Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

Daredevil was ok. It did get a bit too silly for the dark tone they were going for when the ridiculous old man blind ninja turned up. He was so silly. But yeah the fight scenes were great and pretty much carried the show.

Jessica Jones I just finished, and it was excellent. A few terrible lines here and there, and the occasional clunky bit of plotting weren't enough to spoil it (looking at you pill popping cop man, and at you suddenly violent support group). Tennant was great, and the rest of the main cast were excellent too. My biggest complaint was the cutting after every hit in the fight scenes, but it was more a detective show anyway, and almost every American film or TVs show is guilty of that too.

loving bleak stuff though, not exactly the bland yet still enjoyable light viewing I was expecting from a Marvel universe thing.

.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Kainser
Apr 27, 2010

O'er the sea from the north
there sails a ship
With the people of Hel
at the helm stands Loki
After the wolf
do wild men follow

Soothing Vapors posted:

SG would belong to fox, wouldn't she?

Squirrel Girl is a mutant in theory (marvel retconned it recently because they hate fox but that doesn't matter for rights) but she has always been much more connected to non x-men properties so who knows. The Marvel/Fox rights can get pretty esoteric at times. Like the Skrull rights which are dumb as hell with Marvel owning the race and Fox all the named Skrulls or something like that.

marktheando
Nov 4, 2006

The idea of lawyers arguing about comic book continuity in court is very funny to me.

NmareBfly
Jul 16, 2004

I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!


marktheando posted:

The idea of lawyers arguing about comic book continuity in court is very funny to me.

The really funny thing is that this isn't the first time poo poo like this has come up in the court of law. There's a landmark case from a decade ago which determined that, because the X-Men are not human, the action figures are toys and not dolls therefore get taxed at a much lower rate. So despite everything they whine about in universe, we all know from a legal standpoint that mutants don't count as people.

Calico Heart
Mar 22, 2012

"wich the worst part was what troll face did to sonic's corpse after words wich was rape it. at that point i looked away"



McNerd posted:

Once again, you don't have to agree. Hell I was pretty down on Daredevil at first myself (although as it happens, I came around). But if you don't understand why it appeals to people, after reading 100 pages of people explaining how it appeals to them, that probably says more about you than them.

If someone explained to me in great detail why exactly it is they love sucking their own poo poo out their rear end with a tube and eating it I would still also not understand the appeal.

marktheando posted:

The idea of lawyers arguing about comic book continuity in court is very funny to me.

They not only argue about it, they have really long meetings with professional comic nerds whose entire job is to A) Know asinine comic history and B) Explain it in a comprehensible way to someone who doesn't have much time.

NmareBfly posted:

The really funny thing is that this isn't the first time poo poo like this has come up in the court of law. There's a landmark case from a decade ago which determined that, because the X-Men are not human, the action figures are toys and not dolls therefore get taxed at a much lower rate. So despite everything they whine about in universe, we all know from a legal standpoint that mutants don't count as people.

this is rad as gently caress

Calico Heart fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Nov 26, 2015

Stunt Rock
Jul 28, 2002

DEATH WISH AT 120 DECIBELS

Calico Heart posted:

If someone explained to me in great detail why exactly it is they love sucking their own poo poo out their rear end with a tube and eating it I would still also not understand the appeal.

These two things are very similar and this is a spot on analogy.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Combat Pretzel posted:

I'm getting to the last few episodes. Given all the deaths and collateral damage that Kilgrave is racking up, why they're still trying to keep him alive, just to save some poor poor widdle girl from jail, is beyond me. Marvel morals, I suppose. Simpson (or what's his name) had it right. Rifle and bam.

While Jessica is overly invested in saving Hope because she sees it as saving herself, that's not the only reason they're not just practicing head shots on Killgrave photos. Capturing and proving Killgrave's existence saves lots of people, like the guy who got charged with child abandonment and lost everything. It's a desire to be vindicated and made as whole as possible.

