The Justice League would be like a pantheon of gods looking down on us from on high. At any moment they could go rogue and destroy absolutely everything and no one would be able to stop them.
The Avengers may be more flawed, but they're also more human and approachable for the most part. Like a special law enforcement agency. There'd still be a fear of their might, but the fact that none of them really have secret identitiies means that they'd just be like celebrities whose lives we can peer into to help reassure us that they're mostly human too.
>>71525475 I think the reason is that there is too much chaos, infighting, conflict and power abuse withing marvel and that marvel's super"heroes" often aren't all that heroic. At all. Also they are state founded and are part of a goverment agency of the united states.
The JL is neutral towards states and are literally just there to protect people and fight monsters and shit. Their headquarters is even in space to be impartial enough.
>>71525534 >The Justice League would be like a pantheon of gods looking down on us from on high. At any moment they could go rogue and destroy absolutely everything and no one would be able to stop them.
Yes, but they won't, they are the justice league, they may be more powerful and godly, but i trust them way more than a bunch of statist cunts like the avengers, superman will help your cat from a tree. Captain america will fight "terrorists" in the name of israel.
I have always identified with Lex Luthor and I understand the fear is also coming from envy.
I dont want super powers around if I dont have them.
I dont want my life and existence hinging on a tiny group of people put together by happenstance. I wouldnt like to feel that lose of control.
So, yeah, kill em, replace them, whatever, but fuck them entirely. There was an arc of The Authority where the powers that be on earth, as far as the richest most politically powerful humans, got rid of the entire team, replaced them qith people they could control. I always thought that made so much sense, if super powers can be produced, fuck those assholes who lucked into them, lets replace them with our own trained assholes under our supervision.
But we wouldn't know that. If they existed in the real world, we wouldn't have comic books which allow us to peer into their lives and feel like we know them.
All we'd know is that there is an independent group of godlike beings who refuse to reveal their real names and identities, have their own agenda and spend a lot of their time on a weaponised space station.
That would be terrifying for a lot of people. At least the Avengers would have to answer to SHIELD and would have identities which could be used to hold them accountable for their actions. The Justice League would only answer to their code of ethics and the only reason you're saying you'd confide in them in that way is because you read cape comics and have a deeper understanding of their motivations than you realistically would.
Again, there's accountability, though. When a cop abuses his power, there's scandal all over the news about it. People get named, people ask for retribution and we all become aware of it.
If Captain America went and beat some kid to a pulp for no apparent reason, he'd be all over the news and the media and SHIELD would make him answer for it.
If Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman did the same thing,the news and the media would probably be in an uproar but they would have no leverage to hold them accountable for their actions. It would be entirely up to them whether or not they want to take responsibility.
That's the difference between the Avengers and the Justice League: the Justice League are gods. They answer to no one but their own moral compasses. The Avengers are world police. They have superiors and chains of command and public identities. They can be held accountable.
>>71525696 >If Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman did the same thing,the news and the media would probably be in an uproar but they would have no leverage to hold them accountable for their actions. It would be entirely up to them whether or not they want to take responsibility.
Well no they'd get beaten to a pulp by the other big dogs
>>71525696 >That would be terrifying for a lot of people. At least the Avengers would have to answer to SHIELD and would have identities which could be used to hold them accountable for their actions. The Justice League would only answer to their code of ethics and the only reason you're saying you'd confide in them in that way is because you read cape comics and have a deeper understanding of their motivations than you realistically would.
Yeah, that's what i want. The avengers answering to the Americans. I take gods over americans every single day of the week.
I like BIG DC characters more, all my favorites characters are marvel characters, but the more popular one is daredevil, i love mk, iron fist, beta ray bill. But the "big ones" of marvel are mostly assholes (yes picking your old aunt over your family is being a dick).
The JL makes imposible for american troops to invade any innocent country. It makes russia less prone to intervension. It makes israel shit their pants. The global powers will fear the JL, but after a year without war, the world will see the JL as a good influence:
After a year of avengers the avengers would be killing people in the middle east.
Is better to arm yourself to protect your country from gods in the sky that to fight another country.
>>71525889 >The JL makes imposible for american troops to invade any innocent country. It makes russia less prone to intervension. It makes israel shit their pants.
So we'd be powerless to stop them, forced to abide by the black and white code of ethics they impose on us lest we be dismantled by them for being evil.
Every nation would be held hostage by a group of god-like beings who decide what we should and shouldn't do and actively prevent us from taking any actions which could be considered dangerous to the abstract concept of peace.
>The global powers will fear the JL, but after a year without war, the world will see the JL as a good influence:
Maybe, but it wouldn't change the fact that the JL would have essentially taken over the world.
There's a reason they don't usually deal with the idea of the JL stopping wars in comics.
It borders on dictatorship.
