumb can you be, FUCK THE RICH, though!
What a sad show
Last edited:
Doom85
Member
Except, actually those "scraps" were provided by the Ten Rings terrorists (in fact, Tony kept requesting they bring in additional materials), and the usage of the arc reactor was based on an idea from Yinsen, not Tony, and that "suit" lasted for a very short period of time and wasn't practical to last beyond that short fight and flight (and sure enough, it's toast by the end of that short period), so comparing it to what Riri is trying to make, you know, a power armor suit that will last long term, is extremely ridiculous. The comparable suit that Tony makes is AFTER he returns home and has full access to his wealth and resources.
And no, his father Howard was a billionaire. Tony inherited that money which helped him afford all his projects.
Again, it helps to pay attention when watching these films.
Last edited:
Jinxed
Member
Again with the mental gymnastics and useless gif, it's all you can do really?Except, actually those "scraps" were provided by the Ten Rings terrorists (in fact, Tony kept requesting they bring in additional materials), and the usage of the arc reactor was based on an idea from Yinsen, not Tony, and that "suit" lasted for a very short period of time and wasn't practical to last beyond that short fight snd flight (and sure enough, it's toast by the end of that short period), so comparing it to what Riri is trying to make, you know, a power armor suit that will last long term, is extremely ridiculous. The comparable suit that Tony makes is AFTER he returns home and has full access to his wealth and resources.
And no, his father Howard was a billionaire. Tony inherited that money which helped him afford all his projects.
Again, it helps to pay attention when watching these films.
Dude seriously, just read the very long and completely meaningless text you just wrote about what I've said about the suit. It means absolutely nothing lol, Stark still made it in a cave out of absolutely nothing.
We were blessed to have Manabyte kept out of these threads, I don't need someone else to replace him, off to ignore lol
Last edited:
Doom85
Member
So you have nothing. I provide full details of the events of the first Iron Man film, the clear differences in the various power armor suits that Tony created, where Tony's wealth actually originated, and all you have is, "but, but, I remember the meme that Jeff Bridges said!"
Liopleurodon
Member
Saw the trailer, and on Google some comic book pictures.
I don't know, it all looked ok - cool to me.
I don't know, it all looked ok - cool to me.
kpopSuperstar
Member
Yes, she could easily land a job in her teens and make millions. The shit she made in Wakanda Forever would make her the most coveted inventor on the planet.
Instead, she slapped the suit together in her kitchen in a few days, without manufactoring tools, by using the local powergrid and putting some wires on her head.
She says she won't kill people, but are ok with them killing people? she joins a murder gang when she never needed to.
There are nothing indicating these companies are super illegal and all the guards are corrupt. The only justification is we get is two lines of dialogue from the gang about their deeds, and Riri buys into it on the spot after 3 seconds of consideration.
Your Thor comparison is asinine, it's not remotely the same situation. And I have never seen him join petty criminals that steals and kills, take peoples money, and celebrate the killing and stealing.
If she had any morals and was a hero, she would have stopped helping them after the first heist. Or even better, not stolen and cheated at uni. She makes excuses and lies.
Of course she is gonna face Parker, but she should have done that ages ago, and she probably won't take out the gang or go to jail for her bullshit.
Doom85
Member
The suit Shuri didn't let her take with her? The suit made specifically with Wakandan technology and resources? I'm going to take a guess she can't do shit with that suit.
If you're referring to her first suit, that one took her years to make, she flat out called it her "life's work", and it was woefully incomplete, with parts of her body exposed and so forth. Because she only had access to so much money and resources.
And? You're not providing any criticism here, you're just describing events.
How was she supposed to know it was a "murder gang" when she accepted the offer? Also, how many times does she have to question their methods in the show before you notice?
Well, as I already stated above, it's generally illegal to have a security system in place designed to kill intruders, and unless the guards are somehow clueless about the security system of all things, that proves they're not exactly innocent. Also, the claims Ribbons are making would be pretty easy to verify, so it's not like it would take Riri long to fact check them.
Uh, NO, you're not dismissing that one so easily as you clearly don't remember the first Thor movie. A handful of Frost Giants infiltrate Asgard to steal the Casket. After they're dealt with, Thor ignores his father's, you know, the KING, command on how they'll handle the situation, and decides to infiltrate the Frost Giants' planet and confront their ruler about it. Upon getting caught, he happily starts a fight.
Thor does all this despite:
-not knowing if the ruler actually was aware or approved of the attempted heist of the Casket
-how many Frost Giants in all knew about the heist, and how many would support it. Since, you know, it's an ENTIRE planet of them
Despite this lack of information, Thor, with a grin on his face, nearly starts a war between the two realms which would cost countless lives between both of them. Even the Frost Giants' leader doesn't want an all out war between the two realms as he knows it's too costly. Odin, likewise, is absolutely furious with Thor's arrogance and stupidity that could have cost countless people of two WORLDS their lives with his impulsive and shortsighted actions.
