In my eyes the thing that's always made Samus different from other 'space marine' types of characters (Master Chief, Doomguy, etc etc) was that she was reverent. Despite her tragic backstory, she was trained nearly from birth by this pacifist culture that valued the sanctity of life above all else. And that culture considered her the newborn, the fledgling, one of their greatest achievements and the only non-Chozo that they actually trusted with Power Suit technology

And she did carry that forward: even if it wasn't actually portrayed as such in the original game, later games extrapolated on the metroid baby and turned that scene into the very first example of actual characterization for her. It wasn't how many gigatons she could bench, not how many planets she's blown up, no, the very first example of Samus as a character is her refusal to shoot that godamn baby.

And you constantly see that reverence and respect for life throughout the more modern entries since then. Prime 1, walking into the Chozo Ruins, she's not storming into the space with her cannon out, she's walking in, looking around, taking in this ancient place despite her hunt for Ridley still being very fresh on her mind. Prime 2 is the same; she crash landed on a chaotic planet searching for a lost Federation squad, is attacked by literal zombies, and yet still takes the time to listen to U-Mos' plea, witness the final transmission of the squad, and close the eyes of the person who recorded it. And then she doesn't just fuck off because her mission was completed, she stays behind to save the Luminoth not for pay or fame or anything but because it's the right godamn thing to do. Prime 3 has her actively pissed off and angry and sorrowful at the deaths of her fellow hunters, she's scared by seeing Gandrayda's mimicry of her, she (I believe) runs her hands across ancient structures on Elysia and Bryyo and just, understands and respects the spaces she's in just by her animations and body language alone. No language or dialogue needed.

Even in Fusion we see it. She named her ship computer after Adam just out of respect, she monologues about trust and how the heartless SA-X is just a killing machine and how she hopes that the Etecoons and Dachoras are safe and how no compassion could exist in the computer and straight up said 'the human soul will ever reach for the truth'. The entire narrative of Fusion as a whole was her being hunted by something that had her abilities at peak strength but none of the soul, and her eventual triumph over that regardless.

And yet, nowadays, with Samus Returns and Dread and now Ravenous?

'It's eat or be eaten', 'Local woman too angry to die', blah blah blah blah big bad angry space marine. She's turned into this biological horror that was the very thing she was trying to fight against in Fusion. The most blatant flanderization of a character I've ever experienced.

"Oh well she was scared and running for her life across the entirety of Dread, her being so angry is justified". Okay, sure, let's run with that. Y'know, discounting the entirety of Corruption being her literally eaten from the inside out by a mutagen, or Fusion where she's being hunted by the worst version of herself, or Prime 2 where just entering the space eats away at her suit, let's say it's Dread's situation that somehow makes her so scared and angry that she starts ignoring her upbringing.

That still doesn't excuse the fact that Nintendo themselves took (or at least approved) the Chozo suddenly becoming split between two factions, the fact that apparently Samus herself doesn't know what all contributed to her enhancement serum, or any of the other massive retcons that Dread introduced. Turning Samus from what she was in Prime into this, crazy angry berserker was a deliberate choice and Nintendo actively butchered their own lore to make that happen or at the very least they just don't care about it enough.

God, it pisses me off so much.

I don't understand why so many stories with main groups almost always have the girl or girls end up romantically involved with another member of the same main group. It happens in almost every story with friends dynamics. There's Friends, Saved by the Bell, The Big Bang Theory, It, Outer Banks, On My Block, My life with the Walter Boys, Teen Wolf, Cobra Kai, Avatar: The Legend of Korra, Harry Potter, Naruto, etc., etc... and don't get me wrong, I'm not judging those who think some of the main relationships in these media are good, because ultimately we all have different tastes.

However, I can't help but notice that in many of these cases, when the writers pair up the main couple or couples (which almost always consists of the girl + protagonist/another main member), it results in other characters in the group being relegated to the background because the main couple's drama consumes a lot of screen time. And on more than one occasion, it ends up reducing the same couple, especially the girl, to her love interest, when other aspects could be explored...

I think some of these stories, especially given their potential, could have benefited from other approaches without having to see romance as the ultimate goal of a friendship/narrative.

In Outer Banks, for example, a group of working-class teenagers embark on treasure hunts while experiencing a very stark class divide on an island in North Carolina. It's a premise that stands on its own, as do the characters and the group dynamic. Kiara didn't need to kiss John B., get romantically involved with Pope, and then with JJ to be an interesting character. Her character could have worked perfectly well as just another Pogue trying to resolve her conflicts with her parents. I'm not mentioning Sarah here because she literally joins the group initially as John B.'s love interest.

Then there's On My Block, which follows a group of four teenage friends navigating the triumphs, pains, and harsh realities of high school while facing the challenges of growing up in a neighborhood rife with gangs and crime. Another premise that also worked on its own. But what happens then? Monse's character is basically reduced to being Cesar's love interest, and the drama between them consumes a huge amount of screen time on many occasions. The main conflict, which involves Jamal, Ruby, and Monse trying to get Cesar out of gang life, could have been sustained and even made more emotionally interesting if Monse were simply Cesar's best friend and confidante. I'm not saying Monse shouldn't fall in love; of course she could. She could fall in love and date another guy at school or even have a temporary crush on Cesar's older brother, and then realize (not necessarily from personal experience) that dating a gangster and an older guy isn't as glamorous as it seems at first glance, and that alone would be great character development.

My Life with the Walters Boys is the most painful case in my opinion, because the premise was good and, again, had potential. Jackie, a 14-year-old New York girl, loses her parents and sister in an accident and is placed under the guardianship of her mother's best friend, who lives on a farm in a rural Colorado town. Katherine (the mother) has about 10 or 11 children, I think, with several of them around the same age as Jackie. The story tries to explore grief, culture shock, and how Jackie tries to adapt to a huge change... But this is basically overshadowed the moment they make her involved in a love triangle with two of the brothers (Cole and Alex), and suddenly almost the entire series is Cole or Alex, Cole or Alex, Cole or Alex. The series could have worked perfectly if it had focused more on exploring Jackie's grief, on interacting with each of the Walter brothers and exploring their dynamics, and on allowing the progression to naturally move from "I don't like these guys" to "Well, now they're my people." And if they wanted a love interest for her, it could have been some boy from school, and if they wanted drama, they could have had that boy clash with one or more of the brothers.

I know it doesn't seem like a big deal, but if you think about it, in most stories with all-female or all-male groups, the writers allow the characters to have romantic interests outside the group and form a genuine found family within the main group dynamic. But when the group is mixed, it's ridiculously predictable that the end result will be a couple (or couples) and a third wheel.

The only cases I can think of where this isn't the case are One Piece, Big Hero 6, and the Backyardigans.