>After a year of avengers the avengers would be killing people in the middle east.
But they would have to answer for that. They could answer for that. People could protest and debate and hold them accountable for their actions.
You couldn't do the same with the League.
>Is better to arm yourself to protect your country from gods in the sky that to fight another country.
>All these people saying they'd trust the Justice League.
Let me give you a scenario.
Pretend for a moment that you've never read a single cape comic. Cape comics don't even exist.
Now, imagine that one day a man who could punch through steel, fly, shoot lasers from his eyes and was basically indestructible came out of nowhere and revealed he was an alien from another planet.
Sure, he claims that he only wants what's best for humanity and he's a nice guy, but every now and then, he loses his temper and you get a sense of just how dangerous he could be to all of humanity.
What reason would you have to trust this man if you never met him personally? He's a nice guy, but so what? Does that make him trustworthy with godlike power?
Another scenario: imagine you live in a city beleagured by crime and corruption. Then, one day, an urban legend begins to surface about a creature that lurks in the shadows like a monster, preying on criminals and answering to no man. And then he begins to gain prominence and you see that he is an almost superhuman man with an arsenal enough to wipe the city off the map. He may be on your side, but would that make him any less intimidating? Would your heart not race if you ever saw him in a darkened alley, glaring at you over a mangled body?
Another scenario: imagine that you live in a city with a man who is capable of running at the speed of light and using that speed to basically do anything he wants. A man who could kill hundreds of thousands of people in less than a minute if he wanted to. Sure he seems like he's a down-to-earth everyman, but does that mean you can trust him with all that power? Would you trust a random stranger on the street with it?
And if you do trust these three people, let me ask you this: if a country armed itself to the nines with nuclear warheads but assured all its neigbouring countries that it would only use those warheads for the greater good, would you trust that country? Because they said you could?
1)Almost every member of the usual Avengers' lineup has on his record acts of colossal dickery and/or selfishness, and/or idiocy that directly endangered the whole world. The Hulk is not only a walking bomb waiting to go off, he deliberately went on a destructive rampage at least once (because of a thing that other supposed heroes did, too), Hank Pym created Ultron which nearly killed off humanity several times, Tony Stark and Cap America started a fucking civil war and no, Cap is not exempt from the blame, his fucking retarded position greatly contributed to the conflict, and in recent times Cap - at the very least - greatly faciliated two more big superhuman conflicts by being a fucking dick. In short, it is not even a stretch to see the Avengers as dangerous, untrustworthy people.
2)Avengers are affiliated with the US government to the sufficient extent that they can't be seen as impartial. But at the same time they explicitly do not subject themselves to any actual control by elected officials.
Sorry for viewing the question through objective, realistic perspectives. I slobber all over cape cock too, but I can at the very least understand why they would be frightening in the real world, especially in the case of the Justice League.
>If you disagree, you're a casual.and don't read comics.
>JL actions would speak louder at the end of the day.
That's fair, but surely SURELY you are able to see why people would distrust them at least initially. SURELY you're able to at the very least comprehend the validity behind the idea of not trusting the JL completely the moment they appear on the scene, right?
I mean, in the real world you probably wouldn't even be that aware of their various actions and ideals.
I mean, I'm not crazy, am I? This makes sense, right?
>>71526537 I'd still slightly prefer the Justice League to the Avengers, simply because of their neutrality. Yes, they can't be held acountable, but neither can the Avengers really. At least the JL isn't directly working for a warmongering government that isn't mine.
I'd still want anything possible done to make my country defensible against the JL, of course. Slightly better is still pretty horrifying.
Dude, when Superman beats 3 monsters and 5 giant robots off of metropolis a week people are gonna trust and like him. If he's vouching for the JL, people are gonna like the JL. Some shit is public as fuck, like invasions (extradimensional, alien, subterranean) other shit is not (generally magic shit threatening to destroy reality) When these guys save your ass twice a week you're not gonna hate them.
Avengers on the other hand have Hulk who's basically just a monster, Iron Man,
I feel what you're saying but the Avengers, at the very least, can be held MORE accountable for their actions.
Iron Man suffered a lot of personal and professional consequences after Civil War.
Captain America was actually sent to prison for his actions.
Spider-Man is regularly slandered by the press and treated with antipathy.
Daredevil's entire identity went public.
And let's not get started on the X-Men.
While I'm definitely not arguing that the Justice League would be better for protecting the world at large, the Avengers would be a lot more trustworthy as an institution.
I'd argue you'd meet a lot more people who trust (but, perhaps, criticise) the Avengers in a real world scenario. As I said, they're world police. For the most part, people still trust the police, but they still rightfully criticise them, especially when controversy arises.