That is what happened in the first Thor movie. You can't just try to dismiss and ignore that. I'm not saying Thor doesn't earn his redemption, he basically sacrifices himself in the first movie's climax against the Destroyer, but regardless, his actions in the opening act of the film are what they are.
So it's okay for the US government to steal her vibranium detector she invented, which they flat out did in Wakanda Forever, but she's out of line for robbing companies with insurance policies to help cover the damage?
How can you claim this? After trying to kill her, she's already been forced to leave John to die, so that's one down. And why are you assuming she won't face the gang? If you're implying some may help her fight Robbins, okay, how is that a bad thing?
How many other MCU characters never did jail for their "bullshit"? Thor got expelled to Earth for like two days. Tony and Bruce got in over their heads and led to the creation of Ultron who killed thousands of people, and Tony merely got some criticism from people in Civil War and Bruce got to hide inside the Hulk for a few years and then become a celebrity on Earth in Endgame. The Guardians did like one night in jail for their crimes and then get instantly pardoned for their heroic actions, and especially Nebula, who willingly participated with Ronan in his genocidal actions, gets to join the heroes in later films and never does jail time of any kind. Matt Murdock, Jessica Jones, and especially Frank Castle break all sorts of laws and violate rights in their actions.
Are you as equally critical of all of the above for not doing jail time for their illegal actions?
kpopSuperstar
Member
I'm not talking about her suit, I am talking about her skillset being the most coveted skillset in any tech company.
She can make virtually anything. Any company would want her. She never needed to do crime, she did it because she wanted everything right now, instead of working for it.
Questioning their methods? they told her outright what they were doing. She knew they likely killed the Rampage guy, she learned they killed people on the first heist, and she still worked with them. She knew exactly what was going on pretty quickly.
Your whole guard theory is a fantasy, there is nothing to indicate they were anyone bad. Riri didn't fact check anything, she wanted quick cash and looks the other way.
Robbing anyone for insurancy policies is trash. If she has an issue with the US government about anything they took, she would make that clear, which she never mentions. You are making things up because you are trying to justify her actions.
Thor fighting frost giants? this has to be the worst comparison you could have picked.
There are probably many marvel characters that went too far and should possibly be in jail. But I can never think of a hero that joined criminals that kill for money, and celebrates with them by throwing money around, waiting for the next heist to steal more money and kill more people. Add all the other stealing and fraud shit she did, and the fact she was already set and never needed to do this, and you get a repugnant and crusty bitch that no one wants to succeed.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
I liked how they throttled the pacing for this episode and took time to more closely examine a few plot threads and characters. In hindsight, it's apparent the writers chose to pack in a great deal of world building and other introductory topics within the first two episodes. For me this was the best episode thus far.
On The Hood - I don't mind when characters are not a one-to-one adaptation. I think creatively it would be rather boring if every adapted character were mirrors of their source. Even RDJ's Tony Stark was a rather vast departure from the Stark I read as a kid and teenager. Comic Stark shared very little with RDJ's outside from being rich, highly intelligent (though he was by no means the genius MCU's Stark is), and built suits. He was more like Bruce Wayne, in that he managed to put on a happy face for the public and some friends, while he was dour in private and battled personal demons for much of his tales - in his case alcoholism. He was not the exciting, polymath charisma parade that RDJ and the MCU reforged him into.
So, some adaptations work for me and some don't. The Hood here strikes all of the core notes but then departs from them a great deal. That's fine I guess, though I am still not sold. The actor has charisma and he is growing more sinister by the minute, so we'll see. Either way the changes won't make much of a difference in the long run, IMO, because I assume very, very few viewers had even heard of the character prior to this show. I'd wager most think he's an original creation for the show, in fact.
The soundtrack remains bumpin
Edit: side note, I noticed online that the very common storytelling theme of a genuinely good person swerving off the track in life into crime and other unscrupulous activities due to the lots they were dealt in life, and / or just making poor decisions as a youth for a variety of factors, is being lost on many viewers. I don't think it was an accident that they placed this story in inner city Chicago, for example, where many youths could relate to her story.
There's been plenty of examples in literature, film, and television, but my favorite in film is probably Good Will Hunting. For recent genre fiction and television, probably Jack Reacher. Literature? Hmm, maybe Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre.
