A lot of batman villains were working class who got wronged in some way. Ivy, freeze, two face etc…
>>938>unemployed mentally ill guy who kills people
He’s lumpen bro
I’m more fan of his villains tbh. Also, there one batman comic(forgot the name), where he realises, that the only reason he’s not regular street goon is cause of his class.
He got fired ; Being working class doesn't mean not literally holding a job. Read some theory you faggot.
He’s still kills people and is institutionalized in a psychiatric asylum dumbass
>want to "stop crime"
>don't lobby for prison reform or something like that
>buy expensive toys to help you beat up poor people
Practically every villain in his rogues gallery is a more sympathetic character, including the Joker, who at least honest about being a sadist.
The "no killing" rule is also the apex of liberalism, considering how often his enemies kill people and the fact that he is a war profiteer.
The Wayne foundation gives tons of money to help the citizens of Gotham, it's just not him punching people around
>>959>muh good billionaires
Every dollar he spends to help punch people is a dollar he could spend on soup kitchens. This is liberal shit my man. Even assuming he does charity, he still wastes a profound amount of money punishing criminals instead of preventing crime by solving social problems.
The whole conceit of batman is that the government fails to enforce law and order to a billionaire vigilante has to step in. It's ancap fantasy to the max.
I know people here don't like Thought Slime but he gives some pretty good leftist takes on Batman https://youtu.be/73M2sq9zK-I
Overall, I think it depends on the writer. Some, like Frank Miller, do portray Batman as a borderline fascist doing what he pleases but others show his evolution from being a revenge driven conservative starting a war on crime to maturing and trying to erase the conditions on which crime arises in Gotham with the help of his fortune. I agree that in this context he's a liberal at best but I doubt anyone is going to write him going full Engels and starting a revolution.
I haven't read capeshit in a long time. Is Red Son any good?
It has its moments but doesn't really go anywhere or fully explore its premise, and its portrayal of the USSR is very clearly based on western propaganda. It's not too long though. I have it in image format and could storytime it in another thread.
I would be up for a storytime.
I’d like that too
Why can’t he be both?
Batman was never supposed to be political. His entire appeal is that he was a vigilante who simply had the money, tech and ability to carry out the justice against criminals that many ordinary people fantasize about.He acts alone usually because he does not want to put responsibility on others, even the police whom he helpsHe uses intelligence and skill that he refined through practiceHe does not kill, not because of some bullshit like;>"If you kill a killer the number of killers in the world remains the same"but because he doesn't want to stoop to that level. That is why his enemies have always been so interesting, they're all reflections of himself and human nature of one kind or another. Two-Face - the dichotomy of choice Joker - madness and impulsiveness caused by isolationScarecrow - utilization of fear Hugo Strange - obsession Penguin - a craving for opulence and respectSo on and so forth. Many of his foes also crave revenge and their own twisted justice.In other words Batman when not linked the rest of the mess that is the DCU, is less about political ideology and more about individual human struggle and thoughts. His enemy Joker is best, not when giggling madly over a clown-shaped gun but when he points out how Batman is not really so different from him: A freak in a suit operating outside the law. He's not a hero but an anti-hero. His fundamental humanity and position as a rich but kind person makes it hard for him to understand that the capitalist system is what creates most criminals he fights and his own status as a billionaire contributes to this. Instead he tries to take the world on his shoulders, but as a mere individual, even a billionaire, he fails because vigilantism is just picking at the symptoms and not the causes; missing the forest for the treesBatman doesn't work in a world of superheroes like Superman or Wonderwoman or The Flash, He performs above human average because of money, intellect and training, but he is still human, which meshes terribly with superbeings. Being part of shit like the Justice League just makes him a poor parody and infects his character with american comic-book ideology, which is where the whole issue with him being an antihero comes up. He is neither ruthless enough to go full-assassin and thus be a counter to Superman's boyscout ideology yet his own original character contradicts such ideological action as well.TL;DR: Batman outside of superhero DC-verse is a vigilante anti-hero whose tech and actions are a power-fantasy, and whose enemies are a reflection of himself and human nature. His inherent characterization is not focused on the bourgeoisie-proletariat interaction, and was not originally political. Thus his character is inconsistent as part of the "American justice and freedom" superheroes of DCU.For a socio-political/ideological analysis, Joker (especially the recent titular movie) is a much better character. Batman is more of a character study in a detective noir setting, except the private eye is a billionaire recluse with trauma and guilt. Marxist analysis of him can be done, but is comparatively pointless.
that has to be ironic
I'd recommend the left take back Superman since he works in that sort of populist mindset. That being said I'd be worried about the comparison to the fascist concept of ubermen or whatever.
