Supergirl - Season Four
- Thread starter Kai "the spy"
- Start date
Yes, yes we are. I know it's difficult for the sane mind to countenance, but there are apparently guys whose entire masculine identity hinges on whether the boy funnybook character is superior to the girl funnybook character.
Lex is in prison, Lena is not. Therefore, Lena is objectively smarter. QED
As an IP, Superman made a lot of people a *lot* of money and if anything, Reeve's tragic death *elevated* the profile of the character, however slightly or briefly. Retiring the character (which I might add, Reeves didn't even come close to originating) would have cost said people a lot of money and there wasn't really any impetus to do so. People die all the time. Many actors play big roles and go onto other things.
Chloe Sullivan is barely a footnote in the vast backlog of Superman lore. She makes hardly anybody, hardly any money at all on her own. She in inexorably associated with the only actress to ever play her. She didn't die, she got involved in a weird sex cult and was convicted of human trafficking. There's very little demand to ever see the character again and a big flashing neon sign of a reason not to ever bring her up again.
Apples and oranges.
As an IP, Superman made a lot of people a *lot* of money and if anything, Reeve's tragic death *elevated* the profile of the character, however slightly or briefly. Retiring the character (which I might add, Reeves didn't even come close to originating) would have cost said people a lot of money and there wasn't really any impetus to do so. People die all the time. Many actors play big roles and go onto other things.
Chloe Sullivan is barely a footnote in the vast backlog of Superman lore. She makes hardly anybody, hardly any money at all on her own. She in inexorably associated with the only actress to ever play her. She didn't die, she got involved in a weird sex cult and was convicted of human trafficking. There's very little demand to ever see the character again and a big flashing neon sign of a reason not to ever bring her up again.
Disagree with you about the Chloe character, but that's a matter of opinion. It's a matter of fact, however, that Mack has been convicted of nothing. The case hasn't gone to trial yet.
How does one tell who is smarter anyways if you have two smart people in the room? One would be smarter than the other at some things and vice versa.
Jason
Well, they've already said that Lena used to regularly beat Lex at chess.That seems reasonable just as long as he doesn't loose to his sister in a fight!
Jason
It's really not. She is objectively a very minor and recent part of the Superman mythos.
Originating from an admittedly long running TV show, her appearance in comics was only due to the relative popularity of said show, a popularity which seemed to die off almost instantly once the show was off the air. Indeed assuming the DC wiki is accurate, she had less than half a dozen appearances in the comics and hasn't shown up since 2011.
Personally, I really liked the character. For a while there she was the best thing going in Smallville and seemingly the only actor that still gave a shit towards the end.
The fact remains however that she's not important enough for the current show to associate itself with what's going on with the actress. Maybe in a decade or two once the story has faded it'll be safe to bring the character back in some medium...but by that point it won't be bringing back a beloved character. At best it'd be a deep cut, obscure reference that only those who grew up with Smallville will get; at worse it'll be a heavily re-imagined "in name only" version of a disgraced character.
Res ipsa loquitur. Besides, the distinction is fairly meaningless in terms of publicity. Indeed ongoing proceedings just makes the character all the more radioactive.
Last edited:
Well, they've already said that Lena used to regularly beat Lex at chess.
Thati s fine as long as he gets to beat her at Stratego and it's established onscreen.
Jason
It's actually the exact opposite. There are some feminist writers that can't get over the chips on their shoulders so they have to weaken any male, especially a white male, in their fictional world to fake empower their female characters. Political correctness and social justice warriors.
All they accomplish by doing that is weakening the very female characters they beg us to see as empowered because if you have to weaken a male to make a female look strong, you are making the female look weak.
That's why Supergirl is no feminist. They had to dumb down Superman to try to make her look strong, and went out of their way to do so.
I fully expect the writers to do something similar with Lex, which is why I'm not super excited. But maybe they prove me wrong.
The writers can take care of that very easily by having Luthor consistently outsmarted by someone. These are very sexist writers. Let's not forget Cat's anti-male speech in her last appearance. Substitute the word "woman" for "man," and the show would have been brought up on charges.
When the show isn't political, it's terrific, but when it is, it's garbage.
Well, Superman isn't weak in this show. So, next. Again.
There, see, that's basically conceding that the character isn't permanently irredeemable, which is all I've been saying. The Superman mythos has been around for 80 years, so it's appropriate to take the long view.
The character is not disgraced, only the actress.
Because a bunch of writers with a chip on their shoulder made him that way to artificially pump up Supergirl, which was unnecessary, and ended up having the opposite effect. Bad writers can't weaken Superman. All that does is make that appearance easily dismissed because of the feminist outcome.
It's like if a writer writes a story where the top male tennis player in the world loses to a woman, when anyone with any knowledge of tennis knows that the top woman in the world couldn't beat any male in the top 200.
If a writer has to weaken Superman to make Supergirl look better, that writer only weakens Supergirl, and it makes the writers look stupid.
Nope.
So what you're saying is that strong, smart women are cute and all, as long as they mind their place and don't show up their male counterparts.
Gotcha.
Nope. Not saying that at all. You said that, and I guess that's how your mind works. But some people like to put words in other people's mouths so they can be fake outraged when they argue against their own comments.
I'll give you a very similar example of a strong woman that does NOT need writers to make men weak to show how strong they are--the opposite of Supergirl. That's Wonder Woman.
Watch that movie. They didn't need to make Steve Trevor weak to make Wonder Woman strong. He was every bit the hero that she is. Her physical superiority was never an issue nor did it matter. When she fought Ares--same thing. Likewise, in Justice League, when she had physical confrontation with Superman, he was getting the better of her, and she didn't look weak at all.
Wonder Woman doesn't have to be the strongest person in the room to be strong.
In the earlier example in the real world, it is an absolute truth that if Serena Williams played the 200th ranked male that you never heard of, she would be destroyed. But it doesn't weaken her status as the top woman possibly ever. She doesn't need to win for that status.
Now if she had that match, and the man was forced to throw it, and she wins, she looks weaker, and that's essentially what the Supergirl writers did when they wrote Superman as someone that would lose to Supergirl and then had him run around telling everyone how she was superior.
It was a disgusting display of weak writing. Superman has existed for 80 years and is the biggest force for good in the DC universe. He's not going to lose a fair fight to Supergirl. So to write it that way just showed that the writers didn't feel confident enough in the character that she didn't have to be the top dog physically.
So despite your sexist comment, I don't have a problem with strong women. I have a problem with weakening other characters to make them look strong. It's fake, like your outrage.
It's like a zombie argument. It just won't die.
Outrage is a strong word. I would have to take you remotely seriously to be outraged.
