I simply love it when a woman wears her hair short. It radiates so much strength and self-confidence.
Florence Pugh, Zendaya, Milly Alcock, Brie Larson, Emilia Clarke, Daisy Ridley
I think she did a really great job and is a truly strong role model for young girls and women. If you look at her appearances during the press tour and her photoshoots, she absolutely mastered it. She radiates so much natural self-confidence and style, and despite entering a huge franchise under enormous pressure, she gave the character Kara so much real soul. She made her seem like a real person vulnerable yet strong.
I think she did a really great job and is a truly strong role model for young girls and women. If you look at her appearances during the press tour and her photoshoots, she absolutely mastered it. She radiates so much natural self-confidence and style, and despite entering a huge franchise under enormous pressure, she gave the character Kara so much real soul. She made her seem like a real person vulnerable yet strong.
I've been reading the reviews on this subreddit for the past few days, and frankly, it's just exhausting. Not because people don't like the film—everyone has their own taste, after all—but because of the way it's being criticized.
We've completely distorted film criticism: from an appreciation of art to a mechanical used-car inspection.
People are treating this film like an Excel spreadsheet:
- "Villain Krem didn't have enough screen time" -> Minus point.
- "The pacing felt like a condensed 10-episode series" -> Minus point.
- "The CGI was just so-so" -> Minus point.
Result: "Meh, total crap."
This pseudo-intellectual, checklist-based approach completely misses the point of the film. When you see Kara screaming, isolated, and struggling with her deep-seated trauma, some of you are only thinking about whether the second act's structure follows a typical Hollywood formula. That's emotionally insensitive.
Look at how a true artist like Hideo Kojima analyzed the film. He didn't hand out arbitrary stars or percentages. He set aside all the technical bells and whistles and looked at the structural DNA: It's not a generic superhero movie about saving the world through justice; it's a dark, character-driven coming-of-age space western. It owes more to "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" and the uncompromising, raw atmosphere of "True Grit" than to the MCU formula.
These days, it seems a film can't even get a solid 7/10. If it doesn't win 50 Oscars or make film history, the internet will immediately declare it "the biggest flop in the universe." This toxic overreaction robs you of the joy of going to the movies.
"Supergirl" has weaknesses, that's clear. But it has courage, it has an emotional core, and it has a distinctive artistic vision. Perhaps it's time to put down the clipboard, stop acting like the ultimate cinematic elite, and let yourself be touched by emotions at the cinema again. The sun will rise tomorrow anyway, even if a film is only beautiful and imperfectly human.
In the pop culture community, there's an unwritten rule: if Kojima posts a poster on X or Instagram with the dry sentence "I saw [film]", the movie was usually a bitter disappointment, which he keeps quiet about.
That's precisely why Kojima's assessment is so valuable. He doesn't look at Metacritic scores, misguided fan expectations, or the current internet backlash. He evaluates the narrative substance. When a narrative visionary like him praises the emotional depth of Kara's journey, it shows that the film possesses qualities that are simply being completely lost in the Reddit noise.
Simply being able to take a siesta freely in space strikes me as the perfect place for peace, harmony, and tranquility. Carol is such a thoughtful person that she often retreats to the moon to reflect on her problems.
In the Marvel Universe, this symbolism is remarkably often taken quite literally—as various chronicles impressively demonstrate, and as heroes like Moon Knight officially bear this burden. It represents the pinnacle of heroism; when the beasts awaken, these modern knights must throw everything they have into the fray—from high-tech weaponry and magic to raw, unbridled force. These characters fulfill the very role once held by Saint George or the knights of Arthurian legend. The dragon may change its form—appearing at times as an alien threat and at others as a relic of ancient magic—but the knight’s task remains unchanged across the centuries: to serve as a shield and sword for all those who would otherwise perish in the flames.
Merchandising sales play a crucial role, especially for DC and Marvel—or rather, Disney and Warner Bros.—because they generate revenue over a significantly longer period. MGM has already employed this strategy for its new series, "Masters of the Universe"—an approach that was always part of the animated series of the '80s and '90s, where the shows essentially served as advertising campaigns for the toys. When you see on BoxOfficeMojo that a Disney or Warner Bros. film with a $200 million budget only grossed $250 million worldwide, it's considered a colossal flop by film standards.
Considering the licensing fees of the following decades, attractions in theme parks, T-shirts, action figures, and video games, this supposed "flop" could prove to be a veritable goldmine for the corporation over the next 20 years (just think of films like Pixar's "Cars," which was only moderately successful at the box office but generated billions in toy sales). While Box Office Mojo and The Numbers reliably measure moviegoers' attendance figures, they haven't captured the overall economic success of a brand for a long time.
For Warner Bros. and Disney in particular, merchandising sales are significantly more profitable than ticket sales. The films merely serve as an advertising platform. Just think of anime like Pokémon or the vast product range in a Disney Store.