>>71526921 That's retarded. The point is she could've knocked him out and then, I dunno, talked to someone, asked for help, asked for opinions. In the meantime, keep him unconscious. I'm not saying that he didn't need to die, or that she did anything wrong. All I'm saying is that her options at that exact moment were not limited to snapping his neck.
>>71526973 How can they be held more accountable? Sure, you can hate them and shittalk them all you want, but that's true for the JL too. The Avengers aren't any more likely to stay in prison if they don't want to as the JL. The Mutants aren't held accountable, they're just hated regardless of what they do. I don't see why the Avengers are in any way preferable.
>>71525402 This was discussed a bit in a thread yesterday. Gonna toss it in because I believe it has a degree of relevance.
>Of gods and pretenders: Why a world distrusting Superman makes perfect sense…for now
>To many, the only distinction between the heroes of DC and Marvel are the companies that own them. Fans don’t see “DC heroes” and “Marvel heroes;” they only see “comic book heroes.” At the risk of sounding pretentious, however, that’s a very unobservant thing to say. When you look closely at the two rosters of heroes and the way the two companies approach their respective properties, a fundamental philosophical difference becomes apparent.
>To best illustrate it, consider a scenario:
>Imagine if Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Green Lantern and Flash (generally considered the core Justice League roster) were to be hit in the head with an anvil, wake up in the future and find there that world peace had been reached. Poverty had been eradicated. Crime had been abolished. Earth is basically Gene Roddenberry’s utopian fantasy. How would they react?
>Superman? He would, for the first time, get a good night’s sleep. For all of his time on earth he has heard the cries for help, the beggings for mercy, the shouts and the painful groanings of crime-stricken victims. At any given second he hears a million different people crying for anyone to rescue them. It becomes a white noise that is ever present, and one that he can tap into in order to search for the next opportunity to help. To wake up in a world of total peace would completely change him. He would still have super speed, super sight, the power of heat vision and the power of flight, but there would be no need ever to use them again. Superman–Clark Kent–was raised by altruistic, morally-minded, down-to-earth middle-Americans. He was taught the virtues of humility and service. Without a world to save, Superman would cease to exist. Clark Kent would probably marry Lois Lane and move to the ‘burbs.
>Batman? Here’s a guy whose entire life has been consumed by crime. His most vivid childhood memory is of a crime. His adolescence was shaped at boarding schools being teased by bullies with taunts describing that crime. His young adulthood was spent training to fight crime. His adult years were spent fighting crime. His elderly years (depending on what you read) will be spent at his computer, sending out drones and robots to fight crime in his stead. If he were to wake up in a world without crime, he very well might go insane and end up a super-criminal himself (there’s an “elseworlds” story to write about!). Bruce Wayne would probably sell all of his estate and give the money to various causes before moving to Tibet to live in a monastery, meditating until death.
>Wonder Woman? She’d just say “mission accomplished” and return to Themyscira to live out her days.
>Aquaman? Same. He’d return to the sea to rule as a king,likely never to surface again.
>Green Lantern? Very likely he would just leave the earth and journey to some other world to fight against injustices.
>Flash? Probably he’d donate himself to science and spend the rest of his life working very very quickly to invent the next great help to humanity.
>With the exception of Batman (who could probably use a few decades just meditating and calming the rage within him), DC’s heroes’ lives would be largely fulfilled, because those are the kind of heroes DC presents in their books. DC creates gods that pretend to be men. Take away the need to be a god and these heroes would see their life’s mission completed. Either they would retire or they would go off to find some other way to help some other people.
>Now imagine the same scenario as before, only make the heroes Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and the Hulk. How would they react?
>Captain America? He was a soldier before he was a super hero, but in a world without war, he would probably go looking for whoever was in charge and volunteer to be his bodyguard. Maybe he’d run for office. He’s a natural soldier; good at giving and taking orders, so his options are limited. In a world with no need for soldiers, he’d just be a man.
>Iron Man? What are his skills? He’s a tech genius, so maaaaybe he can help out in this future world, once he gets used to all the new technology that’s around. People say he’s Marvel’s version of Batman, but that’s only a superficial comparison that only focuses on their wealth and lack of super powers. Bruce Wayne is a detective, ninja, crime-fighting zealot who happens to be super rich. Iron Man is a super rich guy who happens to fight crime. Take away his suit and what is he? He’s a genius, billionaire, playboy philanthropist. Billionaire? No, He’s either lost in a crowd of many other rich dudes, or–if perhaps money is no longer a thing in this utopian future–he’s not even that. Playboy? A utopian fantasy world sees everyone as equal, social status is non-existent. Philanthropist? A world without poverty is a world without the need for charity. Tony Stark would be nothing. He’d just be a man.