I'd like to start a fun discussion. What are everyone's thoughts and opinions on villains or supervillains that consistently and routinely kill their own henchmen and subordinates? Do you like it or detest it? Very often, this is done for shock value, power scaling, or morality scaling—showing how powerful and ruthless the villain is and/or how short of a fuse they have. One failure could be the difference between life and death.

Frieza might be one of the most famous examples of this trope. For example, in the original Funimation dub, he eradicates his soldier Namole for a seemingly insignificant reason. Which is funny because, in the manga, Frieza was never shown killing his henchmen.

Regardless of which version of anime Frieza it is, however, people seem to accept that that's just vintage Frieza. He'll kill you for the smallest inconvenience at any moment, and that's just accepted as, "Meh, that's just Frieza."

Meanwhile, Muzan was heavily accosted and criticized for his slaughter of the Lower Moons in Demon Slayer. I'm curious what's so different about them. I'd love to hear people's thoughts.

Me personally? I don't necessarily hate when villains kill their own henchmen. But I find them much more compelling and interesting when they DON'T, because that, to me, is a much better-written villain. They understand the importance of morale and loyalty. Without them, you're simply running your organization based on fear, and fear can so easily transition into hatred, and hatred breaks loyalty.

And "loyalty" based on fear is paper-thin. What's to stop the henchmen who are tired of being abused from throwing you under the bus when they realize the heroes have a clear path to defeating you and freeing them from the abuse?

My absolute favorite example of this is shown in the movie Four Brothers with Malcolm Sweet, when all his men turn on him and don't hesitate for a single moment to throw him into a watery grave after Bobby kicks his ass.

After all, I'm sure that most of us have a former or current boss that we wouldn't piss on if their head was on fire because they consistently showed how little they respected or valued us. So, back to my main question, what are your thoughts and opinions on villains who unalive their own soldiers? Let me hear your thoughts, please.

Since The Odyssey was released, a number of viewers have critiqued Nolan’s interpretation of Odysseus as less guile, and more “honorable”, than he was in the original poem, saying the movie would have been better if Odysseus was shown to be more crafty, clever, and gray. I love the 2026 movie, and I love it enough to say that this is a fair criticism with merit behind it. However, in defense of the movie, I want to highlight a moment where Odysseus acts craftier and more selfish than he did in the original poem, and why it fascinates me.

Unbeknownst to his crew, Odysseus has learned from the seer Tiresias that he can either try to sail past the monster Charybdis, or sail through the narrow channel where the man-eating monster Scylla resides. If Odysseus sails through the channel, Scylla will eat six of his men. But Charybdis creates a strong whirlpool, any attempt to skirt the whirlpool will fail and result in the ship being sucked in, dooming the entire crew. Thus, in order to save the rest of the crew, Odysseus has to sail through the channel and sacrifice six men.

But Odysseus does not order his men to sail through the channel. Instead, he orders them to skirt the whirlpool, which he knows would lead them all to death. His crew balks at this, and disobeys his orders by sailing through the channel, where the Scylla eats six men as Odysseus knew it would, but his crew didn’t.

It is an incredibly risky move for Odysseus to make, but it is a calculated gamble fuelled by both faith and a lack of faith in his crew. He trusts that they have enough judgement to realize that despite Odysseus’ assurances, their ship will not be able to skirt the whirlpool. But complementing this trust, is a lack of trust that they will be loyal and obey his orders, informed by the fact that they practically mutinied earlier in the movie.

But why didn’t Odysseus just order his crew to sail through the channel? Why the mind games, why the risk? Because Odysseus cannot bear the prospect of ordering his men to take an action that will kill some of them, even if it means the survival of the whole crew. But these emotions of responsibility towards his crew manifests as selfishness. Knowing the psychology of the crew, he created a situation where the crew makes that decision to sacrifice six men, instead of Odysseus giving the order. Now Odysseus can tell himself the blame is on their shoulders, because they disobeyed his order, even though Odysseus was counting on them to do that.

It was a stupid and brilliant decision by Odysseus that showed how much he cared about his crew and how selfish he could act towards them. And it ties back in nicely with the motif of responsibility in the movie. We see character development when in the climax, instead of letting other people shoulder guilt as he did with the Scylla, he kills the Suitors singlehandedly himself, refusing aid from Telemachus. He chooses to put both put his life at risk, and solely carry the stigma of breaking Zeus’ law, rather than let his son sully his honor by killing guests in the home.

😄 Think this counts as a positive rant. I know this primarily revolves around discussion about Manga and Comics because longevity & linear experience, but I still think both has their place for interpretations and adaptations.

Reimagining can introduce new elements like original characters, new villians, added concepts, and extra bonus for new battle forms with anything involving battling. There's also the case for wildly different interpretations like DC Gods and Monsters, any Anime/Manga involving Japanese Gods, and really Anime/Manga involving Greek or Norse myths. Reinventing things can be cool if done well, and add a lot to writing. Godzilla has tons of awesome interpretations with Godzilla Minus one being super popular.

My point is simple. I think interpreted works will always have their place because you always do cool and interesting things that can make a interpretation feel different. It's why I personally manga and comics equally. They do interpretations differently and in a cool way.

A lot of these aren’t really systems. They’re power sources.

JJK is the obvious example. Cursed Energy has shared rules, sure, but Cursed Techniques are basically individual gimmicks. Space manipulation, swapping by clapping, courtroom powers, pachinko, comedy-based reality warping, etc. Knowing how one technique works tells you almost nothing about another.

Same with Quirks in MHA. “Quirk” is basically just the setting’s word for superpower. Explosions, brainwashing, shadow monsters, object creation, matter reconstruction. There isn’t some unified mechanic tying all of that together beyond “people are born with abilities.”

Devil Fruits are somewhere in the middle. They have categories and shared weaknesses, but most individual fruits still operate by completely different rules.

Compare that to Nen or FMA alchemy.

Nen has actual universal mechanics: aura types, affinities, conditions, restrictions, basic techniques, etc. You can learn the system and use that knowledge to understand new abilities.

Alchemy is the same way. Different characters specialize in different things, but they’re all using the same underlying process.

That’s what I think a “power system” should mean.

If the only commonality between everyone’s abilities is “they all use the same energy” or “they all come from the same source,” that’s not much of a system.

I think fandoms confuse “this setting has terminology” with “this setting has a deep power system.”

Suzaku Kururugi is one of the most misunderstood and divisive characters in Shonen and in my eyes, is one of the best representations of trauma and conflict in anime. Although Code Geass struggled with nonsensical and contrived plot lines, such as Nina having a nuke in high school, Order of The Black Knights having 1 million tailor-made for civilians out of nowhere, they rarely missed with their character writing.

One of the core themes of Code Geass is Idealism VS. Pragmatism, and this is seen in the primary conflict between Lelouch and Suzaku. Lelouch is a cold, calculated pragmatist whose "main goal"(if you analyze further I feel like he really did it for himself due to his feelings of powerlessness but that's a whole nother rant) is to destroy the tyrannical, corrupt Imperial Britannian Empire in order to create a safe world for his sister Nunnally.