👉 Disney has perfected this model over the years, as the film forms the linchpin of a huge ecosystem.
– Point 1: The film. It creates an emotional connection between the audience and the brand. Once this emotional connection is established, T-shirts, backpacks, bedding, and toys are purchased for years to come. These products often generate significantly higher profit margins than movie tickets, and a film is the reason a family books a €5,000 vacation to Disney World. The €15 for a movie ticket is negligible in comparison.
👉 The Japanese industry—especially the anime sector—frequently operates according to the so-called "production committee" model. In this model, direct profit maximization through the anime itself is often not the primary focus. Instead, the anime serves as an elaborate marketing campaign for the underlying source material—be it a manga, a light novel, or a video game series. Pokémon is the best example of this: The series and the films exist primarily to introduce new generations of "pocket monsters" to the world. The goal is to encourage children to buy the associated games, collect the cards, and acquire the plush toys. The revenue from the sale of physical products—such as merchandise and games—far exceeds the film's box office receipts.
These days, cinemas are often just a calling card for a business model that extends to department stores or streaming platforms. The fact that a film is shown in a cinema creates an emotional connection to comics, T-shirts, and rare collectible figures—all of which have a significantly higher value; moreover, the film keeps the character present in pop culture. What the media reports about the film as a "flop" is irrelevant—just ignore it. Actual cinema revenue represents only a fraction of total cinema revenue.
Especially with DC and Marvel—or rather, Disney and Warner Bros.—merchandising sales play a major role, since they generate revenue over a much longer period. MGM has already employed this strategy for the new *Masters of the Universe*—an approach that was always part of the original cartoons from the 80s and 90s, where the series essentially served as advertising campaigns for the toys.
If you see on BoxOfficeMojo that a Disney or Warner film with a $200 million budget only grossed $250 million worldwide, it's considered a colossal flop according to cinematic metrics. However, if you factor in the subsequent decades of licensing fees, theme park attractions, T-shirts, action figures, and video games, this very "flop" can be an absolute goldmine for the corporation over the next 20 years (just think of films like Pixar's Cars, which performed moderately at the box office but generated billions in toy sales).
So, while BoxOfficeMojo and The Numbers reliably measure cinematic interest, they haven't measured the overall economic success of an IP for a long time. For Warner Bros. and Disney in particular, selling merchandise is far more profitable than selling movie tickets. The films serve merely as a promotional platform. One need only think of anime like Pokémon or the wide array of products found in a Disney Store.
👉 Disney has perfected this model. The film is the anchor point for a gigantic flywheel:
- The film: Creates the emotional connection to the IP (Intellectual Property).
- Merchandising: Once the emotional connection is established, T-shirts, backpacks, bedding, and toys will be purchased for years to come. These products often have a much higher profit margin than a movie ticket, of which the cinema deducts roughly half as a commission.
- Theme parks: A film is the reason a family books a €5,000 vacation at Disney World. The €15 movie ticket is negligible in comparison.
👉 The Japanese industry (especially in anime) often operates using the so-called Production Committee model. Here, the anime itself is often not the primary goal of generating profit. It serves as a high-profile marketing campaign for the original manga, light novels, or video game franchise.
👉 Pokémon is the ultimate example: The series and films exist primarily to introduce new generations of pocket monsters to the world, so that children will buy the corresponding game, collect the cards, and want the plushies. The revenue from the sale of physical goods (merchandise/games) dwarfs the box office figures of the films.
- Today, the cinema is often just the business card for a business model that takes place on the shelves of department stores or in streaming apps.
I love Carol and Usagi, and whenever I read a comic featuring Carol or stream Sailor Moon, I notice a lot of similarities. They are very much alike, especially when it comes to their feelings and emotions.
The image featuring Chibiusa and Usagi employs the same visual language as the scene with Carol and the alien child: closed eyes, total focus on the other person, and a gentle swaying of the head. The point here is not to fight an enemy, but to give the person in one’s arms the feeling: "I’ve got you. Nothing can happen to you now."
Toxic fans often mock Usagi for crying and call Carol "too emotional." But the comics and the anime show the truth: her tears are not a sign of weakness, but rather the outlet for her unwavering moral compass. She cries because she cares about the world. And it is precisely this pain that transforms into the power that ultimately sweeps away evil.
Both are at their physical lowest point. Their armor is damaged, their bodies exhausted. A hero relying solely on brutality would be defeated here, their physical strength failing them. But Carol and Usagi rise again because their spirits are not bound to their bodies. They simply refuse to stay down.