>>1105>>1106>t.no reading comprehension
Well about capeshit, I know the story of a FB group that one time started to talk about doing vigilanterism, the next day a guy posted some news about a teenager getting killed in an armed robberie while masked.
Look, for anyone looking for a relatively realistic look on IRL vigilantism and how it turns out watch Bronson's Death Wish 1 and 2.
I'm straight up disappointed that Zack Snyder didn't make some kind of reference to Superman as an Übermensch fantasy in contrast with Jesse Eisenberg as a Jewish Lex Luthor.
>>1107>he works in that sort of populist mindset
Are you kidding me? He is a epitome of "le uberhuman" where his own superpowerdness is so OP that he should be able to solve 90% of major crime by simply over-hearing conversations from the atmosphere and observing everyone simultaneously as his own feats have shown. He is fast enough to act on everything too and shockwaves are near non-existent in superhuman comics except when needed for an effective action shot (otherwise Superman would tear space-time or create blackholes everytime he flew FTL or did other ridiculous shit). He is the most Gary Stu character to exist and his only limit is his "american way" to the point where this is parodied and mocked. The majority of super-heroes are ideologically incompatible with socialism. More villains are ideologically leftist.
>>1130>The majority of super-heroes are ideologically incompatible with socialism. More villains are ideologically leftist.
There is an interesting cultural take on American mass culture in Russia, and on the superheroes in particular.
One interesting take is "An epic of Predator" by Leo Kaganov. It describes an interaction between "absolute collectivist" alien race, "absolute individualist-predators" and humans.
In particular, collectivists and humans try to understand the other races, and have some contact with each other. To quote it:
"The lone Hero only exists in the epics of predators. It is so because the hero isn't someone who is stronger than some enemy. Hero is someone who is the strongest among his group. He is unrivaled in what he does, thus the heroes of predators act alone"
>>1133>"An epic of Predator" by Leo Kaganov
Despite being Russian and well acquainted with the alien/predator fanbase there, I have never heard of this, quite interesting. Although I feel like the idea that aliens are absolute collectivists is slightly erroneous since they do have social heirarchies
(Drone-> Warrior-> Praetoran-> Queen-> Empress).
That last bit about predator is really interesting though.
It's not just superheroes, but protagonists in general. In most contemporary western fiction, the antagonist is proactive and the protagonist is reactive or even outright reactionary. Protecting the status quo is the most common "heroic" motivation in popular media. Usually when you have a proactive protagonist, they're also a villain, like in Breaking Bad.
>>1136>Protecting the status quo is the most common "heroic" motivation in popular media.
That's more MODERN Western media. A lot of works I have read of Western film and literature have been protagonists who are NOT 'status quo'. For example Spartacus or Ben Hur or Huckleberry Finn etc. Obviously shit like Tom Clancy or James Bond is status Quo but that's more modern pop-culture.
>>1139>That's more MODERN Western media.
I said "contemporary western fiction." You're right there's plenty of history to the contrary.
>>1141>contemporary western fiction
Ah, well many 'leftists' tend to use "contemporary" to encompass the entire 20th century TBH.
>>1130>Most villains are ideologically leftist.
Now this is a hot take if I ever saw one. Mind expanding on that?
A lot of the more nuanced villains of superhero stories are leftist or have some sort of leftist ideology.
- Joker, especially in the recent film, is essentially an example of when one of the working class shatters and goes nuts from the crush of capitalism essentially embodying the metaphysical alienation and urge to lash out and do SOMETHING caused by wage-slavery.
- MCU Whiplash was the result of a scientist being essentially thrown out to die after helping create the Arc Reactor and his son seeking vengeance and to gain what his fathers labor had rightfully deserved but was taken. https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Whiplash
- Sandman from Spiderman 3. Guy was put in prison for what amounted to man slaughter after his need to support himself and his family drove him to crime.
- Eddy Brock (Venom) was just a photographer and journalist who ended up being in the wrong place(s) at the wrong time(s) and ended up jobless and with nowhere to go.
- Remont 4 or six depending on publication are literally ex-soviet supers who revolt against the de-sovietization of Russia and want to return the USSR to the days of Stalin.https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Remont_4_(Earth-616)
- Garou from One Punch Man is ironically an idealist who sympathizes with monsters only because the concept of Heroes is so oppressing.
- Stain from My Hero Academia is a hero-killer who despises heroes because they're 'fake' pretending to be noble and instead just playing at being responsible for others.
The list goes on but you get my point
>>1130>The majority of super-heroes are ideologically incompatible with socialism. More villains are ideologically leftist.
Reckon that’s why always liked villains more.
Those characters got fucked over by capitalism or society but that isn't enough to consider them leftist (remember that even fascists claim to be against capitalism)
Plus you're only talking about their origins or what turned them into villains in the first place. Take the Joker for example, there's nothing leftist about crippling women or beating children to death.