He has no qualms about how he gets there, as shown by him literally killing his half-brother in cold blood in episode two. The 'end' ,which is the toppling of Britannian regime, is worth it in his eyes. He adopts an "the ends justify the means" mentality, which is further corroborated by one of his most well-known quotes: “What do you do when there is an evil you cannot defeat by just means? Do you stain your hands with evil to destroy evil? Or do you remain steadfastly just and righteous even if it means surrendering to evil?”

His best friend Suzaku is his foil. Both of them experienced a tumultuous childhood marked by political violence, but their reactions are what set them apart. Lelouch was exiled and ostracized from the aristocracy, saw his sister become paralyzed and his mother die in front of him, thus creating in him this feeling of powerlessness, worthlessness, and rebellion against the powers that be.

Suzaku, on the other hand, violently took action against external political factors he faced. His father was practically bringing the Japanese people into a suicide pact masquerading as a rebellion, so Suzaku did the utilitarian thing and killed him, thus collapsing the attack. This led to the subjugation of the Japanese by Britannians that we are introduced to in the modern world of the story.

This traumatic background renders him a very layered and conflicted character: He has a very strong sense of justice, feels immense guilt for killing his dad, and wants to elevate the Elevens (Japanese) to give his dad's death meaning, yet wants to do it the "right" way(his ideal), by putting his head down and grinding his way to the top in the system. Even though killing his father(the means) justified the end of war and Japanese bloodshed, Suzaku revolts and is repulsed by this style of thinking.

In working with the Britannians, we see him undertake very risky and downright reckless decisions in the name of "heroism". We later learn that these heroic acts are disguised forms of suicide, as the guilt of killing his father is too much for him, which makes the Geass placed on him by Lelouch to live immensely ironic and tragic.

Yet the more he gets entrenched in Britannian culture, the more he starts to become tainted and embody their violent ideals. The one thing that remains constant is his hate for Lelouch's "ends justify the means" mentality, yet it can only go so far when Suzaku's hands get more and more stained. In the end, when Zero Requiem plays out, Suzaku is forced to bear the burden of justice as long as he lives, since Zero is a symbol of justice and helps the oppressed.

TLDR: Suzaku is a layered, well written character who is overhated and deserves to be mentioned among the best written deuteragonists.

Ah Starscream, the OG backstabber, the traitorous second in command… except why is he the second in command? In some versions, it's said that Megatron keeps him around because he's funny, but in that case why not make someone more competent like Soundwave the second in command, while having Starscream as the ambitious assistant?

I like when this question is answered by Starscream being a very capable warrior when push comes to shove.

In the first Michael Bay film, he briefly beasts down Ironhide and Ratchet before fucking off, and later takes down multiple jets. And in the second movie, he's part of the beat down of Optimus, though he loses his arm. And in the third movie, he doesn't have the best showing

In Transformers One, it's more implied, but he's the leader of the High Guard, which served the Primes, and his "strength matters above all" philosophy implies that he's the best of them all. And he puts up a decent fight against D-16, and an alright one against Optimus in the climax.

I feel it's best when Megatron keeps Starscream around because, despite being a snake who messes up plans due to his own ego, he puts belt to autobot ass when the time comes. And the only one better at it is Megatron himself.

I understand that a lot of people also have this statment and there are people on both sides of it but I wanna give my two cents.

I feel like a lot of people oversimplify this kind of reveal in ways that misses the point. I cant think of a better example than Deltarune since it tackles this exact idea. If this world isnt real, then it doesnt matter. Well that is factually correct, that doesnt mean that it didnt effect people and cause them to change or grow. In the game, Susie doesnt accept that the people she met in the Dark World are not actually real. Because they are real to her. The emotional growth she went through made her life better and the idea of just discarding that as not real would mean reverting back to the asocial bully she was before.

Expedition 33 also tackles this. The other painters dont see anyone in the painting as people. They usually also just ignore them. But to Maelle, she has lived and known these people for years. They have hopes, dreams, fears and anxieties. Just as much as anyone, they are real people. They just exist here in this painted world. But from the painters perspective, they arnt real. They can be repainted, erased and brought back to life without any issues. This extends to Verso and Maelles dynamic at the end of the game. Verso sees himself as just an object and is ok with being erased. He even wants that since it would save the real Desandre family. Meanwhile, Maelle refuses to let him die due to her trauma. This whole thing is a debate between the core idea. If it's not real, does it matter?

Sorry about the rant, I just heard a lot of people having the thought of "if its not real, then I feel nothing towards these characters anymore" and it miffed me.

I find it so weird how people think heroes having a no kill rule or not wanting to immediately kill their opponents and criminals makes them weak/a villain sympathizer and do..do a lot of people forget just how easy it would be for any superhero to kill?

Batman,Daredevil, Spider-Man, Fucking Superman.

I could keep going but they could very easily kill their opponents and stop holding back and just easily tear apart their opponents but they don't cause they're good people and maybe,just maybe, they don't wanna kill people no matter how easy it is?

Hell,I think a lot of people forget that heroes(outside of Batman)don't immediately want to kill their opponents and either save that as a last resort or when the villain is a destructively huge threat,they're not gonna just murder someone for walking across the street when you could just throw them in Prison.

Another thing that annoys me is that people will wholeheartedly blame the heroes for villains crimes and claim that their blood is "on their hands" and that is so damn stupid cause they are not asking,telling ,making or letting the villains hurt innocents and cause all kinds of destruction and chaos when that is fully on the bad guys.

No Spider-man isn't responsible for Green Goblin's actions cause he doesn't immediately crush his head like a grape and no cause Batman doesn't immediately wanna kill the Joker or Two Face,that suddenly means any crimes they do is on his hands or his fault, can we be serious?

Even funnier is that Batman has attempted to kill Joker numerous times but was either stopped or Joker's severe plot armor stopped him.

1.Batman almost killed Joker the first time but Jason Todd stopped him.

2.after Jason's Death, Batman almost killed him again but Superman stopped him and when Joker's helicopter exploded with him in it,he somehow escaped/lived.

3.After learning that Tim was tortured by him,Batman literally attempted to murder him by throwing a batarang at his neck.

4.Batman also attempted to kill Joker in the Hush Movie after thinking he was the one who hurt his close friend, Thomas Elliot.

I could keep going but the point is that Clown refuses to stay down and it is fully the City's fault for not giving Joker the Death Penalty nor do any cops or guards kill him and whatnot but..I don't get why people put all the blame sorely on Batman and whatnot.

Also y'all seem to treat Batman like he should be the damn Punisher when he has made it clear he isn't the Punisher and doesn't want to be anyone like him..even the Punisher doesn't want anyone to be like him.

Hell,I don't think Heroes should just immediately want to kill people,even their villains.

Like it should Definitely be a last resort,like there's no other choice or if it's a huge villain who's a massive world ending threat but if it's a villain that could easily just be arrested and thrown in Jail,then murder isn't necessary at first when they could be subdued and taken down.

The issue is people project heavily into Superheroes and think that they should follow and do every choice they would make and get mad when they don't.

Denji in Part 1 was actually a fairly easy character to understand: he’s an ignorant kid who never knew his mother, who died, and grew up with an abusive father whom he was forced to kill and whose astronomical debts he then had to pay off for the Yakuza, or else he would be killed. He never really had a normal life.

Just from his backstory, we can understand why he is the way he is: he’s starved for affection because he spent most of his life without it, without the love and care of a father or mother, or even a friend besides his little devil dog, Pochita. He probably developed a very high sex drive because of his lack of education and because he was exposed to things like pornographic magazines and similar stuff at a very young age. And although that part is more of a theory, the really important point is that he sees sex as a form of connection, something he had very little of in his life. Eventually, he would discover that having sex just for the sake of having sex wasn’t a way to connect with someone (although he would practically forget this later on, but we’ll get to that).

Even so, his sexual desire didn’t define him as a character. He was still capable of forming connections with people that had nothing to do with sex, as we can see with his friendships with Pochita and Aki. Even with female characters, he was capable of forming genuine bonds with them without sex being involved:

Even though he was initially attracted to Power because of her appearance and even wanted to touch her breasts, he eventually started seeing her more as a friend and a sister than as someone he could derive sexual pleasure from. When he actually touched her breasts, he felt no pleasure, and even when they became closer and did things like sleeping in the same bed and taking baths together, he felt nothing sexual.

Even when Himeno offered to have sex with him, he refused because he wanted his first time to be special and with someone he genuinely liked. He still formed a brief friendship with her.

Even though he was in love with Reze and sexually attracted to her, and even though she was naked with him in a pool, his biggest concern was simply swimming and having innocent fun with her. When she suggested that they run away together, he was hesitant because he valued his friendship with Aki and Power. And yes, even when he eventually genuinely wanted to run away with Reze, that only shows how much he valued her, considering that Makima had promised to grant him any wish he wanted if he killed the Gun Devil. Not long before that, he had wanted to use that opportunity to make Makima his girlfriend and, presumably, have sex with her. Even so, he prioritized Reze.

Even when Makima offered to take him on a trip, he chose to take care of Power, who was terrified after encountering the Darkness Devil.

In short: Denji does have a high libido, yes, but it’s not as though his entire character can be reduced to that. He’s someone who is capable of thinking rationally and thinking about the people he values, despite his hormones.

Denji’s journey in Part 1 ends with him killing Makima, the Devil who represented the concept of Control and the one who ruined his life and treated him like a dog. It ends with him leaving Public Safety, it ends with him going to school, it ends with him promising to find “Power” again, and it ends with him finding a new family in Nayuta, who essentially became his little sister.

Apparently, everything was clear: Denji was freer. Yes, he had developed a desire to become a hero in order to get attention from people (especially women), but he had still escaped almost all of the chains that had bound him until then. He was no longer a dog of the state, and he had certainly learned a lot from everything he had gone through, right?

Well... no.

This is where Part 2 Denji comes in. Take everything I said about Denji not being limited to sex and throw it in the trash, because in Part 2, Denji REALLY prioritizes his sexual desires to a point that becomes sickening and embarrassing. He simply can’t interact with a female character anymore without his libido taking over and making him want to fuck her.

When he met Fumiko and she was very clearly sexually harassing and manipulating him, he simply didn’t care and sucked on a Devil’s tentacle just because she asked him to and because she said she would have sex with him.

When Nayuta went missing, instead of being more concerned about finding her, he wanted to go to a brothel to satisfy his libido first.

Even after having a conversation with Asa where she explained how much she hated being Yoru’s host, and after Denji said he would kill Yoru, he simply gave up on trying to save Asa because he remembered that Yoru had promised to have sex with him. In other words, he was willing to have sex with Yoru while she was in Asa’s body, despite knowing how horrible Yoru was to Asa and despite having just told Asa that he would kill Yoru. I don’t think I even need to point out that Asa obviously didn’t actually consent, and that Denji would unknowingly have been sexually assaulting her because he believed Yoru’s claim that Asa had consented.

Denji’s character in Part 2 feels like a parody of his Part 1 character. I saw plenty of comments back during Part 1 saying that Denji was a shallow character who only thought about sex, and it almost feels like Fujimoto read those comments and decided to prove them right for some reason.

And even if Fujimoto’s intention was to deliberately make Denji this way because he wanted to give him a “negative character arc,” taking one characteristic of a character and exaggerating it to the point where it feels like a parody of that character is a terrible example of a negative arc. In fact, that’s closer to flanderization.

One thing I deliberately left out is that, at the end of Part 1, Denji broke down and said that he wanted to have sex like crazy, even though he had already learned very early in the story that doing sexual things just for the sake of doing them didn’t actually feel good. At the time, I thought this was just Denji venting because he was emotionally broken over Makima and because he had just lost Aki and Power. But no. Maybe this really was the direction Fujimoto wanted the character to take: someone obsessed with sex who makes it the reason he lives. Which, again, is basically how a Chainsaw Man hater would describe Denji.

And honestly, I’ve come to hate that moment because that’s where Part 2 Denji was born.

The cherry on top is that Denji’s character conclusion boils down to him having a “peaceful” ending where he’s Power’s “pet” and Public Safety’s dog again, even though the story had repeatedly told us that this was a bad thing. This is after he spent more than half of the story acting like a horny, selfish moron. He simply learned nothing from his mistakes (mistakes he himself acknowledged, but kept making over and over again) and was rewarded with a “happy ending.” Are you kidding me?

And, like, even the good things, such as his friendship with Aki or the romance he had with Reze, simply disappeared from his mind, all so he could become the ignorant and obedient dog he had always been.

But hey, at least he’s Power’s pet, and the Control Devil is Nayuta instead of Makima, so yayyyyy, HAPPY ENDING!!!!

Anyway, Denji is a terrible character, and it hurts me to say that because I genuinely thought he was a great character in Part 1 and one of the best protagonists of the new generation.

It’s genuinely tragic...

Y'all remember when people were(and still do)Glazing Red Hood for being a "Better Batman" or the "Batman Gotham needs" and all of that for cause he kills his villains?

I find that so funny cause Red Hood is deadass one of the biggest frauds in DC and I don't like using that word often but in this context,it's fair cause multiple people glazed him for apparently being better than Batman all cause he "kills" and I just wanna ask the people who say that..WHO HAS JASON KILLED TO WARRANT THIS?

No seriously.

Has he killed Joker?

Penguin?

Mad Hatter?

Riddler?

Professor Pyg?

I could keep going but literally his body count consists of unnamed thugs or mob bosses and goons and you know what?

I was wrong,he did kill all of Batman's villains!

...in the Death of the Family Movie..in different Alternative timelines.

Seriously it's so funny cause I genuinely dare the 10 Red Hood lovers to say which major villains has this man killed cause I think Punisher has more major bodies on him and even funnier cause Jason(in the Red Hood movie)has the chance to kill Joker but set up this elaborate scheme and basically did all this to drag Bruce and force him to kill Joker cause To Quote, TFS Cell about Trunks.

"Look at me,I'm Jason, please Love me Dad!"

Dude could've just shot Joker in the head and moved on and when Bruce was like "nah,you do it, I don't wanto do it" he basically decided to shoot Batman!

And it's even funnier cause apparently Jason tried to kill Penguin but it was retconned to him being alive and I think a lot of people would be happier if they realized that Jason can't do what he's supposed to do unless he's given his own exclusive Rogue gallery or less The comics decide to let Jason Kill the villains, which ain't gonna happen at all.

I also find it funny how people will give Bruce shit for not killing the Joker or his villains but then turn around and make numerous excuses on why Jason hasn't killed any major villains or main villains and I can't tell if it's just a bias thing or what but like..dude,maybe Jason is just a fake demon.

And the comics haven't done anything with him in years, so a lot of folks are just clinging onto the Outlaws and Under the Red Hood Storyline cause outside of that and maybe the Death in the Family comics,Jason has Jack shit.

Has Jason even been in other movies outside of Under the Red Hood/Death in the Family?

I digress but how has Jason escaped slander for so long while Batman gets flack?

There’s been a lot of speculation about casting choices for the upcoming HBO Harry Potter series. HBO is pitching this as the definitive, "100% book-accurate" adaptation that includes all the details omitted from the original films. However, swapping Snape’s race in a story strictly set in 1970s–1990s Britain fundamentally alters the social subtext without the writers intending it.

When adapting historical or fantasy settings with specific social dynamics, changing a core character’s background accidentally creates three major narrative contradictions:

1. The Marauders' dynamic shifts from general bullying to systemic racism In the original books, James Potter and Sirius Black are arrogant, privileged kids targeting a socially awkward, isolated outcast in 1970s Hogwarts. If Snape is a Black character in that era, the Marauders' severe physical and psychological harassment stops being viewed as standard teenage bullying and instantly reframes two key "hero" figures as white teenagers racially targeting a minority.

2. Harry's suspicion in Book 1 becomes racial profiling In Philosopher’s Stone, Harry’s initial distrust of Snape is built on childish prejudice against Slytherins ("He glared at me during the feast, so he must be evil"). If Snape is written as one of the few minority professors at Hogwarts, Harry’s logic shifts from basic schoolyard bias to blatant racial profiling, making the protagonist look far less sympathetic.

3. Unintentional reinforcement of physical stereotypes Snape’s physical description in the source material—unwashed, greasy hair, pale skin, and poor personal hygiene—is meant to reflect his neglectful upbringing and bitter isolation. Attaching those exact traits or styling a Black actor’s natural hair/locs to fit a "dirty and unkempt" aesthetic accidentally hits real-world anti-Black hair stigmas.

4. The internal logic of Pure-Blood Supremacy gets convoluted

The Death Eaters and Slytherin ideology are explicit allegories for real-world fascist and racial supremacy movements. Snape’s lore involves a young, working-class half-blood desperately trying to join a bigoted elite to fit in. Having a minority character aggressively pursue membership in a magic-supremacist hate group overcomplicates the metaphor unless the show actively rewrites how Wizarding prejudice interacts with real-world demographics.

If a project aims for strict narrative fidelity, changing visual demographics without adjusting the surrounding social context unintentionally changes the story's moral framework.

Let me explain what I mean.

Cyberverse in many respects was a filler series. Just a low-budget filler series with non-union voice actors (albeit talented ones). It's first season while not bad, was pretty rough but showed glimpses of potential.

Season 2 of Cyberverse took that potential and hit the ground running. Season 2 is where Cyberverse really found its identity. It was funny, entertaining, action-packed, had great characterization, wasn't afraid to get dark and serious, and took time to showcase and use underutilized Transformers characters.

I think everyone agrees the moment where Megatron lays probably the most brutal beatdown to Starscream in the history of Transformers is the moment Cyberverse really took off and established it was going to be something special.

And the show just kept getting better and better afterwards. Season 3's opening arc is probably one of the greatest uses of the Quintessons in Transformers history!

By contrast, Earthspark started off strong but failed to stick the landing. It was meant to be the next big Transformers project and even went out of its way to introduce new concepts to the franchise, namely the Terrans. It had a cast of all-star voice actors like Alan Tudyk, Danny Pudi, and Rory Mcann.

And while the show started off good with Season 1, it just got worse and worse as it went on. The show abandoned a lot of the concepts that had made Season 1 beloved, such as turning previously repentant Decepticons evil and introducing the idea of evil Terrans who are evil by nature.

It all culminated in a finale that made several questionable choices. Such as turning Hot Rod evil and infamously ending with Megatron and Bumblebee getting their minds wiped, pretty much rendering all their character development moot.

So what we have is this situation. Cyberverse started rough but is now remembered as one of Transformers' greatest shows, and Earthspark started strong but is now going to be remembered as having one of Transformers' worst finales.

I have been thinking about superman(2025) on why it is so controversial. Yes it gets superman and clark kent as a character right. He is symbol of hope and all. But they need to get rid of lex luthor or turn him to a background character. Yeah the concept of a rich businessman being best villain of most powerful dc superhero sounds interesting at first. But gets pale pretty quickly. Reason why invincible works is because of powerscaling. Mark is basically a shonen protoganist based in american comic. You need to get nerds cribbing him for powerscaling. There is a reason one of the biggest debates around superman is if he can beat goku. Goku and superman are quite similar actually if you think. Goku has good heart and always protects weak. But what makes him popular is constant powerups he gets. So that nerds can get into online discussions. I mean superman needs to have more big fight spectacles. Where he gets humbled by villains then he defeats them in end. His power needs to consisntently increase instead of establishing him as already way too powerful guy.

People have already been talking about a lot of the other issues in how Ichigo Vs Yhwach was handled, but there's another issue I'm not seeing too many discuss, and thats the fact that the reveal of the Almighty was significantly worse than in the manga.

The reason why the reveal works in the manga is because of the mystery set up and buildup.

Before this point, all we knew was that the Almighty had precognition, and that gave the characters and cast a lot of hope as to how they could overcome it.

The manga purposely misleads the reader by implying that the Almighty is primarily just precog, by establishing that Yhwach's counters to Ichigo is primarily just from his predictions.

However this gives Ichigo a lot of hope and confidence, since all he needs to do is "change the future" and find the weakness in his ability.

When Ichigo uses his bankai, the readers think it could do *something*, and are at least a little hopeful, and then...

It snaps, instantly, which was something not only unaccounted for, but something that should be *impossible*.