Each of these images reveals a fundamental truth about Carol and Usagi: their strength stems not from a lack of emotion, but from the fact that they feel everything with their whole hearts. Both heroines love men who do not admire them for their cosmic powers, but who know and protect their vulnerable, human side. These relationships demonstrate that the universe’s most powerful women are unafraid to let their guard down and love. It is the ultimate proof of their emotional maturity. A "hero" loved solely for his brutality cannot comfort a child; he cannot dry tears or make a frightened being feel at home. Carol and Usagi can put an entire alien empire in its place and, the very next moment, hold a child as if nothing else in the world mattered. That is the ultimate form of mothering.
It proves in black and white that Captain Marvel and Sailor Moon are kindred spirits—forged from the same DNA of empathy, love, and unbreakable hope.
To all members of the Carol Corps and MCU fans who simply want good, consistent storytelling: We urgently need to talk.
It's no secret that Marvel Studios has been struggling to properly utilize its most powerful heroine for quite some time. But the latest insider information and leaks regarding Avengers: Doomsday really take the cake. Instead of learning from past mistakes, Carol Danvers is once again being completely sidelined.
Looking at the current reports, an absolutely frustrating picture is emerging for Carol's role in the next big crossover event.
- Why this should make us angry as fans
"Marvel has an Oscar-winning actress and one of the most complex comic book characters ever—and they have absolutely no idea what to do with her."
Instead of elegantly picking up the loose, emotional threads from The Marvels and finally giving Carol the depth and spotlight she deserves, she's once again being treated like a tiresome chore. We already saw this pattern in Avengers: Endgame, where she essentially just floated in as a deus ex machina and otherwise barely existed.
Now that the multiverse and the X-Men are finally playing a central role—which would perfectly align with her comic book history surrounding Rogue and her Binary form—Marvel is once again backing down.
- What does this mean for Carol's future?
If Marvel continues to treat Carol Danvers as "too powerful for a normal story" and therefore relegates her to a supporting role in the major films, it will damage the entire franchise. The Carol Corps doesn't want a token appearance just to tick a box next to her name. We want to see the leader, the loyal friend, and the fighter who risks everything to get Monica out of there!
Let us fervently hope that those in charge use the criticism to rectify this misguided decision. Otherwise, the MCU will definitively lose one of its strongest pillars.
Higher, Further, Faster? More like: Sidelined, Scrapped, Forgotten.
Many fans have learned to no longer experience stories emotionally or as a coherent whole, but instead to scan them like a checklist for flaws. In doing so, they try to reinterpret subjective dislike as objective shortcomings in the writing, using pseudo-intellectual terminology. If a fan writes, "I don't like David Colton because he beat up my favorite hero," that's an honest, subjective opinion. But if they write, "He's a flawed Gary Stu and Carol is the benchmark—totally lazy writing!", it sounds like a well-founded analysis, even if the content is complete nonsense.
Unfortunately, this often robs fan culture of the ability to discuss the actual strengths and weaknesses of a story, as people simply resort to throwing around empty buzzwords. Similar to the terms "Mary Sue" or "benchmark," the term "Vegeta treatment" is now frequently overused in fan circles as a catch-all for "bad writing" or "author bias."
Some fans tend to judge a character's worth solely based on their win-loss record. If their favorite hero loses a crucial battle, the immediate reaction is: "The writers hate him; he's being treated like Vegeta again." They completely overlook the fact that these painful defeats are the driving force behind character development. Without the humiliations inflicted by Frieza or Cell, Vegeta would never have undergone his profound, years-long transformation from arrogant killer to selfless family man. Perfect characters who never lose are boring.
A story needs structure, and not every character can deliver the final blow. For example, when Thor or Captain Marvel can't defeat the final boss single-handedly in Avengers: Armageddon—and instead fail—it's not because the writers "hate" these characters; it's simply a device to establish a threat that can only be overcome by the entire team.
In short, the fanbase often confuses a character's humiliation within the story with that character's humiliation by the writers. It's fascinating to see how these notions all stem from the same source: the fans' emotional desire for their favorite character to be invincible and flawless—which, ironically, leads to precisely the kind of flawed "Mary Sue" story they so vehemently criticize elsewhere.
Christos Gage’s answer is the definition of diplomatic damage control to avoid death threats from both fan camps 🤣😂
The artist almost certainly drew that panel that way on purpose. Writers and artists know full well just how sensitive the "Who would win?" community is. When depicting a battle between two such powerhouses, an inconclusive draw—one that has fans at each other's throats—is the best way to keep people talking about the issue.
Phillip Kennedy Johnson: „That is what Eldest claims, yes.“
With this single sentence, he has perfectly checkmated the fandom:
For lore enthusiasts, this means that, yes, the chains are potentially unimaginably powerful because—according to Eldest—they are linked to the First Firmament.
And for Hulk fans, it means that Eldest is a classic "unreliable narrator." If Hulk shatters the chains, it doesn't mean PKJ is breaking the logic of the Marvel Universe; it simply means Eldest lied or vastly overestimated herself.