>>1151>nothing leftist about crippling women or beating children to death.
Not what I said. His actions may not be leftist, but what he represents is ideologically. Even a reactionary character can be ideologically leftist because of their role in dialectical analysis. Joker is a representation of the working class under pressure, who are disorganized and want to get justice, instead lashing out at everyone and everything else BUT those responsible.
In common usage "contemporary" is just "from the same time [as us in this case].
""Modern" encompasses as far back as 1500.>>1150
Villains are also more proactive and therefore more driven necessarily.
Because they're not primarily a template to project yourself onto, they're more suitable for an interesting personality.
>>1155>they're not primarily a template to project yourself onto, they're more suitable for an interesting personality.
That's assuming a person has a disinteresting personality or can't relate to villains>>1155
I know, just pointing out the word's misuse by radlibs.
On the topic of Joker, the moment non-liberal leftists pointed out the semi-socialist ideas of the film, rightoids began clenching. Case in point - Joe Coon: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/33370995/
For the ones without an account or wanting to look at this site basically he liked the movie and how well it was made BUT, despite how he likes that it "triggers the libtards" it's totally not leftist>THE "SOCIALIST" MESSAGE: CUT. THE. CRAP. this movie ain't pro socialism, or anti rich….BANE WAS A SOCIALIST ASSWIPE IN DARK KNIGHT RISES. there is no "LEFT WING" message in this movie, at all. it's simple. RICH PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS SEE NON RICH PEOPLE AS LESS, AND NON RICH PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS SEE RICH PEOPLE AS MONSTERS WITHOUT A SOUL. so. yeah….this movie is not anti rich nor pro poor propaganda….whoever says that….is so many kinds of wrong.>Translation N-no! it's not pro-socialist, it just shows you that rich people are shit who look down on us and are deservedly disliked! You're just wrong *tide goes in and out*.
>>1156>That's assuming a person has a disinteresting personality or can't relate to villains
You're thinking too individuallistically. The characters are meant to be consumed by a wide audience. Making a character bland and generic is meant to make them relatable to as many people as possible.
>>1170>Making a character bland and generic is meant to make them relatable to as many people as possible.
that's just shit writing TBH. There are plenty of protagonists who are multifaceted and have appeal to different people without being flat and boring.
Yeah but the works those characters appear in weren't focus grouped to death and directed by passionless empty suits.
>>1172>focus grouped to death and directed by passionless empty suits.
Aye that's true, too many good film ideas castrated by this.
What does everyone here think of The Boys?
I read through the whole series this summer and the whole time I was conflicted, I liked some of the themes like corporate power is bad, government is corrupted by capital, power corrupts etc etc but I couldn't parse wtf Ennis was trying to say beyond that. Vasili was rad tho
10/10 would crack open a cold one with
>>1563>the Tiananmen Square copypasta in comic form
This is pretty much an idealistic version of crime. It’s not a systemic problem but just something the rich can just deal with ease.
His Superman story was no better, where good ol’ Supes think he could just play Green Peace and relief hunger and only Le Big Bad Dictator that “totally isn’t funded by the US of A”.
It’s laughably liberal.
Fuck Capeshit. The Watchmen stripped the genre of its pretension.
Gotta disagree with you there, bro. Moore's intention with Watchmen wasn't to destroy and BTFO cape comics forever. No, he loved them. He just wanted to display why taking them overly seriously was absurd. However most people think he was eviscerating them and that comics need to be taken more seriously.
>>1605>>1623>Moore's intention with Watchmen wasn't to destroy and BTFO cape comics forever. No, he loved them.
Pretty much this, dude's a radlib larping as an anarchist magician. Just read his pitch for twilight of the superheroes to see his "anti-capitalist" phase only happened after DC fucked him over with Watchmen.https://archive.org/stream/TwilightOfTheSuperheroes/TwilightOfTheSuperheroes_djvu.txt>It would provide a strong and resonant springboard from which to launch a number of new series or with which to revitalize old ones again in a manner that was not obviously crassly exploitative so as to insult the reader's intelligence. With an eye to the merchandising that Marvel managed to spin out of Secret Wars, I think it's safe to assume that if it were possible to credibly spin role playing games, toys, "Waiting for Twilight" posters and T-shirts and badges and all the rest of that stuff from the title, then that would be a good idea too. Ideally, it might even be possible, while appealing to the diehard superhero junkie, to produce a central story idea simple, powerful and resonant enough to bear translation to other media. I mean, I know that I'm probably still intoxicated by the Watchmen deal, but it never hurts to allow for these things as a possibility, does it?