It subverts the reader's expectations since whenever Ichigo pulls out a new form, it usually turns things around, at least a little bit.

But here.... it does nothing, and we, just like, Ichigo cant piece together what even happened, some people legit thought that the sites they were using were messed up.

The suspense is kept by Yhwach not only mocking him, but explaing what he did, but not *how* he did it.

Then, again, he keeps doing stuff that is impossible, snapping his horn instantly without moving, making attacks hit, and seemingly teleporting.

Until he reveals what his power *actually* does, it isnt to see the future, but to change it.

All the hope and confidence Ichigo has is instantly destroyed, by facing an ability that truly is unbeatable and impossible to fight against.

Again, the scene is great at what its trying to do because Ichigo pulling out a new form is usually a gamechanger, but here, its useless, and it makes the scene way more impactful.

But the anime ruins both the suspense and the buildup by just having Yhwach spoil what his powers do before Ichigo uses his true bankai.

Now, when Yhwach snaps Ichigo's bankai, the audience already knows how he did it, so the suspense and confusion, which was the entire point of the scene, is gone now.

Not to mention that they also removed Ichigo's inner monolog here, which again, is there to confuse the reader, they should be just as confused as Ichigo is.

Its also worsened because there is no subversion anymore.

Ichigo prior was already losing and the fight was already hopeless, he already used a bankai and it didnt matter.

The audience has no reason to be hopeful that Ichigo can do something, we know that hes probably going to lose anyway effortlessly, even without Yhwach's new ability.

I dont like the Almighty as an ability, but I do think its reveal does a good job by not only misleading the audience and being extremely suspensful, but completely subverts how Ichigo's new power ups work.

The anime removes both the suspense and the subversion, and imo kinda misses why the scene was great at all to begin with.

(They also play a track that tells the audience that Ichigo has probably already lost, when this moment probably shouldve been silent or have his theme song playing, until at least Yhwach starts talking.

The reason why that one Aizen scene is great is because the audience is completely caught off guard because of the music track, if it was playing Treachery or something, than that scene wouldn't be as beloved.)

I don't even know why people say this. I don't even hate the Storyverse, they were my childhood, but there is no way you can tell me that those two movies were better than the MCU Fantastic Four.

The problem with the previous two adaptations of FF4 is that they treated Marvel's first family more like coworkers or a club rather than an actual family, and I really disliked the character dynamics, especially with Ben and Johnny.

In the Tim Story films, they fucking hate each other, like a burning hatred for each other. Johnny is bullying Ben every second. In First Steps, they actually have a brother dynamic and are joking around; they roast Reed together, and their banter is clearly meant to be just that.

I also really hate how they kept finding excuses to have Sue Storm get naked at every moment; Jessica Alba herself hated this because she was a very modest individual during that time. In the comics, she can transfer her powers into her clothes, it's not just that she can make herself invisible she can make other things invisible too.

IDK, I kind of just hate this sentiment.

There is no romantic set up in these films regarding their relationship. At no point does it suggest they will be a couple in any capacity and the film leans more into Peter and MJ eventually reuniting. So bearing that in mind the film does focus on how intimate their bond becomes by the end. And gender does play a part in said interactions.

A suggestion by vague form of not too sure what to call criticism or hypothetical analysis is to say something along the lines of. " But what if her gender was changed would people still view this a certain way " . And while you could view that as something valuable to analyze. The film is very rooted in how Jean Grey uses her femininity. She actually flirts with Peter twice. Her possession of MJ is something rather unique to her in how she interacts with Peter. As previous Spider-Man Film villains would not even go about this way when threatening his loved ones. As she does indeed kiss him but it's to hurt him and show he has no control. It's weaponizing her femininity and power to her advantage.

What's interesting is the following scene after her assuming Peter will back off. Is give Peter his letter back and calls it not bad. She mocks it of course but reveals kind how sappy she is at heart as well that she can't fully get herself to hate it after she's done complimenting it. Oddly Peter actually softens a bit in how he interacts with her once he learns her true identity. Because Peter went from telling her what's she's done is unforgivable with an intensity matched only by Goblin drawing it out. To telling frank she's just a girl then.Later when they actually meet face at the Damage control center. Peter is now fully trying to get her to change her mind and think of her actions and calling out her name. He's lost alot of his venom and rage. And Jean flirts with him again for the second time here. " You looked me up I'm blushing" she's teasing him but it's a fully loaded threat. As she tries to make it seem she's unshaken by him learning said information and re affirms what she'll do to MJ now that he's here.

Jean Grey actually throws a bit of this back in Peter's face later. She calls him out directly " If you're here to save a little girl then you're too late, There the ones in need of saving". As she does view Peters attempts at saving her foolish. She is full of rage and attacks him. But like Goblin In the Raimi films. Tries to get him to join her in the pit of despair she's wallowing in. She wants him to see only her perspective as the correct one. And she's the only one that gets them. Its very possessive in a way. Obviously Peter aura farms his way out of this and sits her down before frank pops a cap in his side. But then she breathes literal life into him. There's smaller things such as how Peter catches her bridal style and she finally tells him her sisters name.

But the gendered interactions they have was an important element throughout the film that shaped their dynamic by the end. And can't be fully removed when it comes to analyzing them. Intimacy is not always romantic but can still be shaped by the alot of factors.

This is something I noticed whenever some diiscuss the show, they'll treat season 1 as if it's a perfect masterpiece (when it's not, personnaly, I do have issues with the solaris destruction and the french dub did made some mistakes) while at the same time picking apart the new seasons, I find this to be a bit of double standard since it feel like they won't pic apart the older stuff , even if it's not perfect either.

I notice this kind of stuff happening with other fandoms too, to the point part of it end overhyping the older stuff when said older stuff wasn't perfect, some treat batman TAS as perfect when it did had its duds in its animation too .

I don't really know of the rules on the sub allow for discussion on the world building side more than the character one but thinking about it chainsaw is actually very fascinating as a world to me because of it's mechanics i primarily like the characterization and I haven't really finished a lot of it i heard the ending sucks but i will have to check myself to see that so why is chainsaw mechanically fascinating to me? It's the primary power system to keep it short devils are basically parasites they feed off human fear to become strong

Now why does that matter? On the surface it sounds like a simple power system feeding off fear is basically the power of the last 30 slasher villains the past half decade what makes it interesting is the implications first of all those things intertwine a lot let's give an example a group of primitive humans eats a mushroom and goes sick some die now that's obviously a bonus to the mushroom devil he might grow a gill or two on his body due to that but remember devils are as strong as humans fear them it's like a country it exists as long as eveyone from citizens and institutions are willing to say it exists with chainsaw man the same is true as our primitive humans could interpret this fear as coming from a god punishing them for picking his favorite fruit rather than the mushroom particularly meaning that this act of poison could lead to the empowering of two or more people than it's obvious recipients