>Thor? He is really Marvel’s spiritual-interpretation of Batman, in that he’s the one hero that is different from the rest. Steve Rodgers, Tony Stark, even Bruce Banner (when not provoked) are just men: Thor is an actual god, and that’s a rarity in Marvel’s world. If he were to wake up to a utopian Earth, he’d go back to Asgard as the guardian of a realm that didn’t need him anymore. He’d just be an immature god with no purpose or direction to focus his attention and drag him to maturity and heroism.
>Hulk? He’d never have a reason to get angry again. Simple as that. He’d be able to suppress the monster within, perhaps permanently, arriving at a defacto cure and returning him to being “just a man.”
>In this utopian world, the lives of Marvel’s heroes would suddenly feel minor, depressing and lost. because Marvel creates men that pretend to be gods. take away the need to be a god and these heroes would have no purpose. The reason is because the kinds of characters Marvel specializes in, are the kinds of characters that need a reason to exist. With the exception of Thor, Marvel creates men who pretend to be gods.
>That’s the big difference between the two companies. That’s why fans should not look at Man of Steel and Zack Snyder’s take on the DC cinematic universe with contempt. These characters are not Marvel characters. Their movies have to reflect that. Captain America doesn’t have to worry about a cult of people falling at his feet and worshiping him. At the end of the day he’s just a morally-pure soldier on the best steroids in history. But if a guy like Superman suddenly showed up, you better believe people would start bowing their knee before him, while others would be fearful of him, and others still (like Lex Luthor) would use and manipulate that fear for their own purposes. The weight of responsibility, pressure, and even inherent-guilt that comes with BEING Superman is ten-times more weighty than being Iron Man or Hulk or even Thor (who, as stated, is depicted literally AS a god among men). Why wouldn’t Superman’s origin-story be filled with angst? Man of Steel may have been “grim” and “sad” but it’s the realest take on the character I’ve ever seen, simply because it gave me a very realistic portrayal of how someone like Kal El would be received in the real world.
>People were upset with Man of Steel movie because it wasn’t the take on Superman they thought it should be. What they wanted was the comic’s take on the character, and though that sounds like a reasonable and obvious way to go, you have to remember that in the world of the comics Superman has been around since 1938. People are used to him. Even when the comics reset and present Superman’s origin anew, the stories usually introduce him to the public as a savior that wins over the opinions of the people almost as soon as he bursts onto the scene. That’s fine for comics, because comics tend to gloss over the finer details of reality for a more stylized universe, where characters like Oswald Cobblepot and Captain Cold can pop up and no one bat an eye.
>The movie universe that Man of Steel established and that Superman v Batman will expand upon, is one where mankind believes it is alone in the universe and at the top of the foodchain on earth. The arrival of Superman threw that assured thinking for a loop and it will bring out of hiding other godlike heroes like Wonder Woman to continue shocking society. In that world it makes perfect sense that there would be people distrustful of Superman. When you think about it, it makes Richard Donner’s beloved take on the character silly and absurd. In the United States today, a congressman can’t talk about how best to handle the “illegal immigration problem” with the words “compassion” or “humane” without being attacked mercilessly by radio talk show hosts. Of COURSE the appearance of Superman–the most famous immigrant of the, all–showing up (and bringing three “countrymen” with him to wreak havoc on the earth) would be met with disdain and mistrust by some, and worship and adoration by others.
>This kind of take on the character has been hinted at in some comic stories, but rarely has it been explored in depth as it is in the new DC cinematic universe.
>There is a quote from the comics, spoken by Lex Luthor to Bruce Wayne, that seems to perfectly convey the tone these movies are striving for. Lex talks about Superman being an alien, whose thought process is inherently different from our own. We simply can’t predict what might cause him to suddenly decide the best course of action is to rule the planet like a tyrant. He might up and decide that the rainforest needs preserving so he will heat-vision a moat around one-third of South America. He might one day come to the conclusion that whales are better than humans and then its bye-bye people. We can’t understand the way he thinks because he’s not “one of us.” Lex and Bruce are having this discussion and Luthor kept referring to Superman as an “it.” Bruce finally replied that “it” has a name. To which Luthor said:
>"[a name] that we gave him, an attempt to humanize him — as pointless as naming a hurricane. Forget the name, Bruce– and think about what he can do… Think about a hurricane with a will. Then multiply that intensity a thousand fold."
>Bruce then replies “That’s some storm. Good thing he’s on our side.”
>Luthor then calmly retorts:
>"What if he changes his mind? What if… Tonight– he looks down at us and decides we’re not capable to manifest our own destiny? What if tomorrow he wakes up believing he knows what’s best for us? What if comes to believe that it’s not enough to protect the world…when he can just rule it? The only safeguard we have against that happening… is his word."