On The Hood - I don't mind when characters are not a one-to-one adaptation. I think creatively it would be rather boring if every adapted character were mirrors of their source. Even RDJ's Tony Stark was a rather vast departure from the Stark I read as a kid and teenager. Comic Stark shared very little with RDJ's outside from being rich, highly intelligent (though he was by no means the genius MCU's Stark is), and built suits. He was more like Bruce Wayne, in that he managed to put on a happy face for the public and some friends, while he was dour in private and battled personal demons for much of his tales - in his case alcoholism. He was not the exciting, polymath charisma parade that RDJ and the MCU reforged him into.
So, some adaptations work for me and some don't. The Hood here strikes all of the core notes but then departs from them a great deal. That's fine I guess, though I am still not sold. The actor has charisma and he is growing more sinister by the minute, so we'll see. Either way the changes won't make much of a difference in the long run, IMO, because I assume very, very few viewers had even heard of the character prior to this show. I'd wager most think he's an original creation for the show, in fact.
The soundtrack remains bumpin
Edit: side note, I noticed online that the very common storytelling theme of a genuinely good person swerving off the track in life into crime and other unscrupulous activities due to the lots they were dealt in life, and / or just making poor decisions as a youth for a variety of factors, is being lost on many viewers. I don't think it was an accident that they placed this story in inner city Chicago, for example, where many youths could relate to her story.
There's been plenty of examples in literature, film, and television, but my favorite in film is probably Good Will Hunting. For recent genre fiction and television, probably Jack Reacher. Literature? Hmm, maybe Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre.
Last edited:
Does Jack Reacher ever actually commit a crime? I've only read one book and watched the movies/tv show but he always seems to skirt the line of actual criminal activity versus "Aggressively applied self defense" or police-like activity.
In that sense ANY vigilante, be it Batman, the Punisher, or even Spiderman, is a criminal depending on your POV of their actions.
I've not seen this show and am unlikely to, but what are her actual motivations (beyond "being ICONIC"). Is she out for revenge, trying to help those who can't help themselves, or some vague sense of social justice? Obviously most superheroes would be better off using their powers in the workplace but is this girl working dirty to take down a dangerous criminal gang or is she just going with the easy option to help herself?
Doom85
Member
That's not an argument. And it's a pretty basic tactic to falsely characterize someone as livid if you don't have an actual argument against what they're saying.
Well, Scott Lang, who had a master's degree in electrical engineering, didn't need to do crime either, yet he did, multiple times. In fact, (referring to your claim Riri did not fact check Robbins on the places they were stealing from) he agrees to rob Darren Cross entirely on the word of Hank Pym, it's only when captured during the heist itself does Darren reveal he intends to sell his creation to HYDRA. So why is he allowed a redemption arc and she isn't? Especially when his redemption arc is literally him doing crime.
She flat out confronts Robbins after the first heist. Then, after Rampage, she began taking steps to finding out what is going on with Robbins' hood. Why are you acting like none of this happened?
Understanding Booby Traps: Uses in War and Property Defense – MIRA Safety
Explore the fascinating world of booby traps, their historical use in warfare, and modern applications for property defense. Learn how these traps can safeguard your home.
www.mirasafety.com
Now, that carbon dioxide trap, you know, the one that suffocated someone to death? Was that a fantasy, or a blatant violation of U.S. law? At the least, the owner is guilty of not only illegally endangering intruders but also his own security team, but at worst the security detail is aware of this illegal setup and chose to not turn their employer in.
I never said she was robbing them for insurance policies, what are you even saying?
I am not making this up, it's flat out the early plot of Wakanda Forever. The US government obtains her own invention from college and gives her zero credit, financial payment, anything for it and then they proceed to use it to find vibranium but are attacked by Namor's forces.
That is NOT a counter-argument. Address the comparison or admit you don't have a counter-argument to it, please. Simply saying something is the "worst" accomplishes nothing on your part.
Riri hasn't killed anyone except a guy, her own teammate, who tried to kill her, and she didn't even do that, the AI took control of her suit and left the guy to suffocate. When Robbins announces their second heist, she questions their methods. She begins looking into Robbins' hood. These are things that happened.
Oh, stealing and fraud? Again, Scott Lang. You remember him, right? He never needed to do that either. Yet did you want him to succeed even after he did it multiple times?
Also, you don't want Riri to succeed? Strange, as the show is pretty blatantly obvious heading for her confronting and fighting Robbins, I would have thought you would want to see the guy who has actually killed people to pay for his actions.