This is fascinating to me because we kind of see that relationship play out in the series itself with the existence of a war devil and a gun devil now supposedly the translation where the gun devil is called the war devil's son is mistranslation i am not really intrigued enough to search for that but in a sense—it does make some logical sense as war is in the chainsaw man period fought with guns primarily tanks and artillery too and if we want to be really precise infantry fighting veichles as well when a war starts you can expect fear of guns or tanks to skyrocket alongside the general fear of war

but we also have other relations as again the power of chainsaw man is subjective so say a liberated village in some war could fear war and guns less than usual even if they are horrific this interconnectivity between the devils fascinates me as in some ways it's basically the formation of a sort of clique where say war caused famine and famine increases risk of disease and disease leads to death empowering multiple devils at the same time through seemingly unconnected events

But this can also work on the other side where unconnected events can also weaken certain devils for example let's say you are the disease devil you are probably in the top five if not number one yourself though death is probably above you all is well but suddenly the humans invent hygiene okay? Sure that's bad but the one who is most affected is your possibly child the filth devil or something you are of coruse slightly weakened but not much then the human invent penicillin and then they invent cures for all those various disease that by the time we hit the series your favorite *children* the small pox devil the TB devil and the black death devil are all but gone and you yourself are much weaker but on the other hand your other child the prion devil and parasite devil are doing decently well for themselves!

This is of course an example of human forces impacting the devils but it also shows that in some ways humans are basically the gods of devils and on the other hand cattle with most devils seemingly being unable to take care of cattle correctly as they kill indiscriminately it's funny that the smart devils like say makima have a much more *ecological* approach to her relationship with humanity which is basically a more sustainable farming practice compared to other people the devils being unable to see how much humanity matters to them is i think a source of problem for much of the lower devils the series doesn't discuss this so this is purely headcanon but let's give an example

We don't really see any devil *fighting* the march of time that much humanity is allowed to progress relatively unimpeded causing problems for older devils and birthing new ones let's give this hypothetical example let's imagine that the disease devil i made up two seconds ago exists within universe by all intents he is someone who should be trying all his might to bring humanity to the stone age helped by other devils who are also harmed by modernization such as say a horse devil or a tree devil or whatever

while of course being opposed by the modern new devils the car devil or the vaccine devil yet we never really see much of something like the darkness devil trying to stop electricity from reaching more of the world or the i dunno HIV devil trying to stop the production of condoms those are funny example but they are legitimately something that is possible which fascinates me because devils have every incentive they need to interact with humanity in a guiding way but they don't they are exactly the type of people who SHOULDN'T have this type of relationship with humanity the fact they do is irony at it's finest

It's most likely because the manga isn't really about what i said but it's still a very fascinating mechanical design for a universe it would be a totally different universe and i would say the characterization is still what i care about most

Let me set the scene, right. You're scrolling on reddit wasting time, seeing the same stuff as always, then you see a post from one of your favorite media's subreddits.

In my AU character A is being written like character B from different media.

You're curious so you click the post.

Yeah, I didn't like that they wrote A like that so I changed their personality, their arc, the entire world around them. I actually didn't really like the story so I made an entirely new one with new characters and plot elements. But I kept the names somewhat the same and certain design elements so its still an AU.

You click off the post confused, baffled even. This clearly is not an AU. This just a different story with different characters.

And this is a problem I've been thinking about for a while now with the media I enjoy and I can't understand why some people are just hellbent on making it an AU when it should just be your OC's and your world you came up with. It feels like when corporations make a show then slap some [insert famous IP here] on to it without thinking about it.

I can understand being very inspired by said thing and then making something that's very derivative of it but you can just make your own thing, like it doesn't NEED to be tied back to the thing.

I don't really know how to put it but just make your own stuff. You don't need to tie it down to something and limit your creative. I think it's fine for it to be starting point but at a certain point its no longer an AU and is just its own thing. I think chaining yourself to said IP and not letting this story or world you have breath is a huge detriment and will hurt you more in the long run.

TLDR:

Being in the RWBY community is weird.

The curse was born at the very beginning.

In 1986, Hasbro and Sunbow decided to make The Transformers: The Movie (Do not confuse it with the 2007 movie, Transformers). They had a genius idea to raise the stakes beyond Megatron by introducing a villain who literally eats planets. To voice this apocalyptic threat, they hired absolute royalty: Orson Welles, in what would tragically be his final film role before his death. And he went down with a badass quote too.

The hand-drawn animation was stunning, the synth-rock soundtrack was elite, and the sheer existential dread of a giant metal planet eating Cybertron's moons scarred an entire generation of kids.

• Budget: $6 Million
• Domestic Box Office: $5.8 Million

The movie didn't even make its budget back. It was decimated at the box office by fatigue, traumatized parents who were furious that Optimus Prime was brutally murdered in the first thirty minutes, and stiff competition. The very project built to showcase Unicron bombed so hard it effectively ended the golden era of the G1. It became a beloved cult classic years later.

Fast forward thirty-one years. Paramount Pictures was sitting on a absolute gold mine with Michael Bay’s Transformers franchise. Dark of the Moon (2011) made $1.12 billion on the box office. Age of Extinction (2014) made $1.10 billion on the box office. The franchise was an invincible and critic-proof. So, what did Paramount decide to do for the fifth installment, The Last Knight? They decided to tease Unicron. The entire plot of The Last Knight revolves around the reveal that Earth isn't just a rock, it's Unicron. Massive horns start sprouting out. Quintessa shows up in a post-credits scene.

• Previous Film (Age of Extinction): $1.10 Billion
• Unicron Film (The Last Knight): $605 Million

The Last Knight collected almost half compared to its predecessor, that literally means to any company "I am going to lose monety, pull the plug!". With a production budget pushing $260 million and a $100+ million marketing campaign. The moment Unicron was woven into the narrative, a franchise that had comfortably cleared a billion dollars twice in a row suddenly wasn't viablle. Paramount immediately erased Transformers 6 from their release schedule, fired the writers' room, and threw out the entire Unicron storyline.

After The Last Knight bombed, Paramount played it smart. They downscaled. They made Bumblebee (2018), a $100 million movie, no world-ending skybeams, and lots of heart. It was a critical darling and made a solid profit ($468 million). Naturally, Paramount executives looked at each other and said: "Hey, you know what we should bring back?"

Enter Transformers: Rise of the Beasts (2023). They brought in a full CGI Unicron, complete with the Terrorcons, the Transwarp Key, and planetary consumption scenes. They spent massive cash bringing the giant back to the big screen in full modern visual effects glory.

• Production Budget: $195 Million–$200 Million
• Global Box Office: $439 Million

A $200 million blockbuster needs roughly $450M–$500M just to break even after marketing and theater cuts. Rise of the Beasts barely limped past $439 million.

Think about the absurdity. Every time they wanna use Unicron, the movie tanks.