The death of Hope comes as several different elements come together. Jessica learns that she is immune to Killgrave, proof of Killgrave is destroyed, the magnitude of Killgrave's obsession is made clear, and Jessica realizes that her attempts to prove Killgrave are themselves causing collateral damage. Banana Bread boy died because of Killgrave, while Kevin's mom, Detective too old for this poo poo, and Wendy died because of Jessica's actions. Even then there is hope, because Kevin's dad thinks he can make an vaccine for Killgrave. Then Jessica finds out that Hope is being freed. A vaccine looks eminent and Hope is being saved, the horrible costs look like they'll at least provide a Pyrrhic victory. So Jessica knocks out Killgrave and ties him up to ensure he can't go change that. Then Robyn and the idiots break in and ruin it. Hope dies, the vaccine is shown to be a failure and no further attempts are possible because Kevin's dad is in the hands of Killgrave. There are no more justifications for Jessica and the gang not to kill Killgrave.

It is important to keep in mind though that Simpson is only right because of his own actions. Without Simpson, proving Killgrave and bringing him in would have been possible. Not only that, with Simpson helping them they likely would have both had the proof and still had Killgrave in his hermetically sealed cell. Simpson's actions got his boys killed and him in a hospital. If he hadn't done that he could have been there with Jessica and the crew, providing manpower so that Hogarth was never left alone with Killgrave. After that, he still could have helped keep the evidence safe, provided help and expertise in the recapture of Killgrave. Instead he killed Detective to old for this poo poo and destroyed all the evidence.

Jessica's actions are perhaps morally suspect, but Simpson's are as far into moral failing as Killgrave's.

Snak
Oct 10, 2005

I myself will carry you to the Gates of Valhalla...
You will ride eternal,
shiny and chrome.
Grimey Drawer
Yeah, in some ways, bringing Kilgrave to actual, legal justice is like proving that rape is happening, rather than revenge assassinating a rapist so that society continues believing that it wasn't happening. If they shoot Kilgrave in the head, everyone continues to think his victims were just lying about what happened. Furthermore, Jessica (and all of his victims) are struggling with the idea that maybe, deep down, they actually wanted to do the things that Kilgrave told them too. Kilgrave pulls that equivocation bullshit with "I didn't tell you to kill her, I told you to take care of her" trying to put the blame on Jessica. While Jessica comes to terms with the fact that killing him is the best way to stop him, early in the series it's totally understandable that she doesn't want to jump to killing him because it would basically be affirming what Kilgrave said about her: that she wants to kill people. Of course it wouldn't actually mean that, but emotions aren't logical. I think it makes perfect sense that Jessica would initially reject killing him, considering that she strongly associates the act of killing with what he made her do.

Soothing Vapors
Mar 26, 2006

Associate Justice Lena "Kegels" Dunham: An uncool thought to have: 'is that guy walking in the dark behind me a rapist? Never mind, he's Asian.

Calico Heart posted:

If someone explained to me in great detail why exactly it is they love sucking their own poo poo out their rear end with a tube and eating it I would still also not understand the appeal.

An apt analogy for Jessica Jones Season One

The Sharmat
Sep 5, 2011

by Lowtax
They have to introduce Squirrel Girl in season 2 so she's in the MCU in time to defeat Thanos in Infinity War.

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy
The most beautiful thing about Jessica Jones is that it argues that the very concept of patriarchy is a weak construct without ultimate meaning or relevance. It's rather against liberal feminism.

Soonmot
Dec 19, 2002

Entrapta fucking loves robots




Grimey Drawer

Kainser posted:

Squirrel Girl is a mutant in theory (marvel retconned it recently because they hate fox but that doesn't matter for rights) but she has always been much more connected to non x-men properties so who knows. The Marvel/Fox rights can get pretty esoteric at times. Like the Skrull rights which are dumb as hell with Marvel owning the race and Fox all the named Skrulls or something like that.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

The Sharmat
Sep 5, 2011

by Lowtax
So Squirrel Girl is not legally a mutant because she is a literal mutant rather than just having the magic X gene or whatever?

Soothing Vapors
Mar 26, 2006

Associate Justice Lena "Kegels" Dunham: An uncool thought to have: 'is that guy walking in the dark behind me a rapist? Never mind, he's Asian.

Hahaha. drat that's blatant

Kainser
Apr 27, 2010

O'er the sea from the north
there sails a ship
With the people of Hel
at the helm stands Loki
After the wolf
do wild men follow
Would be kinda funny if the current comic status quo affected who got the rights just to see how fast Marvel would retcon Wolverine into a Wolverine-Human lovebaby.

