|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2022 13:50:13 GMT -5
I know the writer is king. If they so desire, Alfred the Butler could find a way to defeat the Living Tribunal if DC and Marvel were to collaborate. I get that.
But within the parameters of a fictional universe, are omnipotent characters redundant?
I did like John de Lancie as Q in TNG, but there’s only so much you can do with omnipotent (or near-omnipotent characters). It almost feels like there are only 3 stories you can tell about them.
I mean, there are these scenarios:
* Strip them of their powers * Introduce an equally or more powerful foe * “Neuter” them (Q could never have become a threat to Picard so he had to become his “friend”)
Fun as those scenarios are, and I believe Q faced them all, you can’t keep doing them. In the case of, say, the Spectre or Phantom Stranger, you can’t keep stripping them of their powers as that’ll get boring; you can’t keep introducing equally powerful foes as that’ll get boring; and if you “neuter” them in some way, or make them a passive character, how interesting is that? In my view, not interesting at all.
It’s not just about omnipotence in the truest sense of the word. I watched Ultraviolet recently, starring Milla Jovovich. While not omnipotent in a Q kind of way, the film was dull to me because I don’t think she faced a single challenge throughout the film. Everyone she faced got slaughtered. When she battled the big bad at the end, it was a one-sided fight. Seeing her struggle in combat might have made the film more interesting.
If I watch wrestling, I don’t want to watch a heel be the undefeated, unstoppable foe forever. There’s some mileage in it initially, but after a while, one-sided battles, where the opponent has no chance, becomes boring.
So I have little-to-no interest in characters who are omnipotent, no matter how visually cool they are. The only option I see, if credibility is to be a ‘thing’ in comics, is making them passive observers, but even that will get boring. I think that heroic and villainous omnipotent characters have a very limited shelf life for all the reasons above.
How should omnipotent characters be approached?
EDIT: Due to autocorrect being the most moronic thing ever created.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jun 15, 2022 14:10:54 GMT -5
I know the writer is king. If they so desire, Alfred the Butler could find a way to defeat the Living Tribunal if DC and Marvel were to collaborate. I get that. But within the parameters of a fictional universe, are omnipotent characters redundant? ............. How should omnipotent characters be approached? EDIT: Due to autocorrect being the most moronic thing ever created. Rarely. I have the same problems with omnipotent characters as I do supernatural: there are rarely built-in rules governing their actions. At best, you get a thoughtful story that explores the human condition as the protagonist sways the omnipotent antagonist to another viewpoint or to at least see things from new angles and consider them. Another frequent thing is the opposite who balances things. Those end of being metaphors about how too extreme a viewpoint tilts reality into danger and that balance is better long term. Fantastic Four introduced Galactus in a story that was essentially the End of the World, as God comes to render judgement upon the Earth. The Silver Surfer ends up being a wrinkle in things, as he comes to see that Galactus' need to consume destroys other living things. Meanwhile, the Watcher introduces an opposite to Galactus, in the form of the Ultimate Nullifier and apocalypse is avoided. However, Galactus became less interesting, to me, when he reappeared. You have the favorite Trek trope of super computers that are undone by questions that don't have binary answers. You also had the gimmick of the proto-Q, The Squire of Gothos (later retconned into being of the Q race), who turns out to be nothing more than a powerful child, playing with toys, until disciplined by his parents. It's all in the metaphor you want to use; but, they've pretty much been done to death and rarely is the omnipotent being either truly omnipotent or relatively alien. Something that powerful and beyond our norm should be remote and alien to us; but, so few writers ever really achieve that. Arthur C Clarke's 2001 is one where it kind of works. The monolith represents a type of omnipotence and we struggle to understand its actions or influences, mainly because we have to interpret them for ourselves, though Clarke's novel version (vs the film script) clarifies some elements more than the film (such as Moonwatcher, the man-ape who discovers the concept of "tools"). 2010 spent more time explaining what was happening; and, though I still liked the story (and the film), it feels less trusting of the audience. The best use in comics is as a metaphor for the concept of a supreme being and exploring what happens when the character "meets its maker" (some more literally than others). Problem is, if it was successful once, it must work 12 times, right?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2022 14:13:10 GMT -5
Excellent topic!
I'll throw another angle onto it...rather than deal with power levels, deal with them as more personas, and somewhat capricious ones at that. They can do virtually anything if they want to, but the uncertainty of where, when, and how they might engage in the hands of a clever writer I think can make things interesting.
