[TV] She-Hulk: Attorney at Law (*SPOILERS*)

[Endus]

My question was not about who's protagonist and who's antagonist, as you've noticed.
What I asked was why he's not even a 2nd violin in his own movie.
And my question has nothing to do with the screentime.

Then you don't have a point. He's playing "2nd fiddle" the same way basically every single protagonist in nearly every literary adventure story always playss second fiddle. The antagonist is, pretty much inevitably, the one driving the story, the one with a plot or mission that he hero has to try and stop. If the Empire and Darth Vader and Palpatine weren't pushing their agendas in Star Wars, there'd be no Rebellion for Luke to join, his uncle and aunt wouldn't be collateral damage driving him to join the fight, the story wouldn't happen. That's how stories generally work. There are exceptions; heist movies are nearly always driven by the protagonists' actions against a static antagonist and their "vault", but adventure stories are nearly always driven by the antagonist, primarily. Without the antagonist's action, there's nothing for the hero to take action against.

That's the only way Strange is "2nd fiddle"; that he's reacting to Wanda's actions (and others'). In every other way, no, he's not, and you do not have an argument to support that claim, and haven't made any effort to do so, meaning it can simply be dismissed out of hand anyway.

Why would you imply I demand that?

There's no implication; you questioned why Multiverse of Madness was titled a Doctor Strange movie, rather than a Wanda movie. Despite Doctor Strange being the central protagonist and the character with the most screen time by a wide margin. You made that argument, openly. And now you don't want to take responsibility for the posts we can still see you having made.

- - - Updated - - -

I repeat myself: I was not talking about screentime.

What else could you possibly have been talking about?

When you take great pains to not explain your points and people leap to the only reasonable conclusions about what you could possibly have meant, the fault's with you. If nobody's getting what you're trying to say, it's because you aren't communicating it properly. We have to go by the words you actually post, we can't read your secret inner thoughts about what you really meant.

[Biomega]

I repeat myself: I was not talking about screentime.

Then you have no leg to stand on to begin with. The movie is entirely formulaic in its villain vs. hero setup, no different than any other random superhero movie. Your complaint is entirely made up.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Allow me to re-quote myself:


I got a response to that that wanda is the main villain.


My question was not about who's protagonist and who's antagonist, as you've noticed.
What I asked was why he's not even a 2nd violin in his own movie.
And my question has nothing to do with the screentime.

Kinda hard to buy that he’s the second when he has almost double the screen time, but are you like just upset that the hero is shown reacting to the villains wrong doings for most of the film? Because that’s like every marvel film that isn’t an origin story.

[Ivanstone]

Maybe yes, maybe not.
The trick is if I were to stop watching them, I'd be instantly cudgeled by NPCs with the "if you haven't watched it - your opinion is null and void" argument.

Nah, we’d rather just discuss the show. Your presence wouldn’t be missed. We’re already assuming you’re just parroting the opinions of some dipshit on social media without having watched the show.

[Darththeo]

Why's the movie "Dr.Strange" , then?

Same reason it is Avengers: Infinity War and not Thanos wrecks the Universe.

The movies are named after the protagonists.

[Jester Joe]

Maybe yes, maybe not.
The trick is if I were to stop watching them, I'd be instantly cudgeled by NPCs with the "if you haven't watched it - your opinion is null and void" argument.

Is this really the depths we're falling to nowadays? The Internet has been a platform for people for so long, they feel entitled to even share their opinions on something they haven't experienced yet to even form an opinion on it, and ridicule people pointing that absurdity out?

Like... Yes, to form your own opinion, you need to have experience. Otherwise it becomes ignorance.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

Then you have no leg to stand on to begin with. The movie is entirely formulaic in its villain vs. hero setup, no different than any other random superhero movie. Your complaint is entirely made up.

Yes, I have.
Have you ever watched "Leon" with Jean Renault?
Did you ever think for a second, that's it's a movie about Gary Oldman's villain, and not about Leon and his relationship with Matilda?
I hope you understand w hat I'm getting at.

Kinda hard to buy that he’s the second when he has almost double the screen time, but are you like just upset that the hero is shown reacting to the villains wrong doings for most of the film? Because that’s like every marvel film that isn’t an origin story.

for the N-th time, my point has nothing to do with screentime.

Nah, we’d rather just discuss the show. Your presence wouldn’t be missed. We’re already assuming you’re just parroting the opinions of some dipshit on social media without having watched the show.

Should I care about assumptions of some unspecified group?

- - - Updated - - -

Is this really the depths we're falling to nowadays? The Internet has been a platform for people for so long, they feel entitled to even share their opinions on something they haven't experienced yet to even form an opinion on it, and ridicule people pointing that absurdity out?

Like... Yes, to form your own opinion, you need to have experience. Otherwise it becomes ignorance.

I've never ate feces.
Am I ignorant for assuming it smells bad and tastes worse?