Avian Pneumonia
May 24, 2006

ASK ME ABOUT MY OPINIONS ON CANCEL CULTURE
I really wanted to love this show but found it to be terribly written in that it regularly breaks the rules it sets up for itself and has characters making terrible decisions for the sole purpose of moving the plot forward. It's a bad show.

SuperTeeJay
Jun 14, 2015

Was the noir aspect of the comics less tacked on than in this show?

I'm asking because it doesn't seem like the team that designed the opening sequence watched a single episode of the series and must have drawn their inspiration from elsewhere.

Argue
Sep 29, 2005

I represent the Philippines

Snak posted:

Furthermore, Jessica (and all of his victims) are struggling with the idea that maybe, deep down, they actually wanted to do the things that Kilgrave told them too.

Mind control seems to be, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, it’s really rare. If it's legitimate mind control, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

Wanderer
Nov 5, 2006

our every move is the new tradition

SuperTeeJay posted:

Was the noir aspect of the comics less tacked on than in this show?

I'm asking because it doesn't seem like the team that designed the opening sequence watched a single episode of the series and must have drawn their inspiration from elsewhere.

There wasn't really a noir aspect. It's straight-up a private detective story that happens to be set in the mainstream Marvel Universe, in the spirit of something like Robert B. Parker's Spenser novels, as if they were written by an incredibly distracted Harold Pinter.

The general arc is the same, with Jessica having left the superhero game after a short time due to an initially-unknown incident, but it isn't set in anywhere near as dark a setting. I'd say Bendis's Daredevil run, which was coming out at about the same time, is more noir than Alias.

Julio Cruz
May 19, 2006
I assumed Kilgrave had chosen Simpson to kill Trish based on his history as a Special Ops dude. It's possible he knows that she's been learning self-defense so he can't rely on any normal NY beat cop to get the job done.

Also I don't know what Simpson was trying to do with his oral technique but it looked ridiculous as hell.

howe_sam
Mar 7, 2013

Creepy little garbage eaters

Wanderer posted:

There wasn't really a noir aspect. It's straight-up a private detective story that happens to be set in the mainstream Marvel Universe, in the spirit of something like Robert B. Parker's Spenser novels, as if they were written by an incredibly distracted Harold Pinter.

The first story arc is pretty noir, with Jessica being sent to find a missing girl then stumbling into a larger conspiracy.

LifeLynx
Feb 27, 2001

Dang so this is like looking over his shoulder in real-time
Grimey Drawer

Snak posted:

Yeah, in some ways, bringing Kilgrave to actual, legal justice is like proving that rape is happening, rather than revenge assassinating a rapist so that society continues believing that it wasn't happening. If they shoot Kilgrave in the head, everyone continues to think his victims were just lying about what happened. Furthermore, Jessica (and all of his victims) are struggling with the idea that maybe, deep down, they actually wanted to do the things that Kilgrave told them too. Kilgrave pulls that equivocation bullshit with "I didn't tell you to kill her, I told you to take care of her" trying to put the blame on Jessica. While Jessica comes to terms with the fact that killing him is the best way to stop him, early in the series it's totally understandable that she doesn't want to jump to killing him because it would basically be affirming what Kilgrave said about her: that she wants to kill people. Of course it wouldn't actually mean that, but emotions aren't logical. I think it makes perfect sense that Jessica would initially reject killing him, considering that she strongly associates the act of killing with what he made her do.

That's not the direction they went in at all, with Kilgrave's powers tapping into some suppressed desires people had. Somewhat with Jessica and possibly with the guy who abandoned his kid, but no one deep down inside wants to throw coffee in their own face, give up something valuable, throw a high stakes poker game, or attempt to saw their head off, etc. Kilgrave tells people to do things he wants them to do. If his powers couldn't make people do things they really didn't want to do, he'd be less scary because people would be resisting him all the time.

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I like how the show has multiple characters painstakingly explain at great lengths the exact specific reasons they want to keep Kilgrave alive, but everyone here is all just "But why dont?? they kill him????? :saddowns:"

ShakeZula
Jun 17, 2003

Nobody move and nobody gets hurt.

BJPaskoff posted:

That's not the direction they went in at all, with Kilgrave's powers tapping into some suppressed desires people had. Somewhat with Jessica and possibly with the guy who abandoned his kid, but no one deep down inside wants to throw coffee in their own face, give up something valuable, throw a high stakes poker game, or attempt to saw their head off, etc. Kilgrave tells people to do things he wants them to do. If his powers couldn't make people do things they really didn't want to do, he'd be less scary because people would be resisting him all the time.