So basically:
-Tony Stark fails to keep a proper eye on where his arms sales goes and they end up in the hands of terrorists who hurt and kill innocent people
-Thor risks kickstarting a war between two realms that would have cost countless lives on both sides (something the rulers of BOTH realms being up, and Thor's own father sadly banishes his own son for his actions over this, you cannot minimize how awful the thing Thor did)
-most of the Guardians of the Galaxy engaged in theft and killing before they became a team, Nebula willingly worked for Ronan and his genocidal plan, and Mantis looked the other way as Ego killed untold numbers of his own children when they failed to display inherited powers until she meets the Guardians
-Scott Lang continually commits crime, even commits one with Hank Pym solely on his word, and also supports then-fugitive Steve Rogers, again, entirely on his word, even though he does not need to
-Stephen Strange, at the start of his first movie, engaged in extremely reckless driving, exceeding speed limits by likely at least 40 MPH, which could have resulted in the death of anyone he collided with, including potentially a (or multiple) child or a baby. And mind you, he's a surgeon, and should be fully aware of how insanely dangerous his driving was and could have ended up for someone else
-Frank Castle, come on, I mean, you were uninformed on one aspect of U.S. law in terms of civilians using lethal security traps, but I would hope that The Punisher's methods of all things should be clear why they break so many U.S. laws
-Loki, um, how did Natasha put it?
So explain to me why all these characters deserve a chance at redemption, or at least in your eyes aren't a "repugnant and crusty bitch", but Riri Williams doesn't, no matter what she does, apparently?
Last edited:
InterMusketeer
Member
If Loki had a 5~6 hour show detailing his killing of 80 people in two days, audiences probably wouldn't be as willing to stick around for his redemption at the end either. It all comes down to the delivery. Ironheart's story sounds pretty standard, but a lot of people don't seem to like the wrapping. These comparisons mean nothing if you don't consider the full context.
Doom85
Member
The Loki show acknowledges his actions in Avengers 1 though, it's not like they forgot about it. And mind you, that 80 count was before the Battle of New York itself, which cost at least several thousand NYC citizens their lives.
The problem is people aren't content to simply say "I don't like Riri", they feel the need to list her actions as justification for doing so and trying to prove she is a worse person than any prior MCU lead character, which thus invites a fair comparison to prior MCU lead characters.
Sadly his particular video I'm describing was deleted for unknown reasons, but Youtuber PlagueOfGripes did a series called DBG (DragonBall Gripes) where he addressed both issues with the series and some of the fandom's behavior. His third video in this series was on Caulifla and Kale, two characters introduced in the final saga of the DragonBall Super anime, and his issues with how some of the fanbase were criticizing that. He made it fully clear it was perfectly okay to simply not like one or both of them, the problem arose when people began specifically criticizing their power levels and growth in comparison to prior characters. As Plague points out, that invites criticism in response, as Plague can now point to numerous past power level growth issues that older Dragonball series committed that did not result in this level of backlash from the fanbase.
He even points to Jiren, another new character introduced in this same saga and the main antagonist of the saga, and how he is far, far more powerful than Caulifla and Kale even at their best and is given even less explanation on where his power level was achieved than Caulifla and Kale did, and while this did receive some criticism from fans, it was nowhere near the level of backlash that Caulifla and Kale received for their power level. So there was some clear level of bias since the criticism was the same angle (the power level) yet one was far more vocal than the other even when the other character was given less explanation for their power level and even played a more crucial role in the saga as the primary antagonist.
And that I think is the issue. Because some people decide early on if they like a character or not, and if they don't, then they more closely examine the character at every angle possible and will criticize the character any way they can find an angle on, even if prior characters they like would face similar criticism if they applied this approach to them. People let their bias dictate their analysis yet still claim they're being impartial in analyzing characters of the whole series/franchise despite evidence suggesting they are not.
And mind you, it's not like being biased in this way makes one a bad person or anything, but it a growing issue that seems to be negatively impacting media literacy, and needs to be addressed more.
Last edited:
Doom85
Member
The Cockatrice
I'm retarded?
ManaByte and Doom85 would make the cutest couple.
Billbofet
Member
Wait, they're not the same person?
Unknown Soldier
Member
I'm pretty sure they are the same person
Doom85
Member
Jinxed
Member
With the other one liking all of their posts, would be quite the love triangle.
InterMusketeer
Member
Yes, you're proving my point. Under the right circumstances, people can be made to like flawed characters like Loki or Stark or whoever else. Ironheart seemingly hasn't created those circumstances.
This is a weird statement. Are you truly suggesting people shouldn't even try to explain their opinions? On a forum?
I think the issue is that most people (including myself) are just not that good at explaining why they (dis)like things. But at least they're making an effort. And I hate to bring this up, but you haven't even posted your own opinion on the show yet. I know you're waiting for all episodes to come out and that's fair enough, but should you really be so critical of others' opinions when you haven't been able to form and share your own? You even went out of your way to spoil yourself so you could argue against someone here. How is this conducive to a healthy discussion?
One could just as easily flip this argument around too. People explain why they dislike a thing and then the squad comes in to dissect their criticism from every possible angle to discredit it due to their own interests.
Isn't everyone biased?