This can have pitfalls too, and there may be temptation to simply use them as convenient deus ex machina when the page count is done and you need an exit to a story (we've all seen that one plenty of times). But again, I think there is certainly potential for much more interesting storylines.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2022 14:21:00 GMT -5
Actually, I think that's part of what made Dr. Manhattan so interesting in Watchmen. He didn't ultimately solve everything with his power, nor did he have an equally powered up adversary. His gradual distancing from a "human" way of thinking was a more "psychological/evolutionary" (if you will) development, and I think some genius on Moore's part.
|
|
|
Post by Professor Echo on Jun 15, 2022 15:57:39 GMT -5
Excellent topic! I'll throw another angle onto it...rather than deal with power levels, deal with them as more personas, and somewhat capricious ones at that. They can do virtually anything if they want to, but the uncertainty of where, when, and how they might engage in the hands of a clever writer I think can make things interesting. This can have pitfalls to, and there may be temptation to simply use them as convenient deus ex machina when the page count is done and you need an exit to a story (we've all seen that one plenty of times). But again, I think there is certainly potential for much more interesting storylines. That’s it exactly. If they are created as one dimensional omnipotent beings you will always lose whatever appeal, intrigue, conflict or drama they are capable of having. Without any flaws, even of their own making, you’re stuck in a dead end. Think of the original concept of Superman without kryptonite. “Oh here he goes saving the world again. What a surprise, yawn.” Without a chink in the armor, you’ve got a character that’s interesting ONCE and maybe not even that much.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jun 15, 2022 16:38:24 GMT -5
Excellent topic! I'll throw another angle onto it...rather than deal with power levels, deal with them as more personas, and somewhat capricious ones at that. They can do virtually anything if they want to, but the uncertainty of where, when, and how they might engage in the hands of a clever writer I think can make things interesting. This can have pitfalls too, and there may be temptation to simply use them as convenient deus ex machina when the page count is done and you need an exit to a story (we've all seen that one plenty of times). But again, I think there is certainly potential for much more interesting storylines. As a fan of cosmic Marvel and cosmic operas in general, this is probably what we be the deciding point about whether I like a story overall. Avengers: Celestial Quest fell prey to this big time. Where I enjoyed page and after page of the six issue mini, and then it fell flat inside 2-3 pages right at the end where the "solution" to the cosmic annihilation was so unreal to both characters that it almost ruined my desire to read it as much as would had the ending been either left open or better resolved and realistic of the characters involved in the solution. There's been other cosmic operas in comics over the years that have feel to this end. Be in a back up story in a comic or a major event. And for me that seems that the writer never had a plan and just was writing as they went along, realized they were running out of pages and wrapped it up real sloppily. But the Celestial Quest was the one that stood out the most as it had Thanos act in a way that was contrary and completely out of his character.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2022 16:38:26 GMT -5
Thinking about this more, although the Hulk isn’t omnipotent, I am glad that the TV series depowered him slightly, based on the chink in the armour that Professor Echo has mentioned.
I remember some great scenes that would have been less tense if it had been comicbook Hulk strength. One example is an early episode where the Hulk struggles to stop a car crusher. Animals gave him trouble in that show. Bullets wounded him. He was captured by the military. He bled on occasion. If the TV show had given him comicbook Hulk strength, none of those scenarios would have been edge-of-your seat in nature. I’m sure comicbook Hulk can hold up a car crusher with one finger - and would swat away a gorilla within a seconds. But TV Hulk had to struggle against those.
Now, I have got a little away from the topic of omnipotence, but Professor Echo’s comment about Superman got me thinking that way, which is why I liked how Byrne depowered Superman ever so slightly.
I can’t really bring myself to care that much about Darth Vader in his solo comics. He’s imposing and visually cool. And I know the drama/tension has to come in a different way, but he just never seems to get challenged, Luke Skywalker aside. He deflects everything, he has little trouble with opponents ranging from skilled fighters to droids, and he’s too powerful at times.
Too powerful is boring. Which is why, returning to omnipotence, I could not imagine binge-reading a Spectre or Phantom Stranger collection.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jun 15, 2022 17:10:40 GMT -5
Thinking about this more, although the Hulk isn’t omnipotent, I am glad that the TV series depowered him slightly, based on the chink in the armour that Professor Echo has mentioned. I remember some great scenes that would have been less tense if it had been comicbook Hulk strength. One example is an early episode where the Hulk struggles to stop a car crusher. Animals gave him trouble in that show. Bullets wounded him. He was captured by the military. He bled on occasion. If the TV show had given him comicbook Hulk strength, none of those scenarios would have been edge-of-your seat in nature. I’m sure comicbook Hulk can hold up a car crusher with one finger - and would swat away a gorilla within a seconds. But TV Hulk had to struggle against those. The limits of TV Hulk's power fluctuated from time to time. For instance, in the pilot, he flipped Banner's car, single-handedly lifted a large concrete pillar, and tore his way out of a chamber structured for undersea pressures. In a 4th season episode, he stopped a tank from running over him, and in another, pulled down a helicopter. It seemed his power grew as the seasons passed, but it still felt realistic because--as you note--he was not like the comic Hulk who is powerful enough to kick tanks into orbit.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jun 16, 2022 0:05:30 GMT -5
Another approach is not to treat them as adversaries: if they're truly imnipotent, they cannot be "fought" in the first place. If they can be, then they're not omnipotent, not even in a relative sense.