>MFW there is a Joker thread when this thread exists
>>1147>Stain from My Hero Academia is a hero-killer who despises heroes because they're 'fake' pretending to be noble and instead just playing at being responsible for others.
Stain complains about fake heroes but in the context of the series we are shown practically 0 malicious "Pro Heroes". The only Pro Hero who was shown to be a bad person is Endeavor, who from the get go his distinction as a "Bad Person, Good Hero" was made very clear and later on got a redemption arc focused on trying to atone his wrongdoing. He was a very lazy critique of heroes who has no ground to stand on when contextually the Pro Heroes of MHA are some of the altruistic and self-sacrificing cast of characters, like, ever.
An analysis of the Metahuman Liberation Army/Paranormal Liberation Army would be something worth discussing. For those who don't follow MHA, the later arcs introduced a revolutionary group as secondary antagonists to the main villains, and framed the revolutionaires as crazed cultists because their main belief was "All humans have a right to freely use their superpowers", a position that's criticized and brought up throughout the series.
you seem to know a lot about MHA.
Is that show political or something?
I maybe imagining things but some stuff about the show seems to hint at evil gommunism :DD or some shit.
The villains call themselves comrades. As the other anon said the villains kinda sound lefty aligned since their complaints of the heroes being materialistic and capitalizing on their quirks.
And the main hero is a Strong american-esque figure which is anti-communist.
And the main bad guy "All for one" is sort of what normies think communism is "no freedumbs, no muh toothpaste choices all of us will work day and night for ebil dictators n shiet"
I might be just reading into it because I saw a little politics in the show of how much respect cops are given in it and how much almost every character hates the media. Very fun show though.
Like all Superhero shows, the presence of super-abilities leads to a somewhat right-wing ideological story, like Sky High or other shit.
>>4836>in the context of the series we are shown practically 0 malicious "Pro Heroes"
Well considering how early into the story Stain is introduced and then removed, that's a poor argument. Further on we get more evidence of such shitty "heroes" and Bakugous explosive attitude and actions as well as his utter disregard for others (considering quirkless people to be worthless and that people who are less powerful to be worthless. His heroics are more out of a sense of "being cool" and twisted guilt-tripping, rather than anything else.
Anyway, my example of Stain was just that, an example of leftist ideological ideas demonstrated by Supervillains, how well its written is another matter. After all, Remont 4 (or 6) are written as stereotypical evil sovjets.
It depends on how much you read into the subtext of the setting.
On the surface it's a story focused on kids going to a top ivy league military academy guaranteed to land them work with the top "heroes" of the country and constantly fight off a group of social outcasts working proactively to change society because they were wronged by it in some capacity. However, in terms of substance there's not much to pick at because the series doesn't dive into the workings of the setting's government or economy much. All that's effectively explained is the Hero Agency system, which even though they are government paid, operate more like efficient neighborhood watch groups and community self defense.
All For One isn't much of an allegory for communism, he's depicted much more as a populist fascist. Basically the equivalent of Nazis calling themselves socialist and using their talking points. What you have to keep in mind with all the villain groups of the series is that despite their parallels to communism/socialist/leftist ideology, the endgoal for nearly all of them is overthrowing society to instate a neofeudal state and crown themselves ruler of the country. Many don't have an interest in helping any population or correcting the wrongdoings that turned them to villainy, they're just destruction or power hungry.
Hell, the My Villain arc was really about the revolutionary group, the MLA, failing to defeat the domestic terrorist League of Villains group and having their movement highjacked by them and their goals changed from "Quirk Liberation/Free Usage" to "Complete Destruction of Society". Whether that's a condemnation or word of warning about how all revolutionary groups will turn into terrorist insurrectionists only interested in destruction depends on how you interpret it and how the remainder of the series plays out.
This convo belongs more in the Joker thread, no?
Thank you anons.
Both of your viewpoints were helpful to my understanding of this show.
I also started reading My Hero Academia Vigilantes and liked it after the first chapter.
Fuck yeah the Snydercut got confirmed
Holy shit, is that a real excerpt?!
Honestly don't see how people don't see your point without being purposefully obtuse. I know the "People's Billionaire" is a annoying as fuck stereotype in fiction, but you can't push Batman any more left than writing him as a person using INHERITED wealth to fuck over billionaires and government pillaging his city(unless you wish to change Batman's background that he comes from a wealthy family, could work, but then you get the "Hey how'd he fund all his crime fighting" fags).
