Things you wish authors would stop doing?

I am so sorry to cause you to drop your head into your hands. I haven't been on this forum long and so am not familiar with your past efforts to educate the philosophically ignorant. I appreciate the simplification and do believe you could've pulled off a Hillel balancing act during that explanation.

 

I strongly disagree with the OP's notion that killing a child to save billions is a "logical" thing to do.

Killing a child is an evil act.

There is never an excuse for it.

The reason that's the basis of a good story is that most people realize that and will root for the hero who puts a stop to it.

 

Incorrect. That does not work well in the superhero medium, especially the never sufficiently damned Marvel/ DC. I would never have blamed superman for murdering joker, that little shit, and batman weeping and being angry over the destruction of parademons would be laughable if it wasn't for the fact they expected us to take it seriously .

The problem here is that supehero logic and superhero genre conventions work on 4 colour comic conventions and old storylines. And any and all attempts to make the genre 'serious' and 'deep' runs in to the logic that superheroes as a concept are innately flawed in logic. Check out things like the Marvel Civil War or the Registration act and literally everything else. Wow, vigilantes that ignore the government enforcement of the monopoly of force and yet trust the governments to keep stuff locked up? Vigilantes that routinely fight black ops programs and yet trust the system?

What a surprise.

*points upwards*

Behold, Kantian logic!

 

The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas. A short story by Ursula LeGuin in which there is a city (Omelas) of perfect peace, harmony, and prosperity. A literal Utopia that depends on one thing: the suffering of a single child, kept chained in a basement, never shown the slightest trace of affection or love.

The greatest good for the greatest number?

 

It's true in reality that people make compromises for the "greater good."

Slavery in the 18th century and 19th century and trade with Communist China in the 20th and 21st so that people can have things at affordable prices.

 

Oh wow, this thing. There's so much to unpack here that I disagree with.

For instance, authors not getting the subject well enough to make working trolley problems. for instance, Slavery is pointed to as a possible cause, in fact, of poverty and economic weakness due to the corrosive effects of slavery on institutions, as well as the crippling of economies and technological growth by usage of slaves.

Secondly, 'price' of a good is the intersection of consumer demand and the producer supply. It is informed by the cost of production, of course, but not as much as some people would like you to think. Of course it might cost more if you had to treat people humanely and pay them well, but let's face it, if a business does not pay its workers well enough to survive it doesn't deserve to exist.

Thirdly, majority of the products in plantations were luxury items. Chocolate, sugar, tea, spices, etc. Only a few like cotton and rubber were all that important for industry, and it can be said that they crippled the places they were in. For instance, the cotton money went to the rich southerners, who would spend it on luxuries instead of basic common goods to boost the local economies. Poorer freemen would be outcompeted by men who would work for no wage, and would be forced to work for even lower wages. The effects of slavery can easily be just as destructive to the societies it is joined to, though it can enrich the individual.

 

I do find it laughable that in the Marvel universe, given the preponderance of variously-powered people, not one has become a ruler of a nation (whether a despot or not) where the teeming masses put him into power because they think he will make their tiny country more powerful on the world stage.

 

Like black Adam or doctor doom?

 

I'm not familiar with Black Adam. And yes, I forgot about Doctor Doom.

 

This happened in Secret Empire, where evil Captain America became dictator of America.

 

Not Marvel, but I kind of like how Homelander is portrayed in The Boys. Power-wise he's basically a Superman clone, but his personality is quite a bit different . No spoilers, but he's the most powerful being on the planet, to the point that even the other superheroes tread lightly around him, and he had a tough upbringing.

With predictable results.

 

I can safely say that slavery was not for 'the greater good' but purely for profit.

 

Black Panther is pretty close.

 

Oh my god, I've been trying to remember the name of this story for years. Thank you.

 

Yeah. Even old people from ancient times knew that something was off. It's just that you know, it's so very convenient.

 

I'm probably in the minority here, but I agree that comic book superheroes shouldn't be taken seriously. Taking a comic book character and making them 'serious' is something that seems prevalent these days. But I find it annoying. Superman having angst attacks, etc. Trying to make a two-dimensional character into a full-blooded 'human' sounds like a great idea. But, for me anyway, it doesn't really work. And it can lead to all sorts of handwaving, when it comes to consequences of actions, etc.

I know I'm in a minority when I say Star Wars (the original movie before Spielberg and Co got on board) was the best of the entire series, because it didn't delve into 'seriousness.' It probably still is my favourite movie of all time. It was a lightweight film, made for fun, totally in the spirit of a comic book. However, once it got stuck into 'serious' themes, I think it began to lose its way a bit. The Empire Strikes Back was a fantastic movie, with excellent characters and one hell of a cliffhanger. But it became harder and harder to sustain as the series rolled along, because when things get serious and 'real' the comic book vibe gets lost.