Nobody's saying that's actually how his power works, just that it's a self-doubt thing going on in the victims (because, as the show points out, Kilgrave doesn't just control you like a puppet, he makes you want to do what he commands).

Maluco Marinero
Jan 18, 2001

Damn that's a
fine elephant.
I don't think it's a 'deep down they really wanted to' thing, more like a culpability for how they interpreted their commands. They question in hindsight whether there was a possibility they could've changed what they've done, which compounds the regret and responsibility they feel for the act.

It's really interesting how Kilgrave's powers specifically have room for interpretation on the victim if they're not precisely used, and how that comes up in various scenes.

NowonSA
Jul 19, 2013

I am the sexiest poster in the world!
It's worth noting that Tennant could come back for another season or appearance if they really wanted to. It's not like we see his whole body messed up or cremated, and you can go with explanations ranging from "He told himself never to die and that let him survive" to "The Stem cells gave him super healing!" There's always good old flashbacks too.

People with powers like Killgrave's are easy fodder when you want to represent a wheelchair-bound threat too, I could see a season 2 or 3 villain using a diminished Killgrave as one more tool in his or her arsenal.

Right now this is wishful thinking though since I just want more Tennant. It's pretty easy to ruin a good death by bringing the character back so we're probably better off letting dead Killgraves stay dead.

The Sharmat
Sep 5, 2011

by Lowtax
Logically all of Kilgrave victims should, on an intellectual level, realize they didn't want to do the things he made them do. Nonetheless, they still experienced the desire to do said things when he told them to. It wasn't "Oh god my hand is moving by itself and splashing coffee in my face". It was a sudden intense desire to splash coffee into their own faces. And that would be harder to shake off and forget.

Note the clear emotional distress it caused Trish when she couldn't get the bullets in her head, or when Jessica pulled Hope out of the bed.

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

NowonSA posted:

It's worth noting that Tennant could come back for another season or appearance if they really wanted to. It's not like we see his whole body messed up or cremated, and you can go with explanations ranging from "He told himself never to die and that let him survive" to "The Stem cells gave him super healing!" There's always good old flashbacks too.
"You will all think you saw me die."

VDay
Jul 2, 2003

I'm Pacman Jones!
Or they could do something not completely stupid and just have Jessica think about him every once in a while.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Maluco Marinero posted:

I don't think it's a 'deep down they really wanted to' thing, more like a culpability for how they interpreted their commands. They question in hindsight whether there was a possibility they could've changed what they've done, which compounds the regret and responsibility they feel for the act.

It's really interesting how Kilgrave's powers specifically have room for interpretation on the victim if they're not precisely used, and how that comes up in various scenes.

When Killgrave tells you to do something, it's not like you're fighting the command and being forced to do it. You want to do it. It's the same as if you just decided to do it. Yes, the victims realize that they are being forced to do it, but it's still not the same thing as someone making you do something. Killgrave tells you that you want something and you really want it. The woman forced to smile for days wasn't giving a fake smile, she was genuinely smiling. Which is what makes it so horrifying. It's beyond the violation of being forced to do something by threat of violence or coercion. The man who lost his kid knows that it was Killgrave, but at that moment he wanted to abandon his child on the side of the road. Killgrave places his victims in a horrifying state where they realize they are but puppets to his whims yet willingly aid him in his whims.

I believe Simpson is the only person who claimed to be fighting it the whole time. Everyone else describes it as simply realizing the horror of the situation and the violation of being made to do the things. Impotently screaming inside.



NowonSA posted:

It's worth noting that Tennant could come back for another season or appearance if they really wanted to. It's not like we see his whole body messed up or cremated, and you can go with explanations ranging from "He told himself never to die and that let him survive" to "The Stem cells gave him super healing!" There's always good old flashbacks too.

People with powers like Killgrave's are easy fodder when you want to represent a wheelchair-bound threat too, I could see a season 2 or 3 villain using a diminished Killgrave as one more tool in his or her arsenal.

Right now this is wishful thinking though since I just want more Tennant. It's pretty easy to ruin a good death by bringing the character back so we're probably better off letting dead Killgraves stay dead.