>No one wants to see a well-established Superman hated by the people. Luthor will always hate him. That’s his character, but ultimately Superman needs to be viewed as a hero to the world. As a way to introduce him, however, I can’t imagine a more real way to do it. Fans would do well to exercise a little patience, and let DC play its stories out. It’s clear that Batman goes after Superman in the upcoming film because he has bought into the hype that an alien being with such unchecked powers must be taken out for the good of humanity. Judging by the defaced statue in the recently released teaser, a lot of people agree with him. It will take some kind of mutual threat to force Batman and Superman to team up, and that threat will have to be big enough that humanity sees the need–despite the risks–in having a hero in blue and red watching from the skies.
>Until then, Superman will continue to be a god pretending to be a man, and man will rightly fear him as a result.
>>71527104 >How can they be held more accountable?
Well for one thing, they have SHIELD to answer to: a large, global organisation which has authority and a chain of command.
Another thing would be their public identities. When they do wrong, they can't just take off their costumes and hide away. We know who they are and we know their histories.
Another thing is that they're generally less powerful, meaning that it'd be a lot more likely that we could restrain them in the event that they should go rogue.
You can shit talk the JL, but that won't really affect the fact that they're the motherfucking JL and they don't care.
The Avengers are more likely to stay in prison just by virtue of the fact that they have public identities, are less powerful and answer to SHIELD.
With mutants it's less a matter of accountability and more a matter of their having to go through red tape and maintain appropriate public relations lest they instantly be targeted by Sentinels or SHIELD or whoever's got an eye on them that week.
The Avengers would be less intimidating from an existential point of view because of that accountability.
I've made no comments for them being a superior team, I'm not here for the repetitive console war nonsense.
I'm just making an objective argument as to why the concept of world police who answer to their superiors would be less intimidating than the concept of a pantheon of real-life gods who answer to themselves and only themselves.
>>71527212 Tony would definitely rejoice at being in the fucking future. He'd probably spend a couple of months/years learning about all the new tech they have (and comment on whether he already thought of it before), he'd then just start building shit for the sake of it. Eventually if he's fast enough he'd end up ahead of the curve again and get bored.
>>71526973 >And let's not get started on the X-Men.
On the other hand, let's.
X-Men are private militia, whose entire and explicit raison d'etre is to held mutants as a whole absolutely unaccountable to anyone but themselves. It is founded and ran by open and vocal mutant supremacists, who only disagree with Magneto insofar as they thing his methods are going to backfire, and believe that the humanity is going to go extinct naturally, if you give it time.
And given that you wonder why people in Marvelverse dislike both superheroes and mutants?
We understand what you mean but we are talking from a perspective of already knowing the JL, so we would trust them. So yeah the public would be scared for the first bit but after Superman saves the day for the millionth time in a year I think we'd see he's a pretty swell guy.
>>71527257 >they have SHIELD to answer to Except I can trust SHIELD no more than I could trust the JL.
>they're generally less powerful That doesn't help us if their powerhouses go out of control, or Tony decides he wants to reign some homebuilt nukes down on some country. >You can shit talk the JL, but they won't care By that logic, neither does Spiderman. >the concept of world police who answer to their superious would be less intimidating Maybe if those superiours are yours. But for non-americans, that would be arguably worse. At least if the JL goes rogue, I can count on all of humanity working against them.
Thor and Hulk might be weaker than Supes and Martian Manhunter, but this is a weak consolation for those stuck on the Earth when they break the planet in half. Even if we only count their average, normal feats rather than top wankery, they can only be stopped by other superhumans or carpetbombing their rough location with nukes and hoping they won't move away in the time it takes your missiles to reach them.
>answer to SHIELD
No, they fucking don't.
If you want to nitpick, they answer to SHIELD until SHIELD asks them to do something they don't like.
I'm asking you to not see it from the perspective of a comic book reader who knows these characters inside and out though.
I'm asking you to see it from the perspective of an everyday joe who probably hasn't even met a member of the Justice League and has lived through shit like Infinite Crisis, The OMAC Project and Parallax.
I mean, I just can't help but see completely trusting the Justice League without having countermeasures put in place in case this pantheon of gods should ever go rogue as anything but foolishly naive.
>>71526422 >And if you do trust these three people, let me ask you this: if a country armed itself to the nines with nuclear warheads but assured all its neigbouring countries that it would only use those warheads for the greater good, would you trust that country? Because they said you could?
No one answered this very good question because it would require them to be objective about superheroes and stop riding cape dick.
>>71527548 >SHIELD would be there to stop them And if some heroes of the JL go rogue, the JL is there to stop them. Except of course if SHIELD/JL as a whole turn evil, in which case we're equally fucked.
I just don't see how you can see the dangers of the JL so clearly, yet downplay those of the Avengers. They have a literal god among their ranks!
>>71527432 >At least if the JL goes rogue, I can count on all of humanity working against them.
