Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 103

Thread: NEW He-Man and the Masters of the Universe: Heroes and Villains Guidebook

  1. #76
    Council Elder zodak74's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Point Dread
    Posts
    15,405
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos88 View Post
    Throwing an unqualified person into training before being handed a leadership position is a pretty stupid thing to do. They should have spent more time finding someone with the proper experience in the industry, especially someone who has worked on shows for the demographic She-Ra would cater to. Noelle did reinvent it, I'll give her that, but she left behind a lot of viewership in the older fans and children demographics.
    She helped create an excellent show that blew most classic MOTU episodes out of the water in terms of story arc, character development, and action, AND a lot of people loved it... so... who cares if she didn't have previous experience showrunning a Netflix animated series? She got the job done and she did great.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    If I may step in here, I understand what you're saying. However, the part that confuses me about parents not wanting their children to watch shows with LGBT+ themes is that these same people will gladly show their kids Beauty and the Beast, Frozen, or The Little Mermaid--Or any other of the kids media that involves romance. Miraculous Ladybug is one show that's fairly popular, and involves the two protagonists constantly crushing and fantasizing about one another.

    All of the above are commonly shown to young kids and feature romance and even kissing. In fact, it's a central theme of those movies. If it's fine for kids to watch those on repeat, why do some people consider it 'too mature' when it's two women who want to kiss instead of a man and a woman?

    The problem here is that these people seem to assume that gay love is somehow less 'pure' than straight love. Like you said, I'm not saying this to agitate you, but to try and explain the situation and why people jump to the 'bigoted' response. It can definitely feel like calling someone a 'bigot' over this comes out of nowhere, and I agree that name-calling is never a good way to go about a converstaion, but people get annoyed over the implications this situation carries.

    And, personally, I see their point. Unless there's some other reason why people are treating gay romance differently than straight, which I'd be glad to hear. Seriously, I would really want another explanation.

    Well-put and thank you.
    Clearing out Classics, Super7 and vintage MOTU & PoP figures... check out my threads in the Marketplace for Fisto, Sorceress, BA variants, SDCC exclusives and more!

  2. #77
    Cobra Saboteur Firefly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Classified
    Posts
    12,117
    I'd prefer to see no romantic relationships of any type in the show or books related to it. Other than King Randor and Queen Marlena sitting on their thrones and not being romantic, I do not care if I see another couple in it. I've never given couples much of a thought when it comes to MOTU other than Teela and He-Man as it was never stressed much in either the original or MYP. I would not want "shipping" to be all people talk about when it comes to a MOTU kids cartoon show. Romance really is not needed for this type of sci-fi action figure kids show. That is more for the teens and 20 somethings, anyways, not parents or kids who buy toys.

  3. #78
    Court Magician
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefly View Post
    I'd prefer to see no romantic relationships of any type in the show or books related to it. Other than King Randor and Queen Marlena sitting on their thrones and not being romantic, I do not care if I see another couple in it. I've never given couples much of a thought when it comes to MOTU other than Teela and He-Man as it was never stressed much in either the original or MYP. I would not want "shipping" to be all people talk about when it comes to a MOTU kids cartoon show. Romance really is not needed for this type of sci-fi action figure kids show. That is more for the teens and 20 somethings, anyways, not parents or kids who buy toys.
    I agree. I don't want romance to be the focus, I'd prefer it be a side plot at best. Romantic love has rarely been a major theme in MOTU, if anything there's more a theme of family/friendship type of love, which can often be very interesting, deep, and emotional as well. I don't mind if there are relationships (gay, straight, ect.) happening in the background, or as side plot, but I would prefer it to not be the main focus.

    I didn't mind it where Netflix SPOP was concerned because the original She-ra did explore romance rather often, such as Sea Hawk and Adora, Bow and She-ra, Frosta and He-man, Castaspella and Adam, or Glimmer's crush of the week. MOTU has strayed much less into that territory, and has been mainly centered on the 'family' unit formed by the main characters. I think the only relationships that have been much explored are Adam and Teela or Skeletor and Evil-lyn, but only in comics and not cartoons.

    I'm excited for Revelations because Kevin Smith stated that MOTU was about family. I think that is accurate, and I hope that other MOTU media keeps that in mind too. That's not to say there can't be romances, but I don't consider it a central theme of the show and I don't think it should overpower the theme of family.
    Last edited by KNight(; April 19, 2021 at 11:02pm.