The Return of the Jedi was downright embarrassing in places ...especially when the all-powerful Emperor was revealed as a cackling old fart with electric fingers. No dignity whatsoever, and fairly easily brought down. By then, with all the serious stuff developing, we were being led to believe there was more to him than just THAT. He turned out to be a comic book villain, but by then, we were expecting a lot more depth. I remember walking away from Return of the Jedi feeling terribly disappointed and NOT sad to see the end of the series at all. (Which, of course, it wasn't.)

I believe the secret to good comic books and movies derived from them is to be inventive ...crazy even. Anything goes. There doesn't have to be a huge backstory to the 'world.' Just dive in and do whatever you want. And have fun. Think 'pulp' not visceral literary fiction. Both have their place in the literary canon, but they don't necessarily mix well. Tone has a lot to do with it.

 

Yeah.

Look. Let's be frank here. If you wanna shift the genre around suddenly, don't be surprised when things don't work out. Because it's like tearing out a cottage farmhouse and replacing it with a 100 story skyscraper. Something is going to break.

 

That's why I prefer Marvel. Although it does all the things you describe, it doesn't take itself too seriously and always has some pretty off-beat humour.

Comic book Hawkeye, for example, is basically a womanising idiot in an costume, and everybody knows it.

I mean, for all the Nazi-fighting, angsty man-out-of-time stuff, it's hard to take Captain America seriously when he looks down at his unconscious younger self and says "That IS America's ass".

 

Also Namor.

 

I'm also in that minority. I always said each of the sequels was about half as good as its predecessor, despite the very oft-repeated idea that Empire was the best because it was darker and dealt with more adult issues. The darkness and issues didn't fit, they felt forced. Plus parts of it felt flat and ridiculous, like the whole beginning in the ice cave where Luke fights the Bumble, who I guess bounced all the way there from Rudolph. The sets looked terrible. I hated the interiors of the cloud city, it was obvious they just made a few simple vacu-formed wall pieces and used them over and over, and they didn't look good. Everything that made the original so good was just not there anymore. All the fun was lost. I guess the idea was that the loss of simple innocence demonstrated Luke's growth arc, but it's unfortunate that the movies went down in enjoyability and lots of hard-to-define things.

As I understand it, on the 1st one George Lucas didn't feel ready to direct such a big special-effects movie, and every day there was a group of his friends (fellow directors) hanging out in the sound stage. They'd go into a huddle for some time and talk, then Lucas would take the director's chair and say "Action." But his friends still stood around him and there was a lot of discussion. Spielberg was a part of this (I didn't know he got involved later).

Lucas had almost no direct involvement with Empire, but by the time Jedi was going into pre-production he had decided he wanted back in, and to direct again. But this time his friends were nowhere to be found. He had decided he's ready now, and wanted to take over his empire. Apparently the only reason it worked as well as it did is because it was the third in the trilogy, he couldn't make many changes—certain things needed to happen. It wasn't until the prequels trilogy that he assumed full control.

He keeps claiming 'it was always supposed to be for children', and yet the 1st one works equally well for adults and children, without the silly cartoonish antics he added in CGI, which make it far less enjoyable for adults and don't fit into the tone of the rest of the movie.

 

No doubt about it and the further Lucasfilm got from his first movie, the worse they got. It was a 1940s action serial for the big screen, that's it. It's why I think Star Wars ended in 1983. Everything since is just bad fanfic, out looking to make a profit off of the bones of the 1977 original.

 

Yeah. Just compare the Jawas with the Ewoks. I mean, the Jawas were cool as hell ...funny, and a tad cute, but creepy as well. The ewoks. Aargh. Cutesy teddy bears. Just a totally different tonal quality.

 

In fact it seems like everything Lucas wanted to do was a bad idea. Originally Luke's last name was going to be Starkiller, and the third movie was going to be the Revenge of the Jedi. He had to be talked down from these blunders. And he thought these ideas were going to be kid-friendly?

Weird, because it's been a long time, but I seem to remember American Graffiti being a good movie. He also made a movie called Lucas (funny how his main characters keep having his name) that was at least pretty decent. Maybe at that point he was restraining his worse impulses and doing straightforward non-sci-fi movies (and not for kids). I've heard egomaniacs usually learn to restrain themselves until they get a real sense of power and then it's all over. Or maybe great power can destroy ordinary people and turn them egotistical.

 

Looks like we're building up a substantial minority here. I was around 22 when I saw the first Star Wars. Blown away doesn't begin to describe my reaction: my companion and I drove all the way home without saying more than WOW to each other. The only other movies I can think of that left me speechless (for totally different reasons) were Sophie's Choice and (much to my surprise) Jesus Christ, Superstar.