The thing is that in Marvel there are plenty of powerhouses outside the avengers, meanwhile DC has most of its powerhouses inside the JL. I feel this is a big factor that makes people think that the avengers are easier to take down, that and the obvious infighting.
>>71527624 >And if some heroes of the JL go rogue, the JL is there to stop them.
MEaning, again, that the Justice League answers only to the Justice League. You're forced to place all your faith in a closed group of godlike individuals who you don't know the names or identities of.
You just have to have faith that they'll have your best interests in mind and that they'll always be there to protect you.
For someone so distrusting of government organisations like SHIELD and the Avengers, you seem awfully willing to place your faith in an organisation which is both more powerful than those two combined and who you wouldn't know half as well.
>I just don't see how you can see the dangers of the JL so clearly, yet downplay those of the Avengers. They have a literal god among their ranks!
I'm not downplaying the dangers of the Avengers, I think you're downplaying the dangers of the League.
I've pointed out that we'd be pretty fucked if the Avengers turned on us, I'm just aware that we'd probably be less fucked given the institutions that are in place in the Marvel Universe in comparison to the DC Universe. We'd know the Avengers. We'd know their names, their identities, who they answer to, where they're from.
All you'd know about Superman is that he's an alien who can bench the Earth and a nice guy.
If Superman showed up, I can't speak towards what the world would think, but I'm confident the US wouldn't trust him at first. Both political sides would want him regulated and doing more in completely different ways that stood to benefit their completely different agendas, and his refusal to do so would most likely be met with alienation. It'd take his defending us from a threat we couldn't stop on our own, and doing so in a manner generally in line with our ethics as a nation, and doing so when he has nothing to gain but much to lose that would get people on his side. Not all people, because /pol/ would call his doing so a false flag to lure us into trusting him, but it'd be enough to at least shift the conversation in his favor I believe, and after he did so enough times, I believe he'd have most of the public behind him. Now getting this back to the question of the thread, personally I think I'd recognize beings reminiscent of superheroes, and because of that I'd be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. Now I'm inclined to interpret OP's use of "like" as meaning these individuals would appear to be superhuman, but not literal translations of either the JL or Avengers. Giving them benefit of the doubt does not mean I'd trust them at first. I'd be inclined to defend them should they behave in a manner similar to those of the heroes I've grown up reading about, but the minute they worked outside the system in a way I felt was inappropriate I'd begin to worry. Now were their doing so exceptions to the standard that I had no problem with I'd be a little irked, but every superhero is eventually written in particularly darker stories every so often so I'd respect them as I do those. If they became the new standard though, very much like how I felt with MoS, I'd want to like them, but if they continued making choices I wasn't comfortable with, it'd be very difficult for me to.
>>71527548 >And then SHIELD works to take them down with those heroes still loyal to them. >Again, accountability. >If the Justice League did the same thing, all you could really do is shake your fist at their tower in space.
SHIELD does not have any more hold on the real powerhouses of the Avengers - i.e., people who can possibly be used to bring others to heel - than UN has on the Justice League.
And I mean, shit, the last time when the government tried to control supers this caused the Civil War and the Dark Reign, and the writers tried to outdo such other in showing how it was a badwrong idea.
Well say that the first time around yo. And my answer still stands. In my opinion, words have a bigger impact than than deeds in this day and age but when your actions include the acts of the Justice League, even accounting for the times a member has gone astray I can't see a reason to not believe they're generally good people.
I'm sorry but you seem very paranoid about this hypothetical situation.
>>71527198 >Aquaman? Same. He’d return to the sea to rule as a king,likely never to surface again.
but thats wrong Arthur would still be torn between his human side and Atlantian heritage kind of like a mixed kid growing up in the culture they're not familiar from despite being from there Arhut will still be dealing with the xenophobia of Atlantians, although assuming this is utopia there wouldn't be such things so ...he would still rule Atlantis but occasionally come up to the surface cause he was raised there its still his home
>Green Lantern? Very likely he would just leave the earth and journey to some other world to fight against injustices he's a space cop
as long as I didn't live near NYC (which I don't) I would be fine with avengers. I'd be more worried about JLA because they seem more likely to get involved in petty crimes and meddle with shit that isn't world endangering stuff
>>71526780 well yes it did....Green Lantern: Emerald Night also lets include when GL(Hal) tried to rewrite history lets throw in another GL(John) who, from his arrogance accidentally was the cause of why a planet got destroyed
>>71526973 i actually think it would be harder to trust Avengers just because of SHIELD being right there next to them. SHIELD if applied in the real world would be CIA and we all know the NUMEROUS conspiracies that arise from time to time as new information is leaked imagine if the public got hold of SHIELDS's secrets and information because we all know that there will be people trying to leak info and proving they evil constitution trying to take over the world WHILE backing the Avengers
>>71526422 It's a Catch 22 m8. Let's assume DC and Marvel never existed but comics as a medium still did, and lets assume Mark Waid still wrote Irredeemable. Now I'd get the parallels to Superman, and I'd be faced with two options. I either take him at him word, leaving mysef exposed to the possibility he is being dishonest, and is going to let the other shoe drop where he either destroys the world and/or takes it over, or I and the rest of humanity be skeptical of him, despite all his actions only being performed to protect us, and keep us safe, and despite our not being able to come up with something to stop him, we eventually alienate him and be the reason he either destroys the world and/or takes it over. This could apply to any of your hypothetical not-Superman, Batman of Flash. In either case, we're fucked. The only difference is in one scenario we are culpable for triggering our demise, and in the other we aren't. Personally, I like not being responsible for bad things happening, so I'd be inclined to take them at their world, acknowledging that there is a 50/50 chance they are being honest, because should they wind up on the 50 where they are being honest, and just trying to make the world better, I think I'd like getting to live in the world their actions lead us to.