  4. #79
    Heroic Warrior Webstor's Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post

    The problem here is that these people seem to assume that gay love is somehow less 'pure' than straight love. Like you said, I'm not saying this to agitate you, but to try and explain the situation and why people jump to the 'bigoted' response. It can definitely feel like calling someone a 'bigot' over this comes out of nowhere, and I agree that name-calling is never a good way to go about a converstaion, but people get annoyed over the implications this situation carries.

    And, personally, I see their point. Unless there's some other reason why people are treating gay romance differently than straight, which I'd be glad to hear. Seriously, I would really want another explanation.
    Well, here's an explanation:

    The parents who allow hetero romantic elements to be seen by their children, but feel that LGBT type romance is for more mature audiences have an attitude that boils down to something all of you (should) already know....

    They believe that in the formative years of children, throwing alt sexuality into their developmental stages, seemingly complicates what is already a delicate biological path.

    Our society is supportive toward LGBT in 2021 in many ways, but still recognizes that the origins of alt sexuality in children still holds a good amount of mystery, being spawned from "genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences" (I took that from Wikipedia).

    Hopefully now the people being annoyed over this issue, and feeling no other option than to imply these concerned parents must be "bigots" can feel less annoyed now that they see the possibility of these parents merely wanting to raise their children in a certain environment they believe to be best for their child.
    This is a link to a YT channel "Dez360" --- a toy-related show I help with... and here's a link to a He-Man parody video Living In Eternia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPmYGVhilGw&t=68s
    GOOD JOURNEY, ORGERS!

  5. #80
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by zodak74 View Post
    She helped create an excellent show that blew most classic MOTU episodes out of the water in terms of story arc, character development, and action, AND a lot of people loved it... so... who cares if she didn't have previous experience showrunning a Netflix animated series? She got the job done and she did great.

    - - - Updated - - -




    Well-put and thank you.
    Yeah I thought the new She-Ra show did a great job of bringing to life other characters besides Adora and Glimmer from the original show. And the fact it had a satisfactory (IMHO) conclusion to the arc was important to me in this age of serialized storytelling we have in many shows, animated and non-animated nowadays. I am looking forward to what this new kids MOTU's series spin on the mythos is and hopefully it can bring fresh life and audience to the series.

  6. #81
    Heroic Warrior Webstor's Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefly View Post
    I'd prefer to see no romantic relationships of any type in the show or books related to it. Other than King Randor and Queen Marlena sitting on their thrones and not being romantic, I do not care if I see another couple in it. I've never given couples much of a thought when it comes to MOTU other than Teela and He-Man as it was never stressed much in either the original or MYP. I would not want "shipping" to be all people talk about when it comes to a MOTU kids cartoon show. Romance really is not needed for this type of sci-fi action figure kids show. That is more for the teens and 20 somethings, anyways, not parents or kids who buy toys.
    People keep referring to that Castlevania show also on Netflix involving some of the same production team... Maybe it will be close to that show in tone? Whatever the "romance" approach is in that one, I don't know.

    For personal reasons, I am essentially "stuck" with measuring all animated series to the Timm/Dini DCAU... but I know that just because I think that's the tone to shoot for (and I think MOTU 200x actually DID come close to the DCAU) in Revelations, and just because Smith is big fan of the DCAU series, doesn't mean that is the vibe Revelations going for.

    That said: Y'all remember the romance stuff between GL and Hawkgirl? And Bats and WW? That kind of stuff seems pretty appropriate for what I imagine Revelations to be.

    Do I NEED that kinda stuff? No. But it seems that if the series WERE somewhat emulating the DCAU, that it would likely have to be part of the equation.
    This is a link to a YT channel "Dez360" --- a toy-related show I help with... and here's a link to a He-Man parody video Living In Eternia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPmYGVhilGw&t=68s
    GOOD JOURNEY, ORGERS!

  7. #82
    Court Magician
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Webstor's Ghost View Post
    Well, here's an explanation:

    The parents who allow hetero romantic elements to be seen by their children, but feel that LGBT type romance is for more mature audiences have an attitude that boils down to something all of you (should) already know....

    They believe that in the formative years of children, throwing alt sexuality into their developmental stages, seemingly complicates what is already a delicate biological path.

    Our society is supportive toward LGBT in 2021 in many ways, but still recognizes that the origins of alt sexuality in children still holds a good amount of mystery, being spawned from "genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences" (I took that from Wikipedia).