This isn't to mention there's been plenty of writers who attempted their best to fix Batman's inherit class traitor traits by saying Wayne Enterprises gives practically all their non-Batman related funds to charities and nonprofits or even silly shit like crime in Gotham will never end because the city is literally cursed so Batman has no choice but to go and kick ass.
lmao never change
> Should the film be rejected by those engaged in emancipatory struggles? Things aren’t quite so simple. We should approach the film in the way one has to interpret a Chinese political poem. Absences and surprising presences count. Recall the old French story about a wife who complains that her husband’s best friend is making illicit sexual advances towards her. It takes some time until the surprised friend gets the point: in this twisted way, she is inviting him to seduce her.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80X0pbCV_t4
At least it wasn't the coffee joke again
Yes, O'Neil is based.
>>4849>What you have to keep in mind with all the villain groups of the series is that despite their parallels to communism/socialist/leftist ideology, the endgoal for nearly all of them is overthrowing society to instate a neofeudal state and crown themselves ruler of the country. Many don't have an interest in helping any population or correcting the wrongdoings that turned them to villainy, they're just destruction or power hungry
Except this is literally how liberals see communists
Why should I be?
oh shid waaat. I remember the penguin being hot and remember nothing less.
Did wayne's dad really be an evil man in the ending? I just wish they would do a giveaway for this game on epic store
>>5088>penguin being hot
Doesn't that ruin part of his character though?
The Wall Street Connection is due to the composite themes, actions and words of Bane and his followers on the background of the previous 2 films in Nolan's series. Bane embodies violent populism and terrorism and how "Eating the Rich" is extremist and extremism isn't good. Nolan denies this connection and articles from Forbes and Rolling Stones have denied the connection to Occupy Wall Street despite the allegories one can interpret and instead argue that it is for "liberal democracy" (see the articles at http://archive.vn/oRnt6
) and this in turn receives arguments to the contrary (http://archive.vn/Pm7Dq
But let's roll back and start with the first of the trilogy, Batman Begins, where Batman after the murder of his parents turns to vigilantism and begins fighting psychos-for-hire like The Scarecrow, The Mafia and Ra's al Ghul's superiority complex.
The part key here is the Mafia, Mafia-Boss Falcone approaches a surrendered Bruce Wayne and says a truth, "Because you think you got nothing to lose. But you haven't thought it through yet. You haven't thought about your lady friend, down at the DA's office. You haven't thought about your old butler. [gestures with his gun] Bang! People from your world have so much to lose. Now, you think because your mommy and your daddy got shot, you know about the ugly side of life, but you don't. You've never tasted desperate. You're, uh, you're Bruce Wayne, the prince of Gotham. You'd have to go a thousand miles to meet someone who didn't know your name! So don't, don't come down here with your anger, trying to prove something to yourself. This is a world that you'll never understand. And you always fear what you don't understand.
But because Falcone is a scumbag criminal this objective truth is instead seen as a smear against the rich, that they're unfairly told tht they understand nothing of the world.
This is followed in the Dark Knight with Joker, who embodied anarchy and terror with the idea that people will turn on one another in times of duress and whose actions lead a passionate criminal prosecutor Harvey Dent to become a vengeful madman himself. To negate Joker's take down of Gotham's "White Knight", Batman takes the blame, (essentially being the fall guy for public faces of 'Good', to quote Officer Gordon, "…he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So, we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A Dark Knight.
Later in the Dark Knight Rises, this cover up is revealed and reveled in by the discontented masses, eager to tear down their heroes, which is depicted as them being thankless towards their (rich) "benefactors". Bane is essentially the epitome of "sweet poisonous lies" of freedom, claiming to be good but being evil. He says fiery words, "We take Gotham from the corrupt, the rich, the oppressors of generations who have kept you down with myths of opportunity, and we give it back to you - the people. Gotham is yours. None shall interfere, do as you please. [one of Bane's captured Tumbler Cannons blows a hole in the prison's gates, allowing his followers inside] But start by storming Blackgate and freeing the oppressed! Step forward, those who would serve! For an army will be raised. The powerful will be ripped from their decadent nests, and cast out into the cold world that we know and endure. Courts will be convened. Spoils will be enjoyed! Blood will be shed! The police will survive, as they learn to serve true justice. This great city… it will endure. Gotham will survive.
" This is a rhetoric just a bit more radical than Occupy Wall Street and close to the words of Revolutionaries, yet with Bane as the villain, the point is that his words are vilified as well, and thus so is the Wall-Street movement.
In short the entire series demonizes the Occupy Wall Street movement and other such protests and 'attacks' on corporate America.
