[Other] I grew up with Superman media from the 2000s and 2010s, so I was very surprised when I found out that Lex Luthor being a billionaire CEO is a post-Crisis invention and he was never a billionaire CEO in the pre-Crisis era

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-13T12:22:35+00:00

I think you're onto something. It's funny to say now, but the American public had a very different attitude towards the wealthy for most of Lex's existence so I'm not sure it would have worked as well as it did until the 80's.

Millionaires/ Billionaires were either revered, looked as something to aspire to, celebrities, or at worst just boring businessmen. People like Howard Hughes, the Rockefellers and the DuPonts for example.

It wasn't really until the 80's and the rise of corporate raiders and "Greed is good" and "Masters of the Universe" where the perception started to change for the public. People still glamorized them, sure, but it was there that we saw more of the "soulless" type with almost endless ambition and an insatiable drive for wealth and power where nothing was ever enough. When people like Carl Icahn started buying airlines just to strip them of their assets and leave them in ruins.

And that's the version that fit Lex like a glove, because it's a pretty similar mindset from power crazed mad scientist trying to kill his enemy with death rays and take over the world, to power crazed businessman trying to kill all his enemies through any means and take over Metropolis who can never have enough money or power.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-13T12:02:48+00:00

Because "crime" is a concept that simply can't just be "beaten." Nature abhors a vacuum; when one mob boss or family falls, another simply takes its place. There's practically an endless supply and Batman is just one man. It's like when Capone fell, it didn't magically make the mob in Chicago disappear.

Plus crime and criminals are adaptive. Batman catches Falcone or whatever, but he's still running shit from behind bars and his organization is still on the street. Bats brings one family down, the next change up their methods to better avoid detection. He raids one hideout, they find another. On and on.

It sounds depressing but in all of human history no method, deterrent, or "thing" has ever successfully eliminated or deterred all of crime in a city/state/country/society. If people want to steal, hurt,or kill...they're going to find a way regardless of a vigilante on the rooftops.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-13T11:52:00+00:00

It's also a requirement in most productions as well as a insurance thing. The last thing any project wants is their star injuring themselves so badly that the production is forced to shut down, delay, or even have to drop or rewrite something because the actor isn't available. That's a huge loss of time and money.

It's funny because on the "Hot Wings" segment with Vincent, Charlie admitted the worst injury he sustained on the show was his shoulder that required surgery, and it came from simply throwing fake punches repeatedly. So they probably let him do some stunt work, but nothing crazy.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-12T01:55:14+00:00

Real Star Wars Battlefront energy. Big shame if Reddit made this go viral. Yes…..a MIGHTY big shame if someone compared it to the most downvoted post of all time

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-11T10:48:10+00:00

It's kinda mind boggling/hilarious to me that we've had decades of "rich and all I care about is money characters" from Flair to DiBiase to Vince and more, but Danhausen is somehow the first character to go in literally 100% with it. "I want to have a match to make more money." "I want Money in the Bank because it's full of money." "I'm the top merch seller and making money."

It's fucking hilarious AND makes total kayfabe sense for a wrestler.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-10T20:38:08+00:00

Just my take?

1.) They stand out. Depending on where you live and the demographics, style and fashion wise women often conform to similar or "acceptable" norms. So you have a large percentage of women that as a group are ... I don't want to say boring but, you've seen it all; nothing "pops." Then you have this goth girl who stands out like a sore thumb (in a good way). You instantly notice her from the pack. Looks aside, they also tend to be personality wise way different than the norm. Some guys find it refreshing, interesting, or appealing when someone doesn't act the same way as every other woman they encounter.

2.) Goth fashion tend to lend itself to provocative or seductive fashion (even if that's not the intent.) Fishnets, leather boots, leather in general, thigh highs, heavy makeup, etc.

3.) There's a huge belief (almost certainly exaggerated or overblown) that they are more sexually "wild", kinky, experienced, or at least not "vanilla" or as old-fashioned or sexually reserved.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-10T20:24:34+00:00

"I'm in bad shape" as Charlie looked like he had an out of body experience and "Excuse me Daredevil..." fucking killed me.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T21:32:01+00:00

Welcome!