Kirby had the right idea with the Celestials, ignored, as usual, by everyone else: they aren't intergalactic bad guys to be attacked, they're a reality - and I think at a symbolic level Reality-with-a-capital-R itself - that has to be accepted, that can't be wished away or "defeated". The impulse to do so is a sign of immaturity that has to be overcome if humanity is to evolve beyond its primitive fight-or-flight instincts.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 16, 2022 5:32:44 GMT -5
So I have little-to-no interest in characters who are omnipotent, no matter how visually cool they are. The only option I see, if credibility is to be a ‘thing’ in comics, is making them passive observers, but even that will get boring. I think that heroic and villainous omnipotent characters have a very limited shelf life for all the reasons above. How should omnipotent characters be approached? I agree that omnipotent characters do, and should have a limited shelf life. Familiarity breeds contempt, and as far as I'm concerned massively powerful characters should be seen very sparsely (Thoth-Amon under Roy Thomas) or their activities should remain a mystery (the Celestials under Kirby, as observed by berkley ). Lovecraft's cosmic horrors come to mind. You rarely, if ever, see them at all; you have little idea of what they want, but they are all the more terrifying for it.
|
|
|
Post by pinkfloydsound17 on Jun 16, 2022 9:54:00 GMT -5
I have a hard time reading certain characters who seemingly have unlimited powers.
The way I try to view it though is how I am able to watch elite athletes. In theory, a player like Connor McDavid should score a goal or multiple points every game. He is the best in the league. But he does not. A team can shut him down and defeat him and, much like athletes, even a super powered being can have an off day or be unfocused and make a mistake. Also, a team can also let you down and you might be the best on the team but you can still lose the battle. Emotions are real and can be manipulated and throw off anybody, to the point where they act stupid or even forget what they are capable of in the moment. I find it helps when you have such a hero with other problems in their lives that another being can manipulate and use against them.
That or a team taking on an omnipotent being. But when you have strong being taking on much lesser strong being and somehow, the much lesser being wins (as if by chance), I find that hard to believe and enjoy. Underdog stories are great but they should be rarely used and require expert writing in order to pull off.
|
|
|
Post by commond on Jun 16, 2022 9:57:05 GMT -5
This thread is giving me Beyonder flashbacks.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jun 16, 2022 10:13:46 GMT -5
This thread is giving me Beyonder flashbacks. Geez. That scene where Peter Parker had to teach him how to pee.
|
|
|
Post by pinkfloydsound17 on Jun 16, 2022 12:23:26 GMT -5
Also, and maybe this sounds dumb, but if a person has 111 different abilities. And they are battling. They might forget that a certain attack or method would work better in the moment. Fighting other superbeings is a high paced, fast thinking event. You might overthink or you might forget of an attack or ability or strategy you have.
A human example...I have a bunch of tools in a shed and scrap pieces of everything. Last year, to trim my hedges, I used my ladder and leaned it into the hedge which was precarious and probably dangerous at times. This year, upon digging through the shed, I found a piece of wood I forgot I had used previously that was perfect to strap to the ladder top, distributing my weight more evenly and making it easier to do the job. Last summer I rushed to do it one day before going away on holiday and completely forgot about this added piece that made the job easier and safer.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2022 12:37:13 GMT -5
Also, and maybe this sounds dumb, but if a person has 111 different abilities. And they are battling. They might forget that a certain attack or method would work better in the moment. Fighting other superbeings is a high paced, fast thinking event. You might overthink or you might forget of an attack or ability or strategy you have. A human example...I have a bunch of tools in a shed and scrap pieces of everything. Last year, to trim my hedges, I used my ladder and leaned it into the hedge which was precarious and probably dangerous at times. This year, upon digging through the shed, I found a piece of wood I forgot I had used previously that was perfect to strap to the ladder top, distributing my weight more evenly and making it easier to do the job. Last summer I rushed to do it one day before going away on holiday and completely forgot about this added piece that made the job easier and safer. It doesn’t sound dumb at all, my friend. I like analogies of all kinds, and your one works for me.
|
|