It's why /pol/ fucking loves this movie. Its both anarchy and violence yet also condemns "de gommies"
I'd go on in more depth but it's been said far better than I can put into words in the following quote, demonstrating the crux of the issue, "All superheroes are black sheep. But the Dark Knight has always been murkier than most. His superpowers are not an accident of birth, or of stumbling into the wrong lab at the wrong time. They're not powers at all, simply a simulation made possible by good fortune and the leisure that accompanies it. Bruce Wayne can splurge on the kit and cars to set himself up as a crime-fighting Christ substitute, plus power and glitter enough to hide his hobby. He's always been a curious idol: within aspiration because he's flesh and blood; beyond it because he's the lucky recipient of inherited wealth. So it should be no surprise that The Dark Knight Rises so firmly upholds the financial status quo. Christopher Nolan's film indulges in much guttural talk of the gap between the 99% and the 1%, but it is the former who are demonised, whose revolting actions require curbing and mutinous squeals muting. Your average Joe, it turns out, requires a benevolent, bad-ass billionaire to set him straight, to knock him sideways, if necessary.
''The Occupy Gotham movement, as organised by gargly terrorist Bane, is populated by anarchists without a cause, whose actions are fuelled by a lust for destruction, not as a corrective to an unjust world. Such self-made characters as we meet in the film are, by and large, fishy – power-grabbers hiding behind a fig-leaf of philanthropism. Even someone who earns their crust nicking other people's stuff looks agog when the masses storm posh apartments to try and redistribute a bit of bubbly.
Batman's butler-crush and bells and whistles feudalism is swallowable – it's a cartoon, right! Likewise the free pass that Wayne's Rowntree-ish gestures, disapproval of criminals and general tortured grizzling seems to allow him. But The Dark Knight Rises is a quite audaciously capitalist vision, radically conservative, radically vigilante, that advances a serious, stirring proposal that the wish-fulfilment of the wealthy is to be championed if they say they want to do good. Mitt Romney will be thrilled. What's strange is that quite so many of the rest of us seem to want to buy into it."'' - Catherine Shoard, "Dark Knight Rises: fancy a capitalist caped crusader as your superhero?", The Guardian, (July 17, 2012) http://archive.is/Xw54R
The more intelligent right-wingers were quick to respond in trying to make the idea of "don't sacrifice porky" as centrist. While also comparing Batman to George W. Bush http://archive.is/6988n
"What passes for a right-wing movie these days is The Dark Knight Rises, which submits the rather modest premise that, irritating though the rich may be, actually killing them and taking all their stuff might be excessive.
" - Chait, Jonathan (August 19, 2012). [http://nymag.com/news/features/chait-liberal-movies-tv-2012-8/
"The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy Is on Your Screen". New York
As a reminder of how close Occupy became a revolt, I remind you of the famous 'Jump Fuckers' sign, and the hope it gives to libertarian socialists, democratic socialists and social democrats. https://jumpyoufuckers.wordpress.com/ http://ojoecollege.blogspot.com/
As a side note I present a decent analysis of Bane and the Joker: https://siftingthroughpatterns.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/the-ideological-dichotomy-of-the-joker-and-bane/
And 10 themes of the trilogy simplified: https://io9.gizmodo.com/10-ways-of-looking-at-the-dark-knight-5809593
in telltale he's a completely different character - used to be a bourgie but his family collapsed and he ended up as a working class anarchist part of an insurgency
wtf 🅱️ enguin is pased???
Haven't read the comic but the show is legit 8/10
Dropped it before even watching the show.
comic was edgy enough
He has other battlefields to fight.
Like how his "no kill" policy gets utterly ridiculed by American writers, going so far as to claim that it's thank to this the Batvillains exist in the first place.
Only in the US, I swear. Once the writers stop picking on him on that, he can explore other themes.
so do Bill Gates and Elon Musk
If we absolutely must look at superheroes politically, it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that they're a right-wing concept inherently. Superheroes are the superior aristocrats whom we must trust to lead and protect us, the common sheep. This was basically the whole thesis in Watchmen.
Batman is particularly egregious when it comes to the failings of the superhero because he is a man who "fights" crime by dishing out punishment rather than using his VAST, VAST fortune to actually address the material causes of crime.
Sure, many Batman stories have perfunctory scenes of him donating to this or that charity, but reflecting the philosophy behind these stories, this never results in a Gotham that is anything but a dark criminal hellhole that just breeds evil by nature. This is the only way for Batman to work as a character.
how are you not gonna post the next page also the best page
explain Spider Man then. Hated by the public, the media, the state while serving selflessly for the people and whose main enemies are generally bougie. And his personal life is definitely one of a prole (unless you count the recent Parker Industries bullshit)
The suggestion is not that superheroes are all bourgeois or serve the interests of the bourgeois. The suggestion isn't even that Peter Parker is a "bad person". But the individualist strongman vigilante who protects the common people by unleashing violence on criminals and doing nothing else is still a conservative's ideal of a hero, not a leftist's.
I see that the mainstream version of superheroes always come with the tropes of them also being the defenders of the status quo as well. No matter what they do the world will remain the same, and anyone who wants to better the world will end up making it worse or portrayed as a villain.