Autoren lieben es, hochmütige Schurken absolute Dinge behaupten zu lassen, ohne diese im Fließtext als universelle Wahrheit zu zementieren. So bleibt der Mythos des Hulk als unbezwingbare Naturgewalt im Hinterkopf der Fans intakt, während die Bedrohung im aktuellen Comic trotzdem gigantisch wirkt. 😅🤣😂
So, just logically speaking, Donny Cates classified level 10 as purely hypothetical in his Hulk Run, while Al Ewing said that TOAA is the reader, writer, or editor. If Hulk were to actually leave the comics and come to our real world to fight TOAA, then this fight would either be a drawing or reading contest. Or making the wrong decisions as an editor at Marvel 😝 Since it's about TOAA's powers, and that's the ability to read or write comics. So, dear powerscalers, get to work! 🤣😂😝
The 2018 Hordak is portrayed as far more capable and menacing, whereas the 1985 Hordak is depicted as a failure and a laughingstock. She-Ra frequently mocks the 1985 Hordak, ridiculing him and his abilities. In contrast, the 2018 Hordak is perceived by She-Ra as a genuine threat.
​
However, Horde Prime is portrayed as a real threat in both versions.
I have created a complete analysis of all the worldbuilding texts for TOAA and Hulk.
- Point 1: PKJ performed a retcon here, specifically in the following way:
When TOAA ruled with the purity of love, his heart was infected with a seed of corruption by the Mother's attack. From this wound erupted an emerald-green flame of absolute wrath. Mortals on Earth mistakenly call this green flame Gamma. So, when Bruce Banner is hit by the Gamma Bomb in his origin story, biologically speaking, he is struck by what science defines as radiation, but metaphysically speaking, his soul is flooded with the infected wrath of God. The Gamma, or the profane blood of God, is exactly the same original Gamma radiation, but radically redefined.
- Point 2: In these specific writings by PKJ, TOAA is surprisingly portrayed as a concrete, independent being acting within the story, rather than the metafictional entity like an author, reader, or editor, as he is often interpreted in Marvel history.
This has drastically diminished TOAA and stripped him of his entire mythology. This also diminishes Hulk. Many fans and critics have criticized this very point in PKJ's run, especially in direct comparison to the previous masterpiece, Immortal Hulk, which had set the bar extremely high for cosmic, philosophical horror.
- 2. The Devaluation of Hulk and TOBA: In Al Ewing's Immortal Hulk, TOBA was the ultimate metaphysical counterweight to creation, the aspect of divine wrath that consumes everything at the end of the cosmic cycle to make way for a new universe. The Hulk was the cosmic vessel for this impersonal, infinite principle.
In PKJ's version, TOAA is no longer the fundamental principle of destruction, but rather the involuntary result of a divine infection. It's essentially the rabies variant of TOAA, created by the Mother of Terror's poison. For Hulk, this means his power is no longer the destructive primal force of the cosmos. Instead, it's the profane blood flowing from an old wound TOAA sustained in physical combat. The Hulk thus mutates from a cosmic world-breaker to a mere byproduct of a primeval god war. This makes Hulk's gamma powers a waste product.
- 1. The Disenchantment of TOAA: Before this run, TOAA was the absolute, unapproachable alpha and omega of the Marvel Universe, often interpreted as the personification of the author. By portraying TOAA in the scriptures as a being who must forge a physical spear, who can be surprised by a creaturely power, and whose golden flesh is literally pierced, he loses his absolute transcendence. He operates here on the same level as Odin, Zeus, or the Celestials.
Before: Hulk was the personified, inextinguishable wrath at the end of the universe, an existential force of nature.
After: Hulk is now the product of an accident or infection. He essentially walks around with the uncontrolled, contaminated blood of an injured god. This robs him of his philosophical uniqueness and makes him a kind of divine collateral damage.
The following is stated in several panels: - Issue 1: This is the classic, heavily downgraded Hulk of the 1960s/70s, who can be seriously threatened by regular military forces.
- Issue 2: The underwater monster completely mocks him: "Why dress you in this low form? You stink of the tree-dwellers." Even the Mother's ancient brood sees this Hulk form as inferior.
- Issue 7: He fights Max and Illyana. Max throws him away and says coldly, "I... have fallen... greater than you." It's even more obvious with Illyana. Her magical Soulsword is embedded in his back, and Hulk is visibly terrified of being decapitated, as the blade is bound to his life force.
Even TOAA uses a rather classic, almost mechanical, angelic vessel to manifest on Earth. Because TOAA interacts on Earth through such a vessel, the entire conflict operates on a much more tangible, lower plane.
PKJ made it clear in several panels just how much Hulk had been demoted.