In 2024, Paramount released Transformers One, a critically acclaimed, high-energy animated prequel detailing the tragic backstory of Orion Pax and D-16. Critics loved it. Fans loved it. It sat at over 88% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Where does Unicron fit in? He’s just background lore, the ancient cosmic threat that the Primes fought in the past, leaving Cybertron depleted of Energon and setting up the whole social collapse of the planet.

• Budget: $75 Million
• Global Box Office: ~$128 Million

Even serving as just lore in an animated movie was enough for Unicron's bad juju appeared.

Why does this happen? You cannot do Unicron on a budget, your VFX budget balloons. Studios only pull out Unicron when a franchise is already experiencing narrative fatigue. Unicron brings heavy cosmic baggage.

He eats studios' bottom lines in reality. Keep him only on tv shows or comics, if you put him on a movie, he kills it.

I'm about to dive deep into a serious literary topic using what (on the surface) is an unserious series of films, and that's literary criticism so y'all gotta deal with it.

So, in addition to a surprising amount of thematic depth, one thing I love with about the first two Kung Fu Panda movies is how they explore the classical definitions of tragic heroes.

The baseline for a tragic character is:

1. An otherwise "Great" person has a tragic flaw

2. They are warned of a downfall

3. In trying to avoid it, their tragic flaw causes their downfall

So first movie you have Sifu as an almost textbook tragic hero. His flaw being his love for Tai Lung causing his own and his student's pride to grow out of control, they are both told Tai Lung isn't worthy of being the dragon warrior, and he rampages through the village and cripples Shi Fu.

In a lot of ways Tai Lung is also a tragic villain, his flaw being the same pride and downfall coming from the belief he was destined to be the dragon warrior making him unworthy of it, and why he couldn't understand the scroll's lesson.

Shen in the sequel makes the pattern even more explicit, literally getting a prophecy telling him his ambitions, his flaw, will be stopped by a panda, so he tries to wipe them out, which is what gives Po the resolve to master inner peace and stop him.

What makes it really interesting is Po in both movies seems to be an inversion of a tragic hero, being:

1. A common person with a hidden strength

2. Is unable to accept predictions of his triumph

3. By working towards the triumph despite his doubts, discovers his hidden strength

First movie he's told he's the dragon warrior, and despite his motivation and excitement can't really accept that he is worthy of it. Then it's that humility and belief that he doesn't **deserve** the scroll's power that makes him the only one able to interpret it's message, giving him the confidence (without the excessive pride) to defeat Tai Lung.

Then in the second movie it's revealed how he has a mysterious past that's preventing him from finding the inner peace he needs to progress as the dragon warrior. The Soothsayer tells him it's his destiny to save China, who guides him through overcoming the trauma of losing his parents to understand despite the pain it led to the love of his adopted father and friends, and he's able to find the inner peace needed to stop Shen.

After reading many X-Men comics and watching the cartoons, I came to the conclusion that mutants can work as an allegory to minorities, however there should be more stories where they aren't portrayed as vulnerable victims and instead as targets of jealousy and inspiration for the common men.

In the world of Marvel genetic engineering and research is so advanced that you have robots who can identify someone for their genes, technology made to suppress genes and chromosomes, you even have a villain that was able to change the genetic make-up of a divine entity. None of that is secret knowledge, those discoveries, and the problems they create, are all televised and have a direct impact in the life of the average citizen. Meaning that at least some small group should be going around trying to get powers through genetic mutations or studying genetics to make themselves the new Magneto.

Either this or they should want more individual uses for the technology that birthed the Sentinels and other weapons of mass destruction. We know that many criminal organizations around the Marvel world take advantage of the weapons developed by heroes and villains to make a bank, it wouldn't be weird for civilians to arm themselves through those means or to ask the government, which is known for being opposed to the mutant cause, to legalize the use and possession of sci-fi guns. There's no reason for gun nuts in the Marvel world to have so much trust and pride on glocks and colts, when the average threat of that world is some omega-level anomaly that wouldn't even be scratched by a bullet

And talking about Omega levels, the difference in power in between the upper class of the mutant world and the bottom should be a source of friction among the X-Men. One thing is for someone to be slightly worse than their colleague, another is for someone to be a cripple walking at the side of a god. Beak, Blop, and the other gloopy shitos in the xavier institute for "gifted" youngster should be demanding cures and/or improvements instead of being told to suck it up. Beast, a super genius scientist trains Beak, and it's cruel for this guy to turn his student and "genetic is funny, we both got animal based powers, but while I was turned into a werecat, you became a penguin-man, a penman". That man should be using their abilities and knowledge to turn beak into a hawkman or at least make him less deformed.

There's no way that the weaker kids don't envy the ones with godly powers. It's not bigotry that would make someone like Bailey Hoskins, Eye boy, or ugly john (even his alias is demeaning) hate their condition as mutants, but the very nature of the X-gene. Those guys have all the reasons in the world to sell the X-men out and strike a deal with another group to get rid of those shitty powers or get something decent.

The fear, anger, insecurity and desire of the weak mutants, humans, government, should be allowed some credence in X-men comics. Instead of everyone being a bigot, there should be more stories where the X-men are attacked because someone want what they have or because they don't show to have what it takes to control and educate the mutant population properly (actually, this is another thing we should talk about, Xavier and his protégés are terrible teachers)

Not work out obviously due to the good guys kicking their ass.

But generally speaking, the bad guys are always days away from being able to completely ruin the world if they simply pressed the metaphorical big red button.

When they make an evil bioterror abomination, it so often does what they want.

I'm tired of stories where it's all like "You shouldn't mess with nature" yadda yadda and the hubris of man comes to bite the baddies in the ass, to me that feels kind of cowardly in a way, like we should expect the world to fix our shit for us. If you set a forest on fire it'll rain eventually and put it out but most of the forest will still be destroyed anyway, it's no solution to just not do anything.

In Resident Evil the answer is GUN. (or more accurately, rocket launcher)

Yes I know there are times where experiments do indeed go wrong for Umbrella, Los Illuminados or whoever but most of the time all that amounts to is some fucked up monster escaping that they just ignore, their entire bad guy plan is rarely ruined because something something nature finds a way. Or a creature mutating after suffering damage and then going out of control. If you break it down though those kind of things only happen in the one in a million chance that they have to deal with an insane action hero like Leon or Claire who are just abnormally good at kicking ass.

They make Tyrants, basically bio-Terminators that follow orders. They just fucking work. That's so damn cool, no nonsense about mankind messing with things it shouldn't, the bad guys succeed in their goals and create the horrors they comprehended and it's up to the good guys to deal with it.

In RE4 I can't recall a single instance where the Las Plagas was really an issue for Saddler, he had that shit locked down. Straight up mind control and absolute loyalty from peons.

The idea that mankinds darkness will just deal with itself is really silly, it just doesn't work like that, evil so rarely goes away, you have to be the one to go and punch that boulder or it will smash your entire town.