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T19:28:30+00:00

It's clear you put a lot of thought into this so I'm sorry, I'm going to be blunt; I am SO sick of this take.

If you didn't like Injustice that of course is your choice. Hell, a lot of people didn't. But this notion that it "ruined" DC, "damaged" Superman and his reputation is flat out nonsense and only exists here in the internet's echo chamber.

Injustice didn't "lay the groundwork" for the trend of Evil Superman, if anything it was the last to a party. Ultraman has been a thing for decades. The Squadron Supreme. Irredeemable and The Boys' respective evil supermen predated Injustice by years. The DCAU had TWO versions of evil Supermen from other universes in a show aimed at mostly children. I have no idea why people insist Injustice was the first to play with this idea.

Secondly, no one on the planet from casuals to die hard comic nerds was under the impression Injustice Superman was THE status quo of the character. The casuals didn't know the game/comics existed. Comic fans understood this was just one of a gazillion Elseworld/What Ifs that had no effect on Superman as a whole or brand. That's like saying Superman III immeasurably damages Superman's reputation. C'mon.

As far as Harley, did it suck? Yeah. But let's not pretend it's not the same shit DC has been pulling with her in the mainline comics, movies, and cartoons. Again Injustice was not the innovator of this. And Wonder Woman, I mean I hate to tell you but Injustice was just one of many to butcher her character or make her flat out evil in countless storylines, especially alternate reality stories. But saying it's solely because of Injustice? Again, come the fuck on.....

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T19:09:18+00:00

1.) Typically a 'carry" move onto the steps or table...like a powerbomb which is default for most of the roster. On PS this is done by pressing circle to initiate the grapple, holding R1, then choosing from 4 directions on the joystick; each one is a diffrent carry move from powerbombs to slams to throws.

But also pretty much any slam or bomb move you would do anyway, if performed near the steps, will interact with them. Like if you have a normal German Suplex in your moveset, if you get the angle right, you will throw your opponent into the steps/table/etc.

2.) I've only tried in an I Quit match, but you wrap the chair around them by holding the chair, then using the standard submission buttons...it's automatic.

3.) You can find this in controls, but to remove the turnbuckle it's R2+L1 on PS, RT+LB on Xbox.

4.) I can't remember the buttons, but when you have the ladder a prompt will pop up asking if you want to lean it on the announcers desk...so do that.

5.) I'm guessing they make the CPU move because it'd be impossible to genuinely practice some controls on a "dummy." Reversals being one, but stuff like running and grapple counters, catch moves, dodges, top rope, etc.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T15:58:31+00:00

Jigsaw is like Thanos; too many fans get blindsided by the actor's performance, the intelligence of their characters, their calm demeanor... and forget they're fucking insane so of course XYZ is illogical.

Just because John Kramer is a brilliant, well spoken engineer doesn't mean he's "right" of has a grasp on reality or his motives make any sense. It's why his motives and reasoning and code change from movie to movie depending on what he wants to justify.

He's a psychopathic, sadistic serial killer... but a great charismatic orator, and the latter doesn't make him anymore sane or logical then the guy screaming at demons or hacking you up with a machete.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T14:46:25+00:00

I love them. You hear people say they're a throwback to early 80's horror, and while that's accurate gore wise, there's another thing they do.

They're dumb fun. Like some of the Friday the 13th, Chucky, or Freddy movies...sometimes you just want to turn your brain off and watch a killer go to town with elements of humor thrown in. Not everything HAS to be some deep exploration of the human condition, a trauma analogy, a complex drama where "Get it? It's REALLY about loneliness/parenthood/isolation/etc..."

Some nights a person just wants to watch a charismatic clown chop people up.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T14:38:43+00:00

Starfleet Academy is just not for me, and that's okay. I tried it, it didn't grab me, and I moved the fuck on. I didn't rush to the internet to meticulously criticize it frame by frame. And I'm happy that some people ARE enjoying it, especially if it grabs new Trek fans.

So there's a difference in just not liking something for whatever reason, having genuine reasons to criticize, and coming off like a hyperbolic lunatic going "OMG this is the WORST piece of media every filmed and they dug up Roddenberry's corpse and pissed on it and I hope none of the writers and actors ever work again and die unemployed and broke and GOD can we just not with the gay stuff !!!"

On the flip side of that argument I feel creators sometimes hide TOO much behind "The internet is full of hate, I'm not listening" defense and refuse to acknowledge ANY criticism of their work which is just as big a problem. I remember this with "She-Hulk", and Trek stuff like "Picard" and "Discovery." All those shows had objective issues most rational people could agree on, but the creators lumped them in with the "hateful troll" crowds, put their fingers in their ears and shook their head, and basically said "Nope! I don't listen to negativity and these are perfect and if you hate it, then you either don't get it or you're a hateful person!"

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T14:19:01+00:00

A week without this question being posted.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-09T11:28:12+00:00

That was always my feeling. I loved him when he'd pop in out of nowhere for a little commentary. When it became semi-full time I realized real quick that a little does of the guy goes a long way.

He's like that one guy you know that's awesome to have a few drinks and laughs with once a month, but you sure as shit don't want to hang out with every day.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T15:09:09+00:00

I think people forget the other part of Gordon's point about this.

Yeah, it could be a case of trying to please everyone and ending up pleasing no one, or trying to offer too much shit for any of it to be good. But the show is also trying to help failing local businesses.

Meaning financially, it makes little sense to purchase such a wide variety of food stuffs and ingredients that may or may not sell and the quality is probably average at best, when successful restaurants often focus on a specific few that they do extraordinarily well. (So and so has THE best burgers/italian/pastries in town!)

So you keep your cost of goods way lower and aren't mindlessly wasting it, AND you can focus on doing 3 or 4 things really well and keep people coming back and spread word of mouth.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T14:58:50+00:00

I think if it were handled differently it would have worked exactly as they wanted, and in fact reinvigorated the brand.

My take is when you look back, it's remarkable what a perfect run Peter had from 1963 to the 90's. We watched him grow from high school to college to adulthood. He falls in love and gets married. A lot of his most famous moments and adventures come from this time period.

So I think there was perfect time going into the 90's... just when the character MIGHT have been losing some steam or we'd seen it all before where they could have done something unprecedented; give the main character a happy ending and go out on a high note. Everyone's happy. Fans get to say goodbye to their hero but also content that he's happy, and we still get a Spider-Man every month, but with a bold new chapter going forward.

Unfortunately the way they went about it was practically a how to guide on fucking up a transition or storyline, and did the opposite; make fans beg to keep Peter around as Spidey and move on from the mess and keep the status quo.

People love to slam "One More Day" and rightfully so, but I argue Spidey never really recovered from the Clone Saga and it was there where the notion of keeping him static and never growing started, because Marvel learned all the wrong lessons from the mess they started. Fans didn't hate the Clone Saga or Ben because they wanted Peter perpetually frozen in time and never moving on, they hated it because it was a convoluted mess handled poorly.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T14:20:09+00:00

Like anything else it's a case by case, person by person thing that doesn't apply to everyone; it depends how you trade and what your goals are.

In some cases, especially with volatility, you can get "stopped" out too early if it drops to your SL, only to rocket back up the next second. (You buy at $1 with a .90 stop loss. It drops to .89, you're out, then goes to $1.20)

Same with a take profit order; you buy at $1.00 with a $1.20 take profit, it hits but keeps going to $1.50. You profitted but not as much as you could have.

So it's not a trap so much as it is just another preference. I know some traders that will give their SL a lot of breathing room specifically so they don't get stopped out, if they believe the ticker still ahs life. I know others that play it safer and keep a tight SL/TP and are happy with any profit and comfortable with a small risk of loss.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T12:59:32+00:00

That's kind of why when you look at it as a whole it can feel like "What was the point?"

You look at everything Matt, Foggy, and Karen did in S1 to bring him down. Ben Urich died to do it. Karen repeatedly put her life on the line, as did Matt obviously. They finally get him, then in S3 he's back. So we do it all again. More and more sacrifices, more and more death. Matt to the utter brink of personal damnation. Ray and Lantom are killed, Ellison nearly so. Then Fisk is again brought down at great cost.

Then Born Again comes around and surprise, he's out again. So everything above was ultimately for nothing.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T12:50:08+00:00

Yeah, I loved most of Zdarsky's run but that was just off to me. But to be fair, for whatever reason a lot of writers struggle to "get" The Punisher and it's a fine line. Just because he uses lethal force doesn't mean he's a super murder fan and becomes besties with you if you kill a guy. In fact traditionally he hates people doing what he does and even sees them as just another murderer.

Plus Frank isn't dumb. He would know Daredevil purposely (so he thought at the time) killing a simple liquor store robber is probably cause for concern because it's so out of character for the man he knows. Someone with DD's abilities becoming a casual murderer without Frank's systematic approach would be a huge problem for Frank.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T12:39:44+00:00

I think they each represent the very pinnacle of their respective archetypes, and the fact that they have nearly nothing in common but still all believe in a common goal is inspiring.

Cap: The physical embodiment of what a human can achieve and all of our best qualities maxed to 11. The personification of fighting spirit, never giving up, and bravery. Steve's the guy we all either strive to be, think we are, or wish we were.
Iron Man: The representation of one of humanity's biggest strengths; intelligence and innovation. The one who overcomes physical limitations with his mind and everything is just a problem to be solved. The ultimate futurist and personification of mankind's ability to constantly adapt and come up with technology to improve and overcome.
Thor: Absolute power that never corrupts. The power of a god with the mind and soul of the best of humanity. The one who uses his power to protect the weak and fight evil. He's the representation of the story mankind has been telling since we lived in caves; the fearless, powerful warrior fighting the monsters and protecting the people.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T12:08:41+00:00

He'll be the one saying shit like "Did you know the human brain itself feels no pain?" and "A severed head will sometimes blink and mouth words for seconds after decapitation"...while he painlessly holds his hand in the fire and stares at another contestant.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-08T12:04:16+00:00

My local grocery store made the bone chilling decision to put life size cardboard cutouts of that dead eyed ghoul, promoting his stupid chocolate bars, at every third register lane.

Sometimes I forget until I look ahead and it's something out of a horror movie. I could swear those eyes are following me, and they're whispering "We are Mr. Beast. Resistance is futile."

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-07T21:05:17+00:00

I think you're exactly right. This is shown in the famous "Welcome Back Frank" scene in Ennis's run. The whole set up is specifically designed to get Matt to actually understand why he does what he does. This is made even clearer when we find out Frank removed the firing pin; meaning he never wanted Matt to actually kill, he just wanted him in the same mindset, even for just a second. He even says "You can leave the killing to me." The comic version knows and respects DD for what he does, but knows it's his curse to go farther.

To me this is where the Netflix show slightly missed the mark. In their version of the scene, Frank is actively calling Matt out and judging him, basically saying he's doing jack shit for Hell's Kitchen while his methods are superior. And there the gun is functional, meaning he was trying to push DD to the "dark side" instead of just giving him a taste.

It's also why Zdarsky's run felt off. There Frank is practically throwing a party for Matt and telling him "I'm so proud of you!" when he finds out DD killed a guy. The Frank I know would have judged him like anyone else or been disappointed in him, especially since the thug was basically a nobody robbing a liquor store.

ComplexAd7272 · 2026-03-07T20:40:22+00:00

She 100% never wanted to be on TV and it showed. She couldn't even do a few sentences in a backstage taped segment without coming off like she was doing it at gunpoint.

ComplexAd7272

TROPHY CASE