>>71526973 >No, the guy who you knew almost nothing about. You just saw Wonder Woman snap his neck on television. Honestly, there is a chance he'd be known from his time with the JLI, and Booster coming out as a character witness that Max had killed Ted would add some credibility to Wonder Woman's declaration that he was mind controlling Superman into beating up her and Batman, and that he had vowed to to use Superman to fuck up the world if she didn't kill him my god, did Goyer just crib that entire situation for the end of MoS?
I would be horrified by any and all violent vigilantism irl. Even if Iron Man was state sanctioned he'd be grossly overpowered, but the fact that he just does whatever the fuck he wants is terrifying. Superman could kill everyone in the world on a whim if he wanted.
The fact that superheroes are (mostly) non lethal would certainly be a positive factor, but it'd be balanced out by the ridiculous violence that they're routinely capable of (how many limbs has Batman snapped?).
The only kind of superhero I'd be ok with would be one that only operates in search and rescue operations, damage control, etc. That would be really boring, though, and not really require a costume or secret identity.
>>71525696 If you think Cap, or any other Avernger, answers to SHIELD in any way, shape or form beyond the merest formality, then you are so amazingly stupid it's a wonder you can turn the computer on, much less type sentences.
Last time SHIELD tried to make Captain answearable to a law he started an underground superhero movement and a civil war.
>>71526422 >Now, imagine that one day a man who could punch through steel, fly, shoot lasers from his eyes and was basically indestructible came out of nowhere and revealed he was an alien from another planet. He stops crime almost always rescuing any hostages and never killing criminals. He rescues people from natural disasters, talks down suicides, is always nice and smiling. Risks his life and limb to protect the people from others with enormous power rivaling his own and then checks too be sure noone else got hurt. May or may not be Jesus second coming. I would trust him with my life.
>Then, one day, an urban legend begins to surface about a creature that lurks in the shadows like a monster, preying on criminals and answering to no man. And then he begins to gain prominence and you see that he is an almost superhuman man with an arsenal enough to wipe the city off the map. Crime and corruption have gone down since he appeared. Even with crazy madman and actual literal monsters roaming the streets he saves people. He never hurts anyone innocent and has hurt himself, people have seen him bleeding, just to save people and make the city safer. You know he is not corrupt exactly BECAUSE he is not part of the corrupt system. If you see him in a dark alley, the only reason to be afraid is if you done a crime. I'm no criminal so I trust him.
Another scenario: imagine that you live in a city with a man who is capable of running at the speed of light and using that speed to basically do anything he wants. A man who could kill hundreds of thousands of people in less than a minute if he wanted to. Has he done so? He fights bank robbers and murderers and monsters all day, erryday. He's probably wanted to kill people several times in his carrer. But yet. Nothing. No superspeed murders that can't be pinned on the yellow copy. Sure enough, I can trust him.
>>71526422 >>71532143 Cont. >And if you do trust these three people, let me ask you this: if a country armed itself to the nines with nuclear warheads but assured all its neigbouring countries that it would only use those warheads for the greater good, would you trust that country? Because they said you could? What, the country who built a tyrant left him alone for decades and only killed him whenit needed oil? The one who taught a bunch of crazy religious nuts how to be terroirist and then got surprised when they turned against it? Who used a terrorist attack as an excuse to attack the wrong country just because of oil? The one with a failing education system and a penchant for violence? I wouldn't trust it with anything, much less the control of metahumans.
Actions speak. I trust people whose actions speak of nobility and heroism not those whose actions speak of incompetence, undirected violence and sheer stupidity. More than half of the Avengers problems can be directly traced back to themselves.
Anyone read Marvels by Busiek and Ross? It depicts the events of the Marvel Universe through the eyes of a reporter in actual time. As in, it starts off in the 1930's with the appearance of Jim Hammond, the original Human Torch and Namor to the early 1970's when Green Goblin killed Gwen Stacy.