[Witchblade77]

is black panther a Killmonger movie?

is first iron man and Obadiah Stein movie? Is first Avengers a Loki movie? is infinity war a thanos movie?

because this is the reasoning I'm hearing. Strange is NOT playing a second fiddle, Wanda's arc facilitates his, in much the same way above movies facilitate hero arcs through those of their villain's. hell we don't even ever see Wanda without Strange being present in some way and her perspective is STILL shown through Strange's eyes, even in the penultimate scene where she confronts her own variant and the kids - strange is the one who stop's America from closing the portal and getting Scarlet witch back, we literally cut back to him watching through the eyes of his own variant. we certainly see Strange without Wanda around.

also, gotta love those strawmen, of comparing watching a show to eating shit. not even remotely comparable. and to elaborate. one is created to be watched. the other is most certainly NOT intended to be eaten. if you are going to compare things - compare things intended for consumption to another thing intended for consumption. in which case, no, you cannot form such strong opinions over something you haven't smelled or eaten and even then - personal tastes are a thing that exist. some people like me - love cilantro. to others, it tastes like soap

[Jester Joe]

I've never ate feces.
Am I ignorant for assuming it smells bad and tastes worse?

What a weird stretch. Assuming isn't arguing online that your opinion matters.

[Biomega]

Yes, I have.
Have you ever watched "Leon" with Jean Renault?
Did you ever think for a second, that's it's a movie about Gary Oldman's villain, and not about Leon and his relationship with Matilda?
I hope you understand w hat I'm getting at.

I also did not think for a second that MoM was a movie about Wanda and not about Dr. Strange.

So... I can only repeat: you have no point to make here.

All you're saying is YOU think it's about Wanda. You have provided nothing to back that point or justify it, you've only repeated various variations of "that's what I think".

Cool. You think whatever you want. Nobody else here seems to agree.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

is black panther a Killmonger movie?

No.

is first iron man and Obadiah Stein movie?

No.

But "Longing for nonexistant children: smoltiverse of wanda feat. dr.Strange" sure feels like a wanda movie.
It's a movie about her, her trauma, her journey to get what she wants inany way she wants and damn the pitfalls and casualties.

i
also, gotta love those strawmen, of comparing watching a show to eating shit. not even remotely comparable.

Except that there's no comparison between two from my side.

What a weird stretch. Assuming isn't arguing online that your opinion matters.

You didn't answer my question.
Allow me to re-phrase, then.
I have never fallen from a cliff.
Am I ignorant for assuming it might lead to trauma or death?

[Endus]

Yes, I have.
Have you ever watched "Leon" with Jean Renault?
Did you ever think for a second, that's it's a movie about Gary Oldman's villain, and not about Leon and his relationship with Matilda?
I hope you understand w hat I'm getting at.

No, we really don't. How is that different? Oldman's character Stansfield is the one who kills Matilda's parents, and who drives basically all the conflict in the entire movie. No Stansfield, no movie. Same deal as MoM, and you're applying a pretty blatant double standard. Or rather, shitting on MoM without any standard for why, since you clearly can't actually explain the issue.

Yes, Leon the Professional is very much "about" Stansfield and whether one of his victims (Matilda) will be able to get her revenge on him.

for the N-th time, my point has nothing to do with screentime.

And yet, we've still yet to hear what it was about. Because you keep saying stuff like the above which just flat-out does not support the distinctions you're making.

I've never ate feces.
Am I ignorant for assuming it smells bad and tastes worse?

Here's a hint; being able to smell it is experiencing it. Smell and taste are so directly connected that there's a solid biomechanical argument to be made that they're actually two factors of the same sense, rather than two distinct senses.

So no. This is more like you refusing to eat chocolate cake because you saw a picture of a chocolate cake once and it's brown like shit so therefore chocolate tastes exactly like shit. And when people tell you that's not true, you complain about how unfair it is that they expect you to have any idea what the hell you're talking about with regards to chocolate cake, rather than just making up absolute nonsense in your own head.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

I also did not think for a second that MoM was a movie about Wanda and not about Dr. Strange.

So... I can only repeat: you have no point to make here.

All you're saying is YOU think it's about Wanda. You have provided nothing to back that point or justify it, you've only repeated various variations of "that's what I think".

Cool. You think whatever you want. Nobody else here seems to agree.

Cool.
"Strange has more screentime therefore it's dr.Strange movie" and "It has his name in its title therefore it's dr.Strange movie" is what's being provided as counterarguments. It is quite interesting.

[Endus]

But "Longing for nonexistant children: smoltiverse of wanda feat. dr.Strange" sure feels like a wanda movie.
It's a movie about her, her trauma, her journey to get what she wants inany way she wants and damn the pitfalls and casualties.

And about Doctor Strange, and his love for Christine, and coming to terms with his own inner demons.

Which you're deliberately ignoring, to continue pushing an intentionally dishonest framing.

I have never fallen from a cliff.
Am I ignorant for assuming it might lead to trauma or death?

Have you ever fallen off anything, ever? Because that gives you something to extrapolate from.

That's not what you're doing with Marvel properties. You're just openly and intentionally lying about them. Shamelessly.

[Biomega]

Cool.
"Strange has more screentime therefore it's dr.Strange movie" and "It has his name in its title therefore it's dr.Strange movie" is what's being provided as counterarguments. It is quite interesting.