Another big tent pole that holds up the concept of a superhero is the fact that criminals are either treated in a fairly non-political way where they’re formed out of a single villain’s actions and only have a minor connection to the systematic problems of society. For instance, the crime problems of Gotham in Batman Year One is all attributable to Falcone’s organized crime and not the rampant corruption of the city’s political system by large industries and the poverty caused by it. Or that Hub City in Denny O’Neil The Question although being my favorite series still continues the autistic Randian narrative started by Ditko was that the city is “evil” by a supernatural force rather being under harsh policies of Reaganomics.
>>5158>When your effortpost response gets no replies, not even a thank you
Why do I even bother
So you proved my point, Zizek's analysis reached the same conclusions that I did, and in his own words, nowhere did I copy-paste his phrases unless general social terms are somehow 'plagiarism'.
So… opinions on Batwamyn and its catastrophic shitshow?
>>1133>One interesting take is "An epic of Predator" by Leo Kaganov. It describes an interaction between "absolute collectivist" alien race, "absolute individualist-predators" and humans.
I know the post is nearly a year old, but link?
the guys he focuses his attention on are almost exclusively mob and spree killers, he's not exactly punching down.
There was an animated movie called Batman vs Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles which was pretty rad. Batman vs Shredder was fucking awesome and it was a fun movie over-all.
>>1147https://batman.fandom.com/wiki/KGBeast >The Hammer* general, angry that the Soviet government was working to better relations with the United States, sends Knyazev on an unauthorized mission to kill 10 high-ranking U.S. officials, ten key people who were involved with the United States' Strategic Defense Initiative, nicknamed the "Star Wars" program, in the hope of putting an end to it.
<Despite [Gorbachev's] Soviet Government warning the United States, he successfully assassinated 7 targets
Absolute Mad lad. Reminds me of the Remont Four from Marvel Earth 616.
*The Hammer is a fictional cell in the KGB
It’s so weird that this is the only villain that Batman tried to intentionally kill multiple times. In his first appearance Batman with the assistant of the CIA (of course) buried him alive. In the most recent Rebirth issue, Batman once again shot him in the neck and leave the guy in the cold for dead. The funniest thing is that this issue also had a connection to the CIA. Tom King being an ex-CIA, a literal glowie at DC.
This dude is a apotheosis of American hatred of communism.
It's not hard to read wikipedia m8>Dr. Paul Kersey is a surgeon who often sees the consequences of the city's violence in the emergency room. When home intruders brutally attack his wife and young daughter, Kersey becomes obsessed with delivering vigilante justice to the perpetrators. As the anonymous slayings grab the media's attention, the public begins to wonder if the deadly avenger is a guardian angel – or the Grim Reaper itself.
Only the first film has any substance, the rest are an insult to the source material.
No, the second film is good too. Afterwards it does the same thing as Robocop 3-onwards
>Wikipedia refuses to add in Rotten Tomatoes and negative reviews because of liberal idpol disguised as "moderation"
So in other words the original Optimus Prime was truly a proletarian hero plucked from the docks where he worked to lead working machines everywhere in their liberation struggle against the military-capitalist elite?
I would say so, yeah.
Man trying to treat his PTSD with LARPing as vigilante but slowly worsen his psychosis while doing so.freudFreud
Batman = fashman
. He's a white rich man who usurps the rule of law through violence, and is motivated by "cleaning the scum off the streets" i.e. beating up mentally ill lumpens
There's nothing wrong with beating up lumpens, they prey on the proletariat.
they are the proletariat's class ally against the bourgeoisie, unemployed are also victims of capitalism
Because it's a comic book. If smart and idealistic superheroes existed in real life, especially likes of batman who can instantly expose corruption in government with his technologies, they would obviously do something more than just beating up random people in the streets. But anti-establishment comic book about revolution wouldn't be a good business decision.
Based. The sequel with Batman Beyond is also pretty good.
Apparently the Robert Pattinson batman movie is borderline horror.
WE NEED MORE BLACK CEOS
Kek in the latest film you have this political debate going on between two candidates and one guy is for the charity that the Wayne foundation does who gives money to the city for different projects to help the city, the other candidate is for cutting the funding by the Wayne foundation and pretty much gutting all the social services on top of stopping Wayne foundation from giving money to the city. Basically the two candidates are a "woke" neolib lolbert and a porky lover sorta Dengist class collaborator. Gotham is totally fucked but the real world is even worse.
The Batman was this close to being the best batman film ever. Excited to see what's next for this edition.
I liked it a lot because it was basically a remake of Seven
>>19745>Blackbatman obviously unpopular <try it again but using a different, female character (again)
kek, at least they toned down the lib idpol and made it actually a little nuanced.
heh that's pretty true. I really enjoyed the murder-mystery vibe they took with it. the riddler reminded me a lot of the film portrayal of the zodiac killer. using dano, who played the disabled child molestor from prisoners was also a nice touch. he plays a creepy nerd/incel type of character really well.
