• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Supergirl - Season 2

You must not know any runners.

Yes, because Superman has been around 80 years, and is not a new character.

He's a new character every time DC revises his continuity, which is frequently. So, that argument is invalid.

Today's Superman could beat the Superman of 1955 - but the Superman of 1963 could probably beat today's Superman.

So claiming that he has an "been around for 80 years" is meaningless - the name and some version of the costume have been around for 80 years, and that's all.
 
They aren't even supposed to be the same Superman. The current one is a combination of the one that's been around since 1989 and the one from the New 52.

The others are sent off to other universes.
 
Yes, because Superman has been around 80 years, and is not a new character.

If they are going to use him, they should use him, not dumb him down to make Kara look good.
But this is the point. He was not dumbed down. He's been written pretty consistently within the context of the show and Supergirl has been pretty much on par with him throughout. All the season finale shows is that Kara's skill has improved dramatically over the past two seasons and she is no longer a "hero in training". In addition to stopping Superman, she has also been forced to make the choice that Clark has always (in the comics as well) been able not to have to make.
 
Wally was the Flash from 1986 to 2011, so it's just as much a question of which Flash as which Superman is winning and losing these races.
 
There is no question that Superman has had some power level changes over the years. I'm not arguing that, but those same changes would equally affect Supergirl as well. They are still the same species.
 
There is no question that Superman has had some power level changes over the years. I'm not arguing that, but those same changes would equally affect Supergirl as well. They are still the same species.


You're grasping at straws now, because you know that the continual revisions of continuity simply render your assertions about Superman's consistency as a creation null and void.

Fact is, in some of those revisions - you call them "power changes," but in several cases they're wholesale revisions of the character's history - Supergirl does not exist and in others she's not Kryptonian. So there is not a single thread of consistency to these characters' putative existence and capabilities that you can successfully hang your reasoning on.

Because, you know, it's all made up and the people making it up change it all the time. They've been making it up and changing it over and over since 1939.

The most you can truthfully say about Supergirl is "I don't like the way they changed it this time" - "That's not true to who Superman is" is an preposterous non-starter.
 
Honestly, I think this whole debate boils down to Kirk Prime being a huge Superman fan and as a result, did not like seeing his favorite superhero lose a fight, especially a fight that he believes his favorite superhero should have won. It's similar to hating when your favorite sports team loses.
 
You're grasping at straws now, because you know that the continual revisions of continuity simply render your assertions about Superman's consistency as a creation null and void.

Fact is, in some of those revisions - you call them "power changes," but in several cases they're wholesale revisions of the character's history - Supergirl does not exist and in others she's not Kryptonian. So there is not a single thread of consistency to these characters' putative existence and capabilities that you can successfully hang your reasoning on.

Because, you know, it's all made up and the people making it up change it all the time. They've been making it up and changing it over and over since 1939.

The most you can truthfully say about Supergirl is "I don't like the way they changed it this time" - "That's not true to who Superman is" is an preposterous non-starter.

Um, no. Not grasping at straws. Stating logical points. Superman has always been the top force for good, no matter what his power levels were. He never had someone better than him, no matter what incarnation Supergirl is. Grasping at straws would be trying to argue that this episode was consistent with who Superman is. It was not.

It's not a non starter. It started 80 years ago.

Honestly, I think this whole debate boils down to Kirk Prime being a huge Superman fan and as a result, did not like seeing his favorite superhero lose a fight, especially a fight that he believes his favorite superhero should have won. It's similar to hating when your favorite sports team loses.

That's closer to the truth than the ridiculous sexism argument. But it's not like seeing a sports team lose, because in this case, we have a fictional character written out of character to make another fictional character seem stronger.

It would be like that favorite sports team being ordered to lose by the league.
 
Um, no. Not grasping at straws. Stating logical points. Superman has always been the top force for good, no matter what his power levels were. He never had someone better than him, no matter what incarnation Supergirl is. Grasping at straws would be trying to argue that this episode was consistent with who Superman is. It was not.

Then you're actually ignoring 80 years of history. Superman (and pretty much every other superhero) has been in a constant state of revision for the entirety of my life.
 
The real question is whether Superman will ever live down this humiliating emasculation, or will villains forever now refer to him as Supercuck?
 
The real question is whether Superman will ever live down this humiliating emasculation, or will villains forever now refer to him as Supercuck?

Fifty years from now, I will be able to point to the exact moment society fell. When Superman got beat by a girl. :eek:
 
Um, no. Not grasping at straws. Stating logical points. Superman has always been the top force for good, no matter what his power levels were. He never had someone better than him, no matter what incarnation Supergirl is.

This is just not true. Yes, Superman (in main continuity) has been a force for good. But he has been bested in fights on many occasions and many times each year, often by characters less powerful than Supergirl. Because he's the hero he does always come back and save the day. He also often gets by with a little help from his friends when the story line calls for it.
 
The real question is whether Superman will ever live down this humiliating emasculation, or will villains forever now refer to him as Supercuck?
OK, I gotta admit that's funny. My problem with it is that Superman is a top dog in the comics hierarchy. I like to think that it's not because Kara's is female but because he's freakin' Superman. If he is to be defeated I don't want it to seem a definitive thing but more of a situational one. It kind of came across the other way in this one.
 
This is just not true. Yes, Superman (in main continuity) has been a force for good. But he has been bested in fights on many occasions and many times each year, often by characters less powerful than Supergirl. Because he's the hero he does always come back and save the day. He also often gets by with a little help from his friends when the story line calls for it.

More in recent times, by writers that seem to think that the only way to have their character look good is to make Superman look weak. Like Batman for example, which was absurd.

Superman getting help from friends is absolutely necessary. That's a different thing. For all his power, Superman is still one person. He can only be in one place at a time, even with his speed. There are tons of reasons other heroes are needed.

This episode was a very similar circumstance. They didn't need to have Supergirl and Superman fight to have Kara fight Rhea. All they had to do was have Rhea demand that Kara fight the battle or there would be no battle. Rhea had a reason to hate Kara, and Superman had plenty to do with an army of Daxamites attacking.

It could have also been written that so that they fought the Daxmites together, with the rules giving them Daxamites a numbers advantage, letting Kara defeat Rhea. All without weakening Superman.
 
Then you're actually ignoring 80 years of history. Superman (and pretty much every other superhero) has been in a constant state of revision for the entirety of my life.

He has to ignore the available information - ie, facts or as close as we can get to facts on this silly fictional subject - to continue his end of the argument at all.

This is just not true. Yes, Superman (in main continuity) has been a force for good. But he has been bested in fights on many occasions and many times each year, often by characters less powerful than Supergirl. Because he's the hero he does always come back and save the day. He also often gets by with a little help from his friends when the story line calls for it.

This is exactly the truth.
 
OK, I gotta admit that's funny. My problem with it is that Superman is a top dog in the comics hierarchy. I like to think that it's not because Kara's is female but because he's freakin' Superman. If he is to be defeated I don't want it to seem a definitive thing but more of a situational one. It kind of came across the other way in this one.

Ding! Ding! Ding! That's the problem right there. It's something that has been going on before this episode of Supergirl. And it's also what I consider the main reason the DC movies have been so bad since they started. If they can't write Superman right, nothing will work.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top