Counterarguments to WHAT?

You haven't provided an argument to counter.

You've only provided your opinion.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Maybe yes, maybe not.
The trick is if I were to stop watching them, I'd be instantly cudgeled by NPCs with the "if you haven't watched it - your opinion is null and void" argument.

Your opinion would be null and void past the point you stopped watching. Your opinion as to why you stopped watching would still be valid.

But I would wonder why you would want to continue discussing the events of the show after you stopped watching it?

I have never fallen from a cliff.
Am I ignorant for assuming it might lead to trauma or death?

That's general knowledge that you would have gained through your life.

Specific details about a television show you haven't watched is quite a different thing.

It's like saying "I haven't seen this show...but I have watched television before... therefore my opinion on this show is valid."

[Endus]

Counterarguments to WHAT?

You haven't provided an argument to counter.

You've only provided your opinion.

He hasn't even really provided that, other than that he doesn't like the MCU.

He won't even specify what his actual supposed complaints are, because then he gets to gaslight us when we make the most obvious guess as to what he might​ mean.

[Witchblade77]

No.

No.

But "Longing for nonexistant children: smoltiverse of wanda feat. dr.Strange" sure feels like a wanda movie.
It's a movie about her, her trauma, her journey to get what she wants inany way she wants and damn the pitfalls and casualties.

Except that there's no comparison between two from my side.



You didn't answer my question.
Allow me to re-phrase, then.
I have never fallen from a cliff.
Am I ignorant for assuming it might lead to trauma or death?

you... literally tried to claim that you don't have to experience something to form opinion on it, by using eating shit as your example to justify why you don't have to watch the show to form opinion on it.

don't you back pedal now.


moreover Black Panther is very much about Kilmonger's arc of chasing vengeance and liberation for his people and its ultimately his actions, even though Nakia was saying Wakanda needs to help all along, but it was Killmonger's desperation that was the final straw for T'chala.

Obadiah Stein is the reason Tony ended up where he did, Obadiah Stein is something Tony goes up against, who he is betrayed by, he is his final confrontation. and Obandiah Stein does what he does because he feels like he deserves Stark industries, given that he's been running it while Tony was partying, and Tony is now jeopardizing it.

Wanda's arc to desperately get her children back mirrors Stephen's arc of desperately trying to get Christine back, resenting that he lost sorcerer supreme title for his actions, much like Wanda is vilified through her own grief. STEPHEN learns to let go by seeing how far Wanda pushes is and the destruction and pain she wrought, HE LEARNS. not before being touched by corruption himself, but he STILL. LEARNS. that's his arc. learning respect. responsibility. not making expedient choices just because they seem like the right ones.

and you are once again comparing apples to sticks.

content designed to be consumed can only be compared to other content designed to be consumed. people are not designed to fall off cliffs, at least not without a bungy cord or whatever other contraption designed to keep as alive.

so if you want to compare TV shows to cliffs? compare it to something like zip lining, or jumping into water in specific locations, etc. and guess what? you may do something wrong and still get injured, and you may not like the show if you watch it, but you CANNO JUST MAKE CLAIMS LIKE YOU DO WITHOUT ANY. PERSONAL. EXPERIENCE. you cannot claim that zip lining is awful and terrible and bad.

and here is the important part. EVEN IF YOU DON"T LIKE SOMETHING? DOES NOT MAKE IT BAD!!! learn some self awareness. please. for the love of god.

[Jester Joe]

You didn't answer my question.
Allow me to re-phrase, then.
I have never fallen from a cliff.
Am I ignorant for assuming it might lead to trauma or death?

Correction, I shot down the question because it was faulty and pointed out why it is.

The issue here is that you're dodging the issue trying to rationalize your actions.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

Your opinion would be null and void past the point you stopped watching.

On that I can agree to some extent.
The problem I have with that is the dichotomy I've noticed:
1. If you are watching/hatewatching, you are told to stfu; even voicing a negative opinion or critique gets you a fussilade of ad hominems and derogatory terms and such.
2. If you don't like it, you are being told to to stop watching, and stfu.
How would you solve that?

Your opinion as to why you stopped watching would still be valid.

Thanks for that, at least.

But I would wonder why you would want to continue discussing the events of the show after you stopped watching it?

To listen to what people say, for one.
Take W/V for example: I dislike that show with a passion(and all the recent marvel series, at that), and I'm interested as to what people say about it.
Tastes differ, right? I didn't like Housewife 5: Prey, for example.
So I went to IMDB and read one of the top critic reviews which said, to quote: "if you think too much, the movie falls apart. So do not think too much."
It was a lively experience. And it's quite interesting to listen what other people say.

That's general knowledge that you would have gained through your life.

I've never took drugs.
All I did is listen to other people saying it's bad.
Maybe I should gain some general knowledge myself?
Analogies are not arguments, I know, but here's to hoping you see what I'm getting at.

It's like saying "I haven't seen this show...but I have watched television before... therefore my opinion on this show is valid."

More like: "I haven't shot people in the head...but I have watched people getting shot in the head before...therefore my opinion that shooting people in the head leads to their death is valid."