I feel it tried to go for the same type of aesthetic as the Batman Animated Series; a noir detective story, but its a bit too long.
>>941>>948>lumpen is when you're crazy
so this is the power of "modern day" communism
movie would have been better if it wasn't the same issue with the villain as TDKR, to be honest - the villain is sympathetic, maybe even right in what they're doing, then lmao kill le civilians 4no raisin
Is there a new Batman movie out? I have adblocker and no normie friends I talk to about stupid bullshit so I'm never aware about what movies are coming out or have came out.
Now I'm like:>wahhh, that's a movie???!?>and it came out 2 years ago ?!?!?
This is the best batman movie ever made. Should have been 2hr 45 however. 3hr+ with a stronger plot
Having the saddest Nirvana song be the theme was pretty brave for a capeshit blockbuster
wot if superhero but dark gritty real world?
is there a new edit cut of the move in digital release
>>24344>then lmao kill le civilians 4no raisin
fucking cringe ass superhereo movie writers
they keep failing
venom 2 had a better villain writing cause i did feel sympathy but still understood why he had to die
>>24344>the villain is sympathetic, maybe even right in what they're doing, then lmao kill le civilians 4no raisin>>24351>fucking cringe ass superhereo movie writers
It's not just cringe. It's overtly political. You take someone who sees a problem with the world and tries to change it, but the political situation can't abide the idea that something should change, so the person with these ideas has to be bad, but they don't have a reason why the ideas are bad, so they just make them do some overtly villainous thing and you're supposed to associate the ideas with villainy now. You can't seriously portray any kind of critique of society in these movies because the entire point of the superhero genre is that the heroes are keeping everything normal.
You really only see this addressed in X Men where the whole premise is that "normal" entails marginalizing people and the mutants who uphold normalcy are selling out the rest of their kind for acceptance. But even then it's massively downplayed (especially in the movies) and the villains are portrayed as bad. The closest you will get in capeshit movies today is Joker, which was only able to say what it did because the protagonist is (A) the "villain" and (B) crazy. So you can give him your social critique to say and the studio suits or whoever who might stop you from putting that in the movie are just like "well he's evil and scary so it makes these ideas seem that way too."
I remember a fan made a fake Batman movie trailer like over a decade ago where the Riddler was a Zodiac figure. It was Nolanverse footage interspersed with scenes from Fincher's Zodiac.
Hollywood literally just stole that dude's idea, I'm sure without any compensation.
never forget that they co-opted black panther title and literally made it as a movie with a CIA agent being as one of the good guys
the only hope i have is some of the people who watch these movies and actually think the villain did nothing wrong
that's one thing hollywood fails/succeeds at unknowingly
they hire attractive and charming actors to play the villains which ends up turning some people
not much to be done with these hollywood machines churning out propaganda against any action, the neolib world order of just do non violent protest and sit back
Big movie = good movie
Recently i watched deadpool, because people kept telling me how good it was and not like other superhero movies
It was steaming garbage and exactly like all other superhero movies. People have shit taste.
and in the end, they open a starbucks or some shit in the name of the guy they kill
basically liberal monument shit, that effectively doesn't do much
Didn't they like literally
give basketball shoes to poor black kids in the inner city?
Harvey Dent. Can he be trusted?
I think the bigger problem is that capeshit movies are used as philosophy material for adult consumers. There's alot of video essays talking about any superhero movies and how "they reflect the state of society".
Then, there's grown men arguing about comic book consistency and other shit.
They're too lazy to read ACTUAL philosophy/politics books.
It's just entertainment consumed by millennial manchildren to "relieve the stress of adulting".
Gonna be real and say capeshit has been so thoroughly mocked that that's not really true anymore
I beg to differ. Capeshit is mocked but also taken religiously.
Children's entertainment in general is being hijacked and botched by adults.
So much so, that kids whom enjoy any specific shows are labelled red flags.
Post-boomer politics is a very dark road of arrested development.
No dude, mockery just makes people dig their heels in harder. Centuries of dunking on christianity and religion in general didn't make people realize it's cringe. They think that the fact that you don't like it is evidence that it is to be taken seriously.>>24364>Children's entertainment in general is being hijacked and botched by adults.
Uh, are the children supposed to be making kids' entertainment?
oh shit i was an absolute retard and didn't realize you were asking me for the video, my bad anon lol
also 1000% agree about youtube's fucking retarded algorithm. I can search the EXACT title of the video I want and it will still list 10 unrelated videos first just because they're trending/made by Youtube Partners
Unique IPs: 26