I dislike these super hero movies where the super hero is at fault
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Marvel/DC
JDoe18 — 9 years ago(October 04, 2016 05:29 PM)
Ok so the title is a little oversimplified but all these comic book hero movies and shows about half of them the crimes wouldnt have happened if the hero wasnt there in the first place. The badguy is always some old form enemy with a grudge. It gets frustrating. Why cant they have a villain that wants to do bad regardless of the hero. Now if they be come enemies after the first movie and stuff that is fine but it is always some grudge just like this show.
-
ayanami-chan — 9 years ago(October 04, 2016 07:07 PM)
- Luke isn't at fault for Willis' grudge against him, that was their father's fault.
- What about Cottonmouth and Mariah? There was no "old grudge" between them and Luke, they simply became enemies because they are bad guys and he's a hero, no matter how many times he insists otherwise. Even Shades, who would have been in a perfect "old grudge" situation with Luke, doesn't get into conflict with him about what happened at Seagate. They only butt heads eventually because of Shades' involvement with the Stokes family.
"We're a team, Garrus. There's no Shepard without Vakarian."
-
JDoe18 — 9 years ago(October 05, 2016 09:20 PM)
Yes but if he wouldnt have existed or wasnt living in one of the most densely populated areas in the world a lot of bad things wouldnt of happened.
Almost every bad guy character is linked to the hero in some way. Take Thor for his example. While he didnt want his adopted brother to destroy half a city but if he hadnt of been there it wouldnt of happened. If starks father hadnt of interacted with some russian guy then Tony wouldnt of had to torn up half a city to save it from the guy he brought there.
Yes it isnt their direct fault but its the same old story. Develop a character that has no prior history with the hero. -
djsosonut — 9 years ago(October 05, 2016 09:47 PM)
In all honesty, personal connections is a nice shorthand to build animosity between characters. Since no personal connection doesn't always lead to an engaging villains: Ronan from Guardians of the Galaxy or the elf dude from Thor the Dark World. Still you do have a point that it can be overused. I think all of Iron Man's villains from all three films had a personal connection to him. It isn't always necessary. Take the Kingpin on Daredevil for example. No personal connection exist between then before the come to blows.
Yes. Luke has a personal connection Stryker, but most of Diamondback's issues are things he's deferred onto Luke. Most of those things are deferred unjustly onto Luke. And Stryker would have still been making a play at the forces around town even without Luke here. It would have just gone more smoothly. Plus, if Luke hadn't been there Cottonmouth would have still hunted down the kids that stole his money. Only difference is that Pops might not have died if Luke wasn't there to find the kid. But there is no guarantee that the kid wouldn't have run to Pops for help anyway.
It's a mixed bag. No matter if there is a personal connection, more often than not, everything is intrinsically connected in a co-dependent mass. It's the public situation and/or villain that provokes the protagonist of the story to action. And by the nature of their actions, often vigilantism, that provokes a reaction from the villains and the public at large.
Clever things make people feel stupid and unexpected things make them feel scared -
tanel-trei-001 — 9 years ago(October 05, 2016 10:24 PM)
They slightly overdid the hero is at fault theme on this one. I didn't find it believable that Luke would think that it's ok to just poke a mob boss an he would just roll over without anybody getting hurt.
-
JDoe18 — 9 years ago(October 06, 2016 02:04 PM)
Honestly if the story was him just fighting Cottonmouth then I would have enjoyed that. Yes he still had a personal connection but it wasnt a crazy one. They became enemies after Luke figured out he had to stop him.