The reason why Marvel civilians are batshit paranoid is because they've dealt with decades of superhuman events like a merman declaring war against the surface world, a mutant supremacist threatening to nuke the world, and the advent of Galactus.
Pre-52 DC Earth is a different story. They have a long history of superhumans fighting for good like the JSA and All-Star Squadron. And then Superman appeared. He was the first of the new generation of heroes in the post-WW2 era. There's this handsome human-looking guy whose always saving the day, never camera shy and willing to stop and chat with reporters, and giving a good impression that there are indeed good and honest metahumans out there.
It was because of the selfless sacrifice and tireless dedication of Superman and his predecessors that DC Earth treat superhumans on a case-by-case basis. Some are good, some are bad. It's why the JLA is honored as heroes and role models.
On Marvel Earth, it's not as clear-cut because you have Jameson smearing Spider-Man which raises suspicion against masks. Even the Avengers dealt with public hostility because of the induction of Hawkeye (a former criminal) and 2 ex-members of Magneto's Brotherhood (Pietro and Wanda).
Then, you have shit like a former Avenger (Hulk) going berserk across the country and causing untold property damage. Mutants popping up during the time when nuclear weapons and energy were more prevalent, thus triggering the X-Gene amongst the unsuspecting population. The kid next door can suddenly spontaneously combust. Another can control your thoughts, so on and so forth. That shit would make ANYONE even comic readers be wary as fuck to mutants.
>>71527187 >>71527198 >>71527212 Oh hey this is pretty great and insightful. Nice. >>71527222 I'm sorry what? >>71527230 >>71527239 >>71527250 And you just went full retard. That isn't the problem with Man of Shit at all. The problem with it is that it reads like a Marvel comic. with Superman killing Zod, with a battle that probably killed more civilians than the villains doom machine had at that point, with Johnathan dieing a pointless death that could have easily been avoided. It's not because it's a origin story, it's because it's not Supermans origin story. His origin stroy should always be about him saving a plane or something, beign a hero and generally a good guy before some villain even shows up.
>>71527469 >Infinity Crisis From the point of Everyday Joe, the skies turned red, there was white wall that eats people and now it's gone and everybody is back. The heroes saved the day. The first Flash even died to make sure he didn't. A few years later Kid Flash becomes the new Flash and he is kinda proud to hear of it on the news.
>The OMAC Project Everyday Joe doesn't know Batman had a hand on that. Far as he knows it was some spy agency on the government pocket that shat itself. And then the heroes saved the day again.
>Parallax Evil Cyborg Man destroyed Coast City. Green Lantern went to space and never came back. We went without a Green Lantern for some time but the there was a new kid. Now the old lanterns are back too. Kinda weird but ok.
You're talking about seeing from the point of view of the common Joe but you're the one using meta knowledge to distort the facts.
>>71527548 Fair enough, but if the Avengers go rogue, SHIELD would be there to stop them because they're a global peacekeeping organisation. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA >And then SHIELD works to take them down KEKEKEKEKEKEKEKEK
The funniest thing is you're serious, you believe that. Captain America alone can take Shield down, probably subvert most of it to his side. Iron Man can make helicarriers rain from the sky with a few lines of code. And if you really think they could anything to Hulk or Thor then you are high.
>>71533061 >>71533049 hey remember that time the Amazons of Themiscara invaded the US and killed hundreds of thousands US troops and civilians? Hey how about that time green lantern's city got destroyed and he went apeshit? Or the batman and how he rules an entire city through fear?
DC's been making it's heroes dark and edgy for a long time.
>>71527548 Have you actually read any comics? Or even seen the tv show? Except for a dozen or so named characters, most of which are Avengers themselves, the rest of SHIELD is hilariously incompetent. If you put two normal innocent baby turtles on SHIELD custody for a day you would come only to find one of the turtles has escaped after killing dozens of their best agents. How? Noone knows. You can find the turtle sleeping in the sun outside the door. The other turtle managed to subvert the rest of the SHIELD agents to HYDRA and taken over the base. It keeps happening. The turtle isn't even in HYDRA. It's actually just as confused as you are.
>>71527548 If anything, the DC humans would have a far easier time taking down the Justice League as they have several government superhuman teams and integrated superhuman soldiers in combat units. Meanwhile 90% of MU government supers are Captain America clones at best.
So basically what I'm getting from this thread is that no matter how well-constructed or reasonable your argument is, if you even so much as imply that you wouldn't immediately trust the Justice League 100% and hate the Avengers constantly, you're an idiot who doesn't read comics.
At some point you just need to realise you're arguing with manchildren holding severely stunted views of how the world works outside of comics and stop trying to break through their hardened shell of fanaticism.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.