    Hopefully now the people being annoyed over this issue, and feeling no other option than to imply these concerned parents must be "bigots" can feel less annoyed now that they see the possibility of these parents merely wanting to raise their children in a certain environment they believe to be best for their child.
    This is an alternative explanation I hadn't considered before, thank you for your thoughts.

    I've reworked this following sentence several times and can't get it quite right, so pardon me if it's not clear: It seems to me, through acting using this reasoning, they are already acting with the assumption that being gay is worse than being straight; that being gay is something that they should want to prevent because it is 'worse.'

    While I understand your reasoning, I can still see why people would be upset by the implications of this.

  8. #83
    Heroic Warrior Webstor's Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    This is an alternative explanation I hadn't considered before, thank you for your thoughts.

    I've reworked this following sentence several times and can't get it quite right, so pardon me if it's not clear: It seems to me, through acting using this reasoning, they are already acting with the assumption that being gay is worse than being straight; that being gay is something that they should want to prevent because it is 'worse.'

    While I understand your reasoning, I can still see why people would be upset by the implications of this.
    I already considered your take,

    ...but couldn't think of anything more to say than that just because it's a preferred choice does NOT mean it is a choice one thinks is either "superior" or "inferior". Just "more compatible with how they live their lives".

    Like for example, I grew up with a father who was very adamant that it was good to marry within your religion because of the consistency you keep in the family... less potential complications, etc...

    Yet when it came down to remarrying after my mother died, he married outside of his religion. He didn't think his religion was superior. Just more compatible with his family.

    He married outside his religion because ultimately it wasn't as offensively big an issue as some may have taken it on the surface. (Also my brother married outside the religion too, and of course it didn't ruffle my Dad a bit)

    Others may have issues with that kind of thinking... but then, hey, I feel that their kind of thinking borders on bigotry itself... I mean, where do you draw the line on allowing people to live the way they'd like to live within the confines of their family unit and not taking it as a deeply personal attack toward others?

    In the words of Lebowski "It's just an opinion, man."
    This is a link to a YT channel "Dez360" --- a toy-related show I help with... and here's a link to a He-Man parody video Living In Eternia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPmYGVhilGw&t=68s
    GOOD JOURNEY, ORGERS!

  9. #84
    Court Magician
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Webstor's Ghost View Post
    I already considered your take,

    ...but couldn't think of anything more to say than that just because it's a preferred choice does NOT mean it is a choice one thinks is either "superior" or "inferior". Just "more compatible with how they live their lives".

    Like for example, I grew up with a father who was very adamant that it was good to marry within your religion because of the consistency you keep in the family... less potential complications, etc...

    Yet when it came down to remarrying after my mother died, he married outside of his religion. He didn't think his religion was superior. Just more compatible with his family.

    He married outside his religion because ultimately it wasn't as offensively big an issue as some may have taken it on the surface. (Also my brother married outside the religion too, and of course it didn't ruffle my Dad a bit)

    Others may have issues with that kind of thinking... but then, hey, I feel that their kind of thinking borders on bigotry itself... I mean, where do you draw the line on allowing people to live the way they'd like to live within the confines of their family unit and not taking it as a deeply personal attack toward others?

    In the words of Lebowski "It's just an opinion, man."
    I have to add to this that 'prefered choice,' like it or not, always implies 'inferior choice,' no matter how subtle.

    To put it in simple terms. if I consider one sandwich I'd like to have for lunch better for my lifestyle at the moment, then by simply having that bias/preference, I consider the other sandwich worse, as it is not suitable to my lifestyle. Sandwich 1 is subtly considered superior. Rewording that to say it's "more compatible with how I live my life" is only speaking in gentler terms. Worse and better are blunt ways of putting it, but just as true.

    But this is much more complex than sandwiches; We're talking about people. The intensity of a bias llike this, and how it affects people, is the real issue. With some, it can be so subtle that no one notices, which is a pretty good outcome, as biases can never truly be erradicated: That's just how humans are hardwired.

    That aside, I can explain why this concern with LGBT+ media is something different from your analogy entirely.

    As for the analogy you went with, there's the fact that being gay is thought to come from biological factors as well. Religion can be a powerful force in one's life, but a more suitable analogy would be with genetic conditions; Something the person experiencing it does not decide for themselves to have. Religion is a choice on the part of the religious person, but being gay is not.

    This is why it's seen as a personal attack, whereas people prefering their family to stay in their religion is a much less hot-button issue. It's a rejection of something that can't be controled on the part of the gay person, wheras religion, politics, schedule, ect., can. The 'line' you express concern about has to do with this ability to choose, and the understanding that some aspects of ourselves we do not have a choice in determining.

  10. #85
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by Tallstar View Post
    Awesome find!

    This is what the description says:

    "The Masters of the Universe are back and better than ever in this brand-new guidebook!

    An ancient evil threatens Eternia once more, and it's up to He-Man and the Masters of the Universe to save the kingdom! This fun-filled guidebook explores the heroes and villains seen in the Netflix show, Masters of the Universe. This guidebook includes a poster and is bursting with exclusive lore from the new show. The power is yours!"


    ancient evil.. do they mean Skeletor?

  11. #86
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    787
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfootRULES View Post
    ancient evil.. do they mean Skeletor?
    That seems to be the most likely. I mean, they wouldn't do Hordak this soon after SPOP.

    Also, if it is, that means he's probably a demon. It's seeming increasingly likely that this will be based heavily on early MOTU (like '82 and '83 stuff), and I know that will make a lot of people very happy.

  12. #87
    Heroic Warrior Webstor's Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    I have to add to this that 'prefered choice,' like it or not, always implies 'inferior choice,' no matter how subtle.
    Incorrect. It's only personal preference with no commentary on the value of that another might make.

    If you choose to make it into a commentary on inferiority... that's not only wrong... it's harmful and/or dangerous.

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    To put it in simple terms. if I consider one sandwich I'd like to have for lunch better for my lifestyle at the moment, then by simply having that bias/preference, I consider the other sandwich worse, as it is not suitable to my lifestyle. Sandwich 1 is subtly considered superior. Rewording that to say it's "more compatible with how I live my life" is only speaking in gentler terms. Worse and better are blunt ways of putting it, but just as true.
    Exactly the same thing I said above. You are manufacturing something that is not being expressed.

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    But this is much more complex than sandwiches; We're talking about people. The intensity of a bias llike this, and how it affects people, is the real issue. With some, it can be so subtle that no one notices, which is a pretty good outcome, as biases can never truly be erradicated: That's just how humans are hardwired.
    While I couldn't agree more, biases as far as imposing them on others vs. applying them to yourself is a mountain of difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    As for the analogy you went with, there's the fact that being gay is thought to come from biological factors as well.
    Which, for the record, I acknowledged in my post.

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    Religion can be a powerful force in one's life, but a more suitable analogy would be with genetic conditions; Something the person experiencing it does not decide for themselves to have. Religion is a choice on the part of the religious person, but being gay is not.
    So, replace "religion" with "race". Problem solved, as i still stand behind the "race" analogy with the same passion that I did using the "religion" analogy, even though that's not what happened in my actual life... it would have played out that way in my real life if those variables were switched... my father/brother could have just as easily married outside their race (some would insist they actually DID in real life, but I don't want to get into what makes someone a certain race)

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    This is why it's seen as a personal attack, whereas people prefering their family to stay in their religion is a much less hot-button issue.
    Well, I switched it to race... so hopefully we can go from there, as race you can't change---although even that is debatable.... even sexuality in rare examples you CAN change... but the reasons behind WHY you would change that are another unnecessary complex conversation within itself.

    Let's just go with your take that race and sexuality can't be changed, which by and large is true...

    Quote Originally Posted by KNight( View Post
    It's a rejection of something that can't be controled on the part of the gay person, wheras religion, politics, schedule, ect., can. The 'line' you express concern about has to do with this ability to choose, and the understanding that some aspects of ourselves we do not have a choice in determining.
    That is not the "line" I expressed at all as far as I can see.

    I sincerely urge you to readdress this so I understand why your assumptions become someone else's failings, because i believe we are both being unnecessarily hurt by this... you being hurt by what you are choosing to believe about "choice being no different than a 'superiority' judgement" and me being hurt by that you are being hurt by something not meant to be hurtful.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I'd like to add for the record that my personal opinion is that parents who make the choice to only expose their children to hetero romantic children's shows for reasons listed above are certainly (in my opinion) functioning with some level of a presumptuousness of some sort --- but a presumptuousness towards science and not sexuality --- because (at the risk of redundancy) these would be the parents who have nothing to say about the superiority of any sexuality, but are more concerned about overloading children with mixed messages on that during their developmental stage, a process which has been linked to changing with environmental elements.

    Because if these parents were less presumptuous, they'd be considering that possibly a child's welfare has less to do with "avoiding conflicting sexuality cues in their consumed media" than "having a more diverse set of sexuality cue examples to observe".

    I'll give you that

    What I do have trouble conceding is that there is any kind of bigotry involved in these cases, cases which I only bring up because I feel that a sizable portion (how much, I don't know) of parents are operating on this notion.... a notion prone to scrutiny to be sure, but not a malicious one toward any particular sexuality either.
    Last edited by Webstor's Ghost; April 20, 2021 at 03:17am.
    This is a link to a YT channel "Dez360" --- a toy-related show I help with... and here's a link to a He-Man parody video Living In Eternia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPmYGVhilGw&t=68s
    GOOD JOURNEY, ORGERS!

  13. #88
    Heroic Warrior Stratos88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by BooperScoop View Post
    That seems to be the most likely. I mean, they wouldn't do Hordak this soon after SPOP.

    Also, if it is, that means he's probably a demon. It's seeming increasingly likely that this will be based heavily on early MOTU (like '82 and '83 stuff), and I know that will make a lot of people very happy.
    I hope they aren't going to have Skeletor just be misunderstood and he's Keldor possessed by said ancient demon. Let villains be villains, I'm tired of media looking to redeem them.

  14. #89
    Cobra Saboteur Firefly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Classified
    Posts
    12,117
    This thread is starting to get heated too, so I'll put a warning in here as well. Please be more respectful of each other and refrain from usage of words like "purist", "haters", or "bigots". Talk about the books/show and not each other. Thanks.

  15. #90
    Heroic Warrior Rikki Roxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    nWo Country
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos88 View Post
    I hope they aren't going to have Skeletor just be misunderstood and he's Keldor possessed by said ancient demon. Let villains be villains, I'm tired of media looking to redeem them.
    Yeah, it was "cute" for a while but it's become one of my least-favorite conventions in modern storytelling. "Nobody's 'bad', just misunderstood."

    And yeah, sure, sometimes that's true. And it can enrich the storytelling SOME of the time when you go with that. But it's become so standard now that I'd honestly prefer it if more bad guys were just Bad Guys.

    One of the things I loved with DC's MOTU comics was how they'd periodically tease a "redemption" arc for Skeletor, only to pull the rug out from under you and be like "Nope. More evil than ever! And of course, because he's SKELETOR!" And it would almost make you feel silly for even entertaining the notion that he'd even want to be "redeemed" in the first place. But you could buy into it in the moment, because EVERY bad guy is just abused or misguided or misunderstood or a victim of circumstance, anymore. To the point where when Skeletor would be like "Nope! Just pain like being evil!" it was honestly refreshing.

    I mean, psychopaths and sociopaths exist. Some people ARE just "bad people" and I feel that it's dishonest to suggest that behind every narcissist there's a "tragic backstory". Especially when it's become so overdone anymore. They try and make us sympathize with the JOKER nowadays, for crying out loud. That right there shows you how the whole thing has gone too far.
    My matches, toy reviews, promos and more are on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA

  16. #91
    Catwoman...Hear Me Roar! Mikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Catwoman's Catacomb
    Posts
    7,225
    It's only human nature to want to see the good in others even when it's hardest to do so.
    "Tell me I am beautiful - it means nothing to me. Tell me I am intellectual - well, I know it already. Tell me I am funny however, and that is the greatest compliment in the world that anyone can give me".

    - Julie Newmar (The Catwoman)

  17. #92
    Heroic Warrior Rikki Roxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    nWo Country
    Posts
    475
    Given the amount of people the Joker has killed in-universe, I think that ship has long since sailed on that character regardless of how much money that movie with Joaquin Phoenix made.

    Boy, was that an uncomfortable viewing experience in the theater. I liked the movie, but far too many people started cheering out loud once he started killing people. Somewhat disturbing. Regardless of how the film portrays him in a sympathetic light, there's a certain "moral event horizon" a character crosses where no sane and rational person should even be trying to "see the good in them" anymore and they're just plain irredeemable.

    Skeletor, same deal. Even if at one point he was a decent guy, how much bad stuff does he have to do before you can't defend him anymore? Generally not a lot, although in some versions he's worse. DC's "I'm going to murder the entire multiverse rather than lose to he-Man ever again" version was certainly irredeemable. No "good" left in THAT guy at all. Who'd even WANT to empathize with a guy like that? Only someone incredibly warped, I reckon.

    And so on and so forth. Fiction is fiction, and you can make up any backstory or motivation for a character that you choose. But quite frankly, anyone who assumes "There's some good in Everyone" simply hasn't met enough people, or they'd sing a different tune.
    My matches, toy reviews, promos and more are on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA

  18. #93
    Heroic Warrior Stratos88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by Rikki Roxx View Post
    Regardless of how the film portrays him in a sympathetic light, there's a certain "moral event horizon" a character crosses where no sane and rational person should even be trying to "see the good in them" anymore and they're just plain irredeemable.
    Agreed. It's when a story tries to keep a villain on the right side of that horizon so they can be redeemed where things just get boring. An ineffectual villain is a lot less entertaining to watch, keep Skeletor the Overlord of Evil.

  19. #94
    Heroic Warrior Durendal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,170
    Quote Originally Posted by Rikki Roxx View Post
    Skeletor, same deal. Even if at one point he was a decent guy, how much bad stuff does he have to do before you can't defend him anymore?
    Possibly infinite. It never occurred to Filmation He-Man to finally put Skeletor's ever-present threat to an end, even though he could easily have done so.

  20. #95
    Heroic Warrior A Dalek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos88 View Post
    I hope they aren't going to have Skeletor just be misunderstood and he's Keldor possessed by said ancient demon. Let villains be villains, I'm tired of media looking to redeem them.
    I don't think there's anything wrong with a redeemable villain who joins the main cast. After all a lot of the best Power Rangers were that.

    And Ellen/Cure Beat, who's my favourite character in the entire Precure franchise, was a villain who redeemed herself.

    So no I don't think having think we should never have redeemable villains.

    I don't necessarily think Skeletor should be one mind you. But I also think you are jumping conclusions when you say he will be that kind of villain.

    To frank we no nothing concrete about the show at this point and you are mostly crisscrossing it over things you are imagining it doing over anything we know it will do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rikki Roxx View Post
    Yeah, it was "cute" for a while but it's become one of my least-favorite conventions in modern storytelling. "Nobody's 'bad', just misunderstood."
    I don't think I've ever seen a redeemable villain who was "not bad just misunderstood". They have pretty much universally been bad people, who had enough redeemable qualities, for certain experiences to cause them to take a look at themselves and change for the better.
    Last edited by A Dalek; April 20, 2021 at 01:00pm.

  21. #96
    Court Magician
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Rikki Roxx View Post
    Skeletor, same deal. Even if at one point he was a decent guy, how much bad stuff does he have to do before you can't defend him anymore? Generally not a lot, although in some versions he's worse. DC's "I'm going to murder the entire multiverse rather than lose to he-Man ever again" version was certainly irredeemable. No "good" left in THAT guy at all. Who'd even WANT to empathize with a guy like that? Only someone incredibly warped, I reckon.
    As you say yourself, how evil he is depends on the version. I wouldn't want to watch Filmation or 200X He-Man kill his uncle when we've never seen Skeletor kill anyone in battle, let alone commit a murder.

  22. #97
    He-Man historian
    Jukka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Hämeenlinna, Finland
    Posts
    14,383
    Quote Originally Posted by MCX-Eternia View Post
    1) Was Adam really explicitly 16 in 200X? He looked younger than that. Teela was confirmed to be 16 in "Out of the Past"..
    Adam explicitly celebrates his 16th birthday in first episode of MYP.

    Adam and Teela usually are depicted to be same age.
    He-Man & She-Ra fan, writer to official Dark Horse MOTU/POP books

    · ToonJukka - Youtube Channel with He-Man/She-Ra videos; Origins, Trivia, Top5 lists and more!

  23. #98
    Heroic Warrior Stratos88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by A Dalek View Post
    To frank we no nothing concrete about the show at this point and you are mostly crisscrossing it over things you are imagining it doing over anything we know it will do.
    Well yeah, it's a message board. Of course we're going to talk and speculate about upcoming projects. Would you rather we all sat here silently until Mattel announced stuff? Nothing wrong with discussing possibilities.

  24. #99
    Heroic Warrior A Dalek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratos88 View Post
    Well yeah, it's a message board. Of course we're going to talk and speculate about upcoming projects. Would you rather we all sat here silently until Mattel announced stuff? Nothing wrong with discussing possibilities.
    There is a diference between speculating what a show might do and criticising it for doing something, it hasn't done yet and we have no real evidence it will do.

  25. #100
    Heroic Warrior Stratos88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by A Dalek View Post
    There is a diference between speculating what a show might do and criticising it for doing something, it hasn't done yet and we have no real evidence it will do.
    Where did I criticize the show for doing something it hasn't done? Discussing the trope of redeemable villains? That's not criticizing the show, it's criticizing the trope and saying I hope the show doesn't do it. There is a difference.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •