Remove ads

Unpopular opinions we have on fiction

"Let's go! open up, it's time for Unpop!"
Alright, time for my mandatory Unpopular Opinions Post. Let's get this over with.
"You're late. You know the deal. You can Omelaspost for a Funny, or you can make an interesting post for an Insightful."
Here in Unpopular Opinions Poster Civilisation, no one chooses to make interesting posts. It's better to make the one joke everyone knows for the Funny, rather than risk your entire life for just one Insightful rating.
"Tomorrow you better not be late, or I'll have you posting for Informative reactions as punishment."
"Yes sir, sorry, I won't be late next time."

Down here, us Omelasposters only get one Rating a day. One Funny rating is just enough to get your post:reaction ratio to the next day. But that's the life of Unpopular Opinions Poster Civilisation. If you wanna survive, you have to Unpopular Opinions Post. Every Omelasposter has the same goal, and that's to make it to the top thread, where all the Brothers Karamazovposters live. Except, most Brothers Karamazovposters are born on the top thread. If you're an Omelasposter, there's only one way up, and that is through the Temple of Unpopular Opinions. The Temple of Unpopular Opinions is the only structure on SV that combines the bottom thread to the top thread. To make it up, you have to post an impossibly hard Unpopular Opinion Reply that no Omelasposter has ever completed. And that's assuming you even get the chance to post the reply in the thread. The inside of the Temple is protected by a barrier and the only way an Omelasposter gets past the barrier is if they've earned a gilded post. I've never even tried getting a gilded post before, but if I'm going to rank up to a Brothers Karamazovposter one day, I'm gonna have to.
 
Alane1 said:
It's not any stranger than heroes who fought in World War II still being active I suppose, and honestly Gotham has so much supernatural business and so many leaky cans of evil I'd completely buy that everyone in Gotham just plans live longer just from all the weirdness in the city.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


I wouldn't, because it would suggest that Gotham could have a positive effect on people.

Although on the other hand if they live longer, they're living longer in Gotham, which is its own kind of hell.
 
Last edited:
Rat King said:
Yeah, a take on Mordred where he and Arthur genuinely do have a complicated relationship (familial, political, etc.) makes for a better story.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That seems to have been the intent in the older fragments. With there actually being at least one fragment complimenting someone by saying they were as strong as Arthur and as good natured as Mordred. I seem to remember that originally the conflict was more between Mordred and his younger and more legitimate but less qualified half siblings.
 
Arawn_Emrys said:
That seems to have been the intent in the older fragments. With there actually being at least one fragment complimenting someone by saying they were as strong as Arthur and as good natured as Mordred. I seem to remember that originally the conflict was more between Mordred and his younger and more legitimate but less qualified half siblings.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think the original original fragments don't even tell us whether Mordred and Arthur were on opposite sides, just that they both died at the same battle.
 
Rat King said:
I think the original original fragments don't even tell us whether Mordred and Arthur were on opposite sides, just that they both died at the same battle.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is correct yeah. You do have centuries of people running with the idea of him as the villain, and I don't believe the framework given by the myths is bad. Plenty of writers have made it interesting and good, across those centuries. Still, I'm surprised all those "early versions of the story" novels haven't ever attempted a more sympathetic view of the figure to my knowledge. Though I have burned out a bit on the "Post-Roman trying really hard to be historical Fiction" form of King Arthur so. Like I'll read Sword at Sunset but I think that'll be the last.
 
I'm definitely not what you're looking for but If I ever finish it, I am playing with Sub-Roman Arthur blended with Medieval Romance Arthur.
 
MysticKnightJoe said:
This is correct yeah. You do have centuries of people running with the idea of him as the villain, and I don't believe the framework given by the myths is bad. Plenty of writers have made it interesting and good, across those centuries. Still, I'm surprised all those "early versions of the story" novels haven't ever attempted a more sympathetic view of the figure to my knowledge. Though I have burned out a bit on the "Post-Roman trying really hard to be historical Fiction" form of King Arthur so. Like I'll read Sword at Sunset but I think that'll be the last.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Out of curiosity, what versions of the Arthurian myth do you recommend? Other than TH White, I've already read that one.
 
CatOnTheWeb said:
Out of curiosity, what versions of the Arthurian myth do you recommend? Other than TH White, I've already read that one.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
TH White is, of course, amazing and if you have read that that is great! Kind of wish I had started with that instead of Cornwell in all honesty. I'm fond of Mary Stewart's Merlin series, which kind of does a half and half thing in terms of the "Historical and Fantasy" divide. The Prince Valiant strip is pretty great, Boorman's Excalibur is a good movie that covers everything fairly soundly. It is fun because I think I am just scratching the surface here!

Oh this is random, but there is this big collection called "The Great Book of King Arthur" which is a good collection of stories that are a little more unique than just the usual ones.
 
Last edited:
foamy said:
I wouldn't, because it would suggest that Gotham could have a positive effect on people.

Although on the other hand if they live longer, they're living longer in Gotham...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Speaking of Gotham, I think I'd like, if possible, for the state of Gotham to be changing as Batman ages.

Initially, I think it should be like a full on gothic horror shitshow where everything is dark and crazy mobsters and corrupt officials are in charge. But as Batman comes and the rest of the Batclan comes into play, it should look much cleaner, sleeker, more hopeful.

I do just want it to be shown that, hey, Batman is not gonna live to see his crusade finished but he very much did have a positive affect on Gotham.
 
Gotham does have a rough sketch of it's past and future - year one and similar stuff shows the era of gotham when it was more of a noir crime drama, which Batman did kinda flush out to be replaced by the rogues gallery. And there's sort of a suggestion of cyberpunk future gotham even if Beyond is dubiously still in the canon I think. They could use an additional phase for late batman career or an explanation of how the title is going to be handed down. (I believe the perennial complaint with fans is that they often attempt to have somebody take up the name and then that change has to be rolled back to get towards the status quo and the brand image stuff?)
 
NemoMarx said:
Gotham does have a rough sketch of it's past and future - year one and similar stuff shows the era of gotham when it was more of a noir crime drama, which Batman did kinda flush out to be replaced by the rogues gallery. And there's sort of a suggestion of cyberpunk future gotham even if Beyond is dubiously still in the canon I think. They could use an additional phase for late batman career or an explanation of how the title is going to be handed down. (I believe the perennial complaint with fans is that they often attempt to have somebody take up the name and then that change has to be rolled back to get towards the status quo and the brand image stuff?)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You had Dick as Batman, which DC refuses to acknowledge ever happened even though it was awesome, and then you have Future State Batman who I'm pretty sure no one liked? I might have a small sample size there though
 
I have an odd relationship with Batman Beyond, even beyond (ha) my odd relationship with the DCAU in general, in that I'm not necessarily the biggest fan of Bruce driving away all the Batfamily since I consider one of the bigger strengths of Batman as an archetype being the capacity to transcend trauma and rise above demons which don't really fit together neatly.

(Don't get it twisted, Terry is still my GOAT as future Batman)
 
Voikirium said:
I have an odd relationship with Batman Beyond, even beyond (ha) my odd relationship with the DCAU in general, in that I'm not necessarily the biggest fan of Bruce driving away all the Batfamily since I consider one of the bigger strengths of Batman as an archetype being the capacity to transcend trauma and rise above demons which don't really fit together neatly.

(Don't get it twisted, Terry is still my GOAT as future Batman)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If it makes you feel better Batman Beyond exists in an odd spot anyway. I don't think you get the DCAU as a proper thing until maybe Justice League, until then it's largely just Batman, Superman, and their associated casts. As far Batman was concerned his story was ended in 99 a few years before the Justice League show came out. So Batman Beyond has to fit in there somewhere.
 
Voikirium said:
I have an odd relationship with Batman Beyond, even beyond (ha) my odd relationship with the DCAU in general, in that I'm not necessarily the biggest fan of Bruce driving away all the Batfamily since I consider one of the bigger strengths of Batman as an archetype being the capacity to transcend trauma and rise above demons which don't really fit together neatly.

(Don't get it twisted, Terry is still my GOAT as future Batman)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Honestly, I kind of liked the one comic where we got a brief glimpse of Old Man Damian as the lonely retired Batman who mentors Terry instead of Bruce.

It just works.
 
Actually, Wonder Woman opinion this time, one that makes me probably a hypocrite:

George Perez's All-Loving Amazons are superior to the "mythologically accurate figures" people keep trying to produce, but also I am annoyed at what he does with Ares, in particular how Poseidon helps Diana because Ares killed his son, the same son who assaulted Ares' daughter, without acknowledging that facet, which seems like some very important context.
 
Voikirium said:
Actually, Wonder Woman opinion this time, one that makes me probably a hypocrite:

George Perez's All-Loving Amazons are superior to the "mythologically accurate figures" people keep trying to produce, but also I am annoyed at what he does with Ares, in particular how Poseidon helps Diana because Ares killed his son, the same son who assaulted Ares' daughter, without acknowledging that facet, which seems like some very important context.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Original Wonder Woman didn't really do much with Greek Mythology, the Amazons were just a kind of science fantasy utopia. George Perez kept the utopian aspects but tied them more tightly to Greek Mythology, with the Goddesses actually intervening and stuff. I think he overall did a solid job.
 
Pidl said:
Not for the Greek pantheon. Sexual assault is just how they say hello.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

As I recall from the myth in question the gods did put Ares on trial but ultimately found Ares was justified in killing Poseidon's son for trying to rape Ares's artist daughter though that killing still earned Ares the moniker of kin slayer.
 
Sexual assault was still, generally, a crime in Ancient Greece.
Even if for different reasons than it is today.
It just happened to be one you could get away with if you were powerful enough, and the victim or their relatives were not (nothing new there).
God assaulting a mortal with no divine patrons is not going to cause issues.
But assaulting the daughter of another god, one who actually seems to give a shit about their offspring, not the smartest move.
 
I think the Jurassic World trilogy was pretty good overall, and that Jurassic World itself was the second best film of the series. Jurassic World actually captured the Indominus rex extremely well, showcasing the exact concept of the books- these are terrifying genetic monsters, not regular animals.

And people wildly overstate how much control Owen had over the raptors, Blue goes basically entirely feral in the final movie, even slicing open his hand.
 
I mentioned FF7 Rebirth above a bit so guess I'll drop a more unified hot take: I don't think where it ended was right for that part of the story. Like honestly moreso than any lore change I think the pacing has been really thrown out of wack a bit and I have trouble imagining where the third game will even start. I don't think Aerith's death really worked as a final bit, the game should have ended at the Northern Crater.
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top