When an angry super human snaps your neck after you torment her for years and threaten to mentally and physically rape her sister/bff for years to come, I'm pretty sure your neck is good and broken and you're extra dead.

Gyges fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Nov 27, 2015

The Sharmat
Sep 5, 2011

by Lowtax
Jessica also mentioned some tiny part of her trying to fight it somehow. Hope too. But I don't know how that feels. I guess they knew at the time they shouldn't want this, but they still wanted what he told them.

Bringing back Kilgrave would be immensely stupid.

NowonSA
Jul 19, 2013

I am the sexiest poster in the world!

VDay posted:

Or they could do something not completely stupid and just have Jessica think about him every once in a while.

Well yeah, I'm just saying when you're dealing with characters based on comics, where everybody comes back to life eventually, the ol' neck snap doesn't exactly instill me with confidence that they won't bring him back eventually, for better or worse (probably worse).

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

The Sharmat posted:

Jessica also mentioned some tiny part of her trying to fight it somehow. Hope too. But I don't know how that feels. I guess they knew at the time they shouldn't want this, but they still wanted what he told them.

Bringing back Kilgrave would be immensely stupid.

They say they tried. They attempted to not want to do the things but were powerless. Simpson says he was fighting it the whole time. Everyone else accepts that they were powerless and is dealing with the horror of what they did. Simpson refuses the notion that he was powerless and is dealing with the disgrace of losing a fight to a cheater. While he didn't want to kill Trish and isn't happy about it, he seems more angry about being "overpowered" by Killgrave. It's part of why he's so quick and adamant about jumping on the kill Killgrave bandwagon.

The Sharmat
Sep 5, 2011

by Lowtax

NowonSA posted:

Well yeah, I'm just saying when you're dealing with characters based on comics, where everybody comes back to life eventually, the ol' neck snap doesn't exactly instill me with confidence that they won't bring him back eventually, for better or worse (probably worse).

Yet there have only been three principal antagonists not killed in the thing they debuted in within the MCU; the Red Skull, Loki, and Wilson Fisk. I don't think the comic trend matters.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK
Red Skull got sucked up by some light around 70 years ago. He's way more likely to be dead than not dead.

Jerusalem
May 20, 2004

Would you be my new best friends?

Gyges posted:

Red Skull got sucked up by some light around 70 years ago. He's way more likely to be dead than not dead.

During Avengers I was convinced he was Thanos' second-in-command, the guy constantly talking poo poo to Loki. That theory was very quickly debunked!

Yudo
May 15, 2003

BrianWilly posted:

I like how the show has multiple characters painstakingly explain at great lengths the exact specific reasons they want to keep Kilgrave alive, but everyone here is all just "But why dont?? they kill him????? :saddowns:"

Because as Killgrave's depredations escalate their explanations ring hollow and are more the voice of the writers trying to stretch out the story.

Avian Pneumonia
May 24, 2006

ASK ME ABOUT MY OPINIONS ON CANCEL CULTURE

BrianWilly posted:

I like how the show has multiple characters painstakingly explain at great lengths the exact specific reasons they want to keep Kilgrave alive, but everyone here is all just "But why dont?? they kill him????? :saddowns:"

That's not it.

People are frustrated that the reasons they lay out for keeping him alive are really REALLY really dumb.

tin can made man
Apr 13, 2005

why don't you ask him
about his penis
I love how the Armchair Vigilantes in this thread seem to forget that the position of "He keeps killing people, so Jessica Jones needs to kill him you loving idiots!" was literally espoused, many many times, by the series' secondary villain. Like, do people think that Officer Nuke Simpson - the black ops badass who's always hangin with His Boys and looks like Captain America and argues "Why doesn't Batman just kill the Joker? What a pussy" - being a mentally-incapable, degenerate monster is an accident?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
Y'all weirdos are aware that the plea deal Hope got offered, the one that got her "only" twenty years in prison if she confessed to murdering her own parents, was a last minute cheap ploy by the DA, right? Before that point, Hope was going to spend her entire life in jail if Jessica couldn't prove Kilgrave's existence. But oh yea sure, Jessica should just kill him. Good plan.

And by the time Hope got offered the deal, Jessica already had Kilgrave captured and had worked out a perfectly sensible plan to expose him. It would have worked if Hogarth wasn't stupid. And even then, it still would have worked if your glorious idol Nuke hadn't destroyed the evidence for literally no reason.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply