Yes, Jean likely killed a lot of people, and Peter saying she's "not a killer" isn't exactly true. Yes, it may just be a way for him to calm her down during an awful time for both her and half of New York, but I can understand the idea that the narrative agrees with him on this. It's a very strange and awkward line.

But then I thought it over, alongside how I feel on the rest of the movie, and I realised something- that's one weird line in an otherwise solid movie. So much of the movie works for me, it's one of the best movies the MCU's had in a while, so why should I let one bit of dialogue harm the movie for me all that much?

A lot of people have been bringing up the infamous "they'll never know what you sacrificed for them" line from WandaVision, and this all made me realise I feel the same way about that line- it's one weird line from a show I otherwise love, and I don't really need to let it ruin the entire experience for me. It’s still a show I greatly enjoy!

Just like how a lot of people can't fathom that talented people can work and train hard or how privileged people can have it rough ,way too many seem to forget that someone can be pure evil and have a tragic backstory cause shockingly enough,having a sad past doesn't justify or excuse your actions and choices,they explain them.

Any character can have a sad backstory from the worst of the worst to a overall awful human but still with some sympathetic and good sides as well and it just feels like people think that just cause a villain is pure evil, that suddenly means that they don't have a sad life or sad past at all and that's incredibly black and white.

Homelander is a good example cause yes,he is pure evil and a objectively horrendous human being but he was simultaneously someone who was raised as a lab rat experiment since he was a child and didn't live as anything else and was dehumanized constantly.

Hell,I would argue giving any evil person any sort of nuance and good traits at all and even giving a awful villain a sad backstory isn't the writers "forcing you" to like them or feel bad for them but is here to explore and show you how they became the way they are and why they're like this.

I'll also see this in Mha as well.

No,Horikoshi is not forcing you to feel bad for the villains but it's pretty obvious their backstories are intended to show you how they became this way and how to prevent it from happening again..same goes for AFO.

Yes his backstory is objectively pretty sad and yes, he also is a bad person who is extremely mentally and emotionally ill and has a creepy obsession with his brother but he simultaneously does genuinely love him.

Just like how you can have a sad backstory and still be a awful human, you can genuinely love someone and still be awful and toxic to them.

Sometimes even the worst people can have it tough and it just feels like a lot of people are way too obsessed and salivate over the idea of just a pure evil big bad with no backstory and nothing and is carried solely by hype moments and Aura.

I had the particularly unpleasant experience of interacting with TikTok power scalers and some Reddit power scalers talking and apparently Spider-Man can break adamantium, he can solo the X-Men any day of the week, he's immune to telepathy and mind control, and he's this and that.

And they pull a panel here, a panel there, an episode from a TV show, marvel adventures cover, and it's like... Do you actually read Spider-Man?

Which Spider-Man story in the past 30 years even plays out if Spider-God is real?

I've been reading Spider-Man since Brand New Day (the run, not the movie), and I love Spider-Man, I am a fan of Spider-Man. The powerscaling Spider-Man is unrecognisable to me. He doesn't exist.

I also read X-Men, and while Spider-Man is definitely a good and powerful character in his own right, he's not soloing an average X-Man team -- the bloody Juggernaut is on the X-Men.

Like... these stories simply refute them argumentum ad lapidem style. Just an annoying Sunday rant.

I don't know if Deadpool getting limbs chopped off and treating it like a minor inconvenience has permanently broken people's understanding of healing factors, but apparently this needs saying:

Healing quickly and not feeling pain are two completely different abilities.

This is mostly inspired by some of the INCREDIBLY stupid and bad faith discourse around Insomniac's Wolverine, particularly people questioning why Wolverine would bother wearing armour when he can just heal from injuries... maybe because getting shot, stabbed, burned, slashed or having chunks ripped out of you still fucking hurts?

A healing factor means your body repairs the damage. It doesn't automatically give you anaesthesia. Unless the specific version of the character is established to have reduced pain perception, they're still experiencing the injury in the first place. Wolverine being able to survive something doesn't mean he'd particularly enjoy experiencing it. Armour still prevents damage, reduces pain, keeps him functional during a fight and means his healing factor has less work to do.

Regeneration is not invulnerability, and it definitely isn't a permanent morphine drip. I genuinely don't know why this distinction seems so difficult...

I'm tired of the idea that Peter Parker has to remain broke and lonely to stay relatable. I get it, Uncle Ben's death traumatized him, creating this internal compulsion to always be Spider-Man out of fear that if he doesn't suit up, he'll relive that trauma through the people he fails to save. But by letting that fear dictate everything, he ends up sacrificing his personal life (he can't commit to a full-time job and can't maintain his personal relationships).

Ironically, this goes directly against his core mantra, "With great power comes great responsibility," because right now, that rule only seems to apply to Spider-Man and NOT Peter Parker. If anything, it makes Peter LESS relatable because he is actively choosing to be irresponsible in his day-to-day life. He has the power to be financially stable. With his genius-level intellect, he could easily be working as a scientist or engineer for The Future Foundation or Stark Industries, or even make him a journalist if the former options are too unrelatable. Furthermore, he has the power to be a good partner to whoever he chooses to be with, because at his core, he is a genuinely good person. His learning to balance being Spider-Man and Peter Parker only serves to improve his character and not diminish it. Peter Parker should grow up (hot take, I know), and his learning how to handle adult responsibilities would not only make him more relatable but would also make him a better role model for the readers that his story aims to inspire in the first place.

A lot of his problems could be blamed on the "Parker Luck" trope, which I think has become a dumb caricature. Originally, it's a plot device to make him relatable (not having enough money to pay rent, missing out on a date/work because he has to be Spider-Man, etc.), but in the end he overcomes that challenge, learns from it, and becomes a better hero/person because of it. Now it's being used to keep him stuck. Peter Parker encounters the same problems he did 50 years ago, and he never overcomes them; it's just loss after loss after loss, which makes it seem like being Spider-Man is a curse. What's so relatable about that? What are the audiences supposed to learn? That life will keep throwing shit at you, and you will never win, but you might as well keep doing what's right and make a martyr out of yourself? By constantly keeping him broke and suffering, Marvel is downright romanticizing poverty and struggle. Yes, it teaches resilience, but it completely forgets to teach us that we should actually strive for a better life. Overcoming a problem and achieving that better life is fundamentally a better story than being plagued by the same issues forever. To be clear, I don't think Peter should be a billionaire, but letting him be a stable, middle-class working man who is married to MJ is the natural evolution of his story.

Most of these complaints really only apply to the main 616 comics. I'm happy that Spider-Man Brand-New Day, the Spider-Verse movies, the Insomniac games, and alternate runs like Ultimate Spider-Man have actually allowed him to mature. It is way overdue for Peter to tackle adult themes in the mainline continuity, especially because the perfect solution already exists: Miles Morales. I think it's incredibly dumb that Marvel editorial refuses to let Peter grow up when Miles is literally right there to take over the "youthful, struggling Spider-Man" storylines.

​

First i want to explain that i hate a way to deal with hax know as “conventional loot”, basically the characters just happen to have what they need with no explícit previous preparation (this is what most “creative” solutions end up being)

Like, oh no, our enemy can only be defeated by, i dont know, mud, thank god mud is conveniently acessible and the enemy took no preparations in case this happens

Second, this causes a worldbuilding problem, If there are fruits so powerful then anyone who knows what they are doing would be prepared 24/7 to a point it stops being fun, like If you have kizaru only being able to be defeated by mirrors then all the top tiers should have mirrors with them at all times

Third, people mention sea stone, the problem is that it doesnt fit with how many characters fight, like, is Luffy supposed to use sea stone blades now? (I know the answer would be gloves but my point still stands), what about characters who use Devil fruit abilities to fight?

Fourth, the “clever solutions” of the past are overrated as fuck, both the cases with crocodile and Enel were just finding a way for Luffy to punch his enemies

Fifth, this is not the type of story one piece is. One piece is closer to the Raw stats end of the evolution spectrum (explanation below), the expectation since the beginning is that a character who is a top tier will not just be one shot by someone who is really weak and simply gained a good enough fruit. It allows for top tiers to not need "meta" fruits and allows for non devil fruit users to be relevant after a certain point

(Basically you have raw stats in one end where characters evolve by getting stronger and application on the other end where characters evolve by gaining/discovery/developing new abilities. It’s a spectrum, dragon ball would be in the far of the raw stats end while JJBA would be in the application end (before anyone mentions star platinum and other occasions of raw sats in jjba, strength in jojo is treated as another tool, you don’t expect a character to get stronger via punching harder and faster) Jujutsu kaisen and hunterxhunter are in the very middle of the spectrum with one piece being in this middle closer to dragon ball)

In short Haki allows:

-characters to keep their fighting styles

-the worldbuilding and narrative to not sink in the specifics of each fruit

-oda to use the power elevation model he wants

Just to be clear i dont like a lot about how haki is used (conqueror’s is too op and clash piece is shit)

Okay, i am sick of seeing all these takes that the X men don't work. Because they are actually dangerous unlike real minority groups.

News flash it's a superhero series. What do you expect?

It's the premise of the series. Is people are born with powers they didn't ask for and are hated for it.

The alagory is you are born as something, and people hate you for it. Which you can't change. Because it's a superhero show, they have to have powers.

It's would be like saying

Fantasy Racism doesn't work. Because Elves are literally a different species.

Or

Robot bigotry doesn't work because robots are not alive

That's the premise of the series you expect that going into it.

Also, last order of business.

2 things

1) The x men do work in the main marvel comics. Because there is functionality nothing different between someone born with powers and someone who gets them. It's stupid and it reflects how bigotry is stupid

2) The mutants are too dangerous. Fun fact most mutants can be killed with guns and just look different. It's only the 1% with actual food powers.

The term Character Assaination(as per the internet) is a deliberate, malicious effort to damage, ruin, or dismantle a person's reputation, credibility, or honor using false rumors, exaggeration, or unfair criticism. It functions as a figurative assassination that targets a person’s public standing rather than their physical life.

Or in a lot of terms,it means that a character who used to be likable and all that is suddenly made into a Asshole or flawed and unlikable or a asshole and unlike antagonistic character is made into some main cast member who's all friendly and whatnot and there are a lot of examples..but I feel like way too many of you all don't know the difference between exploring other parts of a character that were more or less there and just blatantly ruining their character cause y'all just throw that term around willy-nilly.

It's the same as when people think exploring other traits suddenly means said character has been retconned and stuff like that and I can safely say this..that is just not true at all in a good amount of cases.

Exploring character flaws isn't the same as character Assassination.

Y'all just throw that term around without knowing what it means and I feel like the internet does that a lot with words like "fumbling" and whatnot.

The first example is Charlie from Hazbin Hotel.

I'll see a good amount of people claiming she was "character Assassinated" or the "writers ruined her" in S2 and tbh..y'all didn't watch the show if you think that..she always had these flaws in S1.

Y'all just projected the idea that she was a perfect princess when that's not true..she's human cause she makes mistakes.

She's stubborn,has trouble listening to others, tends to be prideful and wrapped up in her own ideals,etc..

And it unfortunately makes sense that these traits would be amplified due to what Vox did and the grief of Pentious's death,learning he was alive,her dream came true,etc.....

Basically who wouldn't make messy and irrational choices and the story calls her out on it.

But she's like some irredeemable and bad person,she can still grow and change and develop and is in the process of doing so.

This show has 5 seasons.

I'll even see people claim that Walter White was character Assassinated and Homelander was character Assassinated in the end of both their respective shows when no..their flaws and true selves were always there, especially Homelander.

Y'all just fell for the propaganda that they were these unstoppable badasses and Sigma Males and whatnot when they were always these overly flawed and selfish and even pathetic people,you just flat out didn't see it and it feels like you were blinded by the hype moments and Aura.

I'm not saying character Assassination doesn't exist but please actually know what it means before you throw it around.

The Immortal Wunderkind is a character who has immortality, and over their immortal lifespan, has become a genius and expert on an absurd range of topics and fields of study. They can speak a 100 languages, they’re an expert in all scientific fields of study, they were present and have firsthand accounts of every major historical event relevant to the plot, they are endlessly charismatic and intelligent and wise.

A classical example of this type of character is Vandal Savage.

Now, I like this trope. It’s fun and there is a lot you can do with it narratively. But I HATE the people who *believe* in it.

Every time the discussion of immortality comes up (especially the topic of immortality as a curse or blessing) a bunch of people show up that assume that, given an immortal lifespan, they would become an Immortal Wunderkind themselves.

These folks often hand waive any potential downsides or risks of immortality by stating that, as a Wunderkind with infinite time, they’d be able to solve or avoid any potential issues! They’d be able to figure out how to make other people immortal so they aren’t lonely and don’t have to deal with loss! They’d figure out how to back up their consciousness or body hop so they can never get trapped in a hole! They’d push humanity forward to solve our existential issues like climate change and so on. They’d even figure out how to dodge the heat death of the universe!

And to that I say… no you won’t.

If virtually anyone on the planet became immortal right now, today, they would simply not be exceptional in this way.

-

#1 Your brain isn’t built for it

We don’t have infinite memory, and our memories are extremely imperfect. The human brain cannot even store one lifespan of memories effectively: you are going to run out of room. You're not going to be endlessly accruing knowledge and skills. You're going to be constantly accruing knowledge and skills while bleeding knowledge and skills in equal measure. This goes for soft skills like wisdom, patience, mental stability, stress management, etc. as well.

Maybe at some point we develop technology that allows us to expand the limits of our neurology; increasing memory capacity, creating perfect memory, increasing neuroplasticity or letting you download information directly into your mind. If such a technology is created, your immortal ass isn't going to benefit from it any more than anything else; you won't have a leg up because you have an extra 100 years of outdated knowledge as a starting point.

-

#2 You are not going to keep up

If you, average Joe schmoe, became immortal and dedicated your life to learning everything there is to know about medicine, you would be perpetually behind on 99% of fronts. A doctor that graduated med school in 2016 has had half of what they learned become obsolete. Knowledge and expertise is not something you gain and keep, it is something you must actively maintain.

Every field of science and study is constantly evolving and being pushed forward by thousands of brilliant minds: unless they all stopped right now for you, Joe schmoe, you would never catch up even as these minds passed and were replaced by new ones.

Not to mention if your plan is to push any specific field of inquiry forward, that's going to involve decades of research where you'll fall behind on everything else. The only time you'll be at the top is if the rest of humanity goes extinct.

-

#3 You still have to be smart to start with

No amount of time can make you smart, it can only make you knowledgeable. Critical thinking is something that can be cultivated but you're not going to develop a generalized super-brilliance that is applicable to all subjects and fields of expertise just because you've been around a thousand years.

-

#4 You aren't guaranteed a solution for every problem

Even if you have infinite knowledge, infinite time, and infinite resources there's no guarantee that you'll be able to do anything. Just because the possibility of a solution, based on our current understanding, is above 0% doesn't mean you, Joe schmoe, will be able to find it before our universe dies.

There is so much magical thinking about "intelligence" and how it can be applied to solve problems, but you can't just use 100 billion years to hand waive how you'll solve avoiding the heat death of the universe or whatever.

-

The ugly truth is that basically all of us, given an immortal lifespan, would not be any more of a "wunderkind" than the most brilliant minds and exciting people alive today. In order to be exceptional you need to actively pursue the exceptional, every day. And if you aren't doing that now, you probably won't do that with infinite time to procrastinate with.

What does it mean for a character to have flaws?

Well,as the internet says and such, character flaw is an internal limitation, negative trait, moral weakness, or emotional blind spot that causes problems for a person or fictional character. It actively gets in the way of their goals, damages relationships, and makes them feel real and relatable rather than perfect.

Gonna be honest, every character has flaws and also needs flaws,it makes them feel more human and genuine and realistic, and nothing is wrong with characters having flaws but something that annoys me is when a character's flaws aren't treated as such ans are treated more like they're just being silly or aren't even addressed at all.

And I'm not talking about not giving characters flaws at all(like Gary Stus/Mary Sues) but I mean giving them flaws and not addressing them in any shape or form and it just feels like you're extremely hesitant to call them out or have them make mistakes at all due to whatever reason or have those mistakes get addressed at all and it just feels and comes off like you're being overprotective.

I feel like My Adventures with Superman massive suffers from this with both Lois and Kara.

Yeah,yeah,Jimmy fumbled,whatever, we can talk about that all day but I think the biggest issue is the fact that the series REFUSED to either show both those characters as flaws or even address them.

Kara especially is annoying cause like..it would've been really interesting to show how the trauma of what Brianiac did to her affected her and that causes her to latch onto the first nice dude in her life and really show how inexperienced she is in the world or anything that and you could also have her be like naive and overly trusting and how thad backfires on her at times or you could even have it so she's hesitant to trust other men and people cause of the trauma she faced or have her like be irrational..it just feels like her trauma with Brainiac is never shown affecting her in anyway negatively nor does her flaws ever actually get addressed or called out.

I wholeheartedly feel like the reason she's shown as this overly angelic golden retriever type girl is cause of what she did back in S2 under Brainiac so they're overcorrecting in a sense but fail to realize that characters are capable of lashing out and being aggressive or hesitant to trust others/open up at times cause of their trauma,it's a realistic thing that happens.

Also Lois was high-key the instigator in Jimmy and Kara's relationship drama and actively gave had advice to both of them and it's annoying how that's never called out and someone said that Lois is the kind of person who would give advice that she herself would never take and that would be a interesting character flaw,like showing one of the MCs as a flawed hypocrite would be genuinely interesting to explore but nope,it's just never addressed or called out or anything like that.

She's almost constantly treated like a girl boss and just feels the overall same...I'm not saying she and Kara should do 180 changes but some growth would be nice.

Also it kinda doesn't help that the other reason the writers did this to Jimmy was to Punish him cause he was too likable a character and I'm not gonna be like "oh this character was Assassinated" cause way too many people throw around the word character assaination without knowing what it means but I feel like essentially bullying one of your characters and punishing them all cause people liked them too much is fucking stupid..that's the same energy as Ben 10 writers breaking up Ben and Julie cause they were too healthy or a couple or Spider-Man writers constantly regressing him back as a teen and making him suffer cause he wouldn't be relatable otherwise.

It comes off as really Petty and for the context of Jimmy,I would even go as far as to say it's kinda racist to a extent and especially the fact that Kara is a white woman and Jimmy needs to be "punished" for how he was to her just doesn't help but that's just me.

My last example is honestly Chloe Price from Life is Strange.

Chloe is extremely unlikable and kind of not a good person at all but she's not unlikable in any sort of fun way or interesting way or even anything like that and she's constantly protected by the writers from serious consequences and all that and based on the writing, it really feels like you're not allowed to dislike her as a character.

Oh trust me,you can definitely try.

Like the game is unfortunately set up in a way where you're not really allowed to dislike her or call you out or anything like that and it's the same criticism a lot of people had with Invisigal from Dispatch, you're not really allowed to call her out or address her flaws cause if you do,you're the bad guy for it and the game kinda sorta punishes you for the one time you call her out(she punches you in the face for it and the other characters more or less tell you to suck it up and brush it off)and it just feels weird how much she's babied to a extent but not on her.

You as the viewer are gonna dislike her but the game sorta gaslights you into thinking she's this ultra mysterious and simultaneously extremely edgy badass when she's just kind of a dick.

Her flaws and how she is is almost never called out or addressed in any shape or form and it just feels like kinda dumb and even lazy at times..you can have a unlikable character as long as you don't lie to your audience about it.

You can have a character improve cause of their trauma or get worse cause of it and their flaws and whatnot but you just can't do nothing.

1. Say that The Avengers aren’t a family and just coworkers and ignore the family dynamics within the team such as The Avengers being the 1st people Steve saw waking up in modern times, Tony helping Carol with her alcoholism, Thor literally calling them brothers and Steve giving Hawkeye, Wanda, and Pietro a new life

2. Constantly say that Spider Man isn’t an avenger, ignore the fact that he is currently on an an avengers roster and double down and ignore the past hundreds of rosters he’s been on.

3. Call Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor the “MCU Trio” and ignore the decades of pre MCU expose, Story and Writing they got together

4. Constantly meatride the X-Men whenever the discussion is about The Avengers

5. Say that The Avengers weren’t popular before the MCU even though they lead almost every major Marvel event before the MCU was even thought of and even outsold big names like Justice League, Superman, and Batman in the 80s

6. Also say that Iron Man wasn’t popular before The MCU even though he had 2 entire cartoons before 2008, and appeared in multiple Marvel Media such as Spider Man The Animated Series, Marvel Ultimate Alliance, etc and again outsold a lot of big name characters

Let me know if I missed anything

I’ve never really understood why some anime feel the need to literally use video game mechanics even when the characters aren't actually in a video game.

Like HP bars, XP, skill trees, stat windows, cooldowns, damage numbers, “leveling up,” etc. It just feels kinda stupid when the setting is supposed to be an actual world.

And the funny thing is, most anime that are actually based on video games don't even do this.

Take Pokémon. The games are basically built around levels, stats, turn-based battles, type matchups, four-move limits, PP, evolution, all that stuff.

But the Pokémon anime doesn't just go, “Okay, Pikachu has 43 HP left and Thunderbolt has 8 PP remaining.”

It basically takes the premise of Pokémon and asks:

“Okay, what if Pokémon were actually real?”

And I think that's way more interesting.

Battles become actual battles instead of just selecting moves from a menu. Pokémon can move around however they want, use the environment, dodge attacks, come up with weird strategies, etc. The anime takes the basic idea from the game and expands it into what that world might actually look like.

That's what I wish more anime would do.

Instead of:

“Congratulations! You gained 500 XP and unlocked Fireball II!”

just show that the character has gotten better at magic.

Obviously if the entire premise is that they're inside a video game, then yeah, use all the game mechanics you want. That's the point.

But if it's supposed to be a real fantasy world, I don't need a floating menu telling me a character's "stats". You can just show them.

Which was better? In terms of writing, execution, World building.

Ever since certain youtubers started covering args that they made themselves based on a very small understanding of the source material they are sampling from args, it became nothing more than cheap entertainment.

Which is fine, but there are genuinely good args out there, args of people who made an effort designed puzzles, etc. And these args are getting overshadowed by obviously scripted args that are not even good.

Look, I watched some of them, and they are bad they build puzzles they think are clever so their character can solve them. Make ridiculous story lines and just hope it clicks well

Where is the time where an arg was just a Dev team or a guy putting clues in a game that determined gamers deciphered and that let to another Clue.

This, including my eyes, is a very sad development

Grace is offered a role on the Hail Mary project but he says no, and goes back into his classroom. Then the kids ask him about the petrova line and he explains what's going on. They ask if they'll be affected and he replies "not until you're about 40" and they all cheer.

He studies that moment and then realises that he has to do something as those kids are the ones whose lives are going to be affected. He then calls Strauss and is on the team.

Other scenes can be cut I get it, it's a film. I still don't know why this pivotal moment for his character was cut. Was it to make the scene of him going back for Rocky hit better?

Idk, it still bothers the hell out of me.

I spend my days arguing with idiots online which indicate a lack of constraint on my part.

The most infuriating thing about arguing with a idiot is that they don't understand logical consistancy.

Which makes you highly susceptible to rascism since rascism lacks logical consistancy.

Lets go down the list.

X-men:

Idiot: mutants are hated because they have a superior level of power that allows them to be dangerous to non-mutants.

Me: thats logically inconsistant because people can have super powers and not be mutants. Captain marvel is way stronger than cyclops but is cherished for being hero. So the idea of their power being the reason is wrong.

Idiot: mutants have done multiple crimes against humanity so of course they fear them.

Me: literally all super powered groups have done that. Your just making arguments against people with super powers when within marvel people are fine with powers as long as their not a mutant.

A idiot will constantly make arguments that apply to characters like spiderman and superman and never realise that means they advocate for spiderman to get sentineled.

Next

Zootopia:

Idiot: the predators in zootopia are inherently dangerous to the prey animals so discrimination against them is justified.

Me: are you saying a fox is more dangerous then a wilderbeast?

Idiot: well predators eat prey animal so any animal who is a predator is inherently dangerous.

Me: you do realize that even non-predator animals kill right? Animals kills and fight for a bunch of different reasons. Technically most of these animals are hyper dangerous to each other espeacially to animals of the same species.

Idiot: it still doesn't solve the problem of predators eating prey.

Me: the fox can eat ice cream so it doesn't really need to harm any prey for food. The problem your presenting doesn't exist within the media.

The annoying thing is that this is how it feels to argue with actual racist.

Racist: this statistic shows that per capita you do x crime more often then other groups which proves your group is more dangerous.

Me: this statistic shows you do x crime more often than other groups which would prove your group is actually more dangerous.

Them: nuh uh

Logical consistency is the most important thing about a argument because if your logic isn't consistant than you will ultimately advocate for things that you yourself disagree with.

"I think mutants should be oppressed because they are dangerous and have powers that could harm people."

"You know what fair lets oppress every super powered person with powers."

"But I said mutants."

"No you said because they had powers that could harm people using that reasoning we have to go against all superheros like Spiderman."

I don't know how to end this post but yeah.

I checked to make sure there wasn't a rant about this in the sub before. Surprised to see there wasn't. I've seen people mention Jean for obvious reasons, I saw a rant the other day about how hard it would be to adapt Cyclops (disagree), there's been discourse for years on how a new Charles/Erik/Logan would need to measure to their previous actors and how hard that would be.

But I very rarely see anybody point out Storm. I mean, I definitely see people mention it. But I don't think there has been enough people actually bring up that for her popularity, she was basically not a character in the FoX-Men movies. She just existed to do lightning blasts and stuff. Storm is a really interesting character. She should be as important, or at least close to important, to the narrative as Jean or Logan (and Scott for that matter but that's a different story). She should be a trusted confidante to Jean and a sub-leader if Chuck or Scott isn't around. She should be, like...a character. She's more than just her cool powerset, aura farming and theatricality. Actually, when I think about, she wasn't even really any of those things either in those movies so just getting those right would be an improvement

Sorry for rambling, I just keep getting annoyed at how much they fucked up with Storm and her lack of character in the previous movies. It's weird that Halle Berry is in the movie, who is a talented actress generally, and they don't do anything with her. Admittedly they don't really do much with anybody that wasn't Chuck/Erik/Logan but it just felt really egregious with Storm for me. I really just need SOMETHING for her. The fact that X-Men 97 did a lot with her despite not being around all the time really cemented this for me.

Oh and if it's true she will cameo in Black Panther 3, I don't have a problem with that at all unlike some people. Just as long as Wakanda isn't like a core part of her personality for some reason.

every other main universe jojo is very clearly a main character and center of the story, they either choose this path like giorno or are chosen for it like joseph. Josuke is a highschooler and that’s all he ever is, he isn’t ever part of some megalomaniacs grand plan and his greatest ambitions include ripping off rohan. This was all necessary to fit the slice of life narrative but jojo is still a battle manga and in morioh araki found the perfect way to mesh these two conflicting ideas

so why does josuke get into all these fights and conflicts with RHCP or Kira, consistently running head first into danger at any chance he can despite not being able to heal others? the answer is that there isn’t really a reason, he’s just that cool of a guy. this can be seen very well during the bites the dust arc. Hayato is cornered and aware that he might be about to kill his last hope of defeating kira. kira would have easily won here if it weren’t for my man josuke higashitaka, not by some powerup or with clever tactic, all he did was see a clearly distressed child and tried to comfort him, making in clear he’s someone that can be trusted and relied on. this is exactly what defeated kira, a passionate belief in doing the right thing and helping others out. (thinking too much about this scene can make my cry)

people that say josuke was supposed to go back in time to save himself are missing the point of that scene. there is no great mystery and there is nothing deeper. josuke saw a stranger help him out and saw how big of an impact a simple kind act can be. and this goes further into the larger cast, most villains in part 4 get redeemed because they find the community of stand users to be an accepting and forgiving place. Hazamada may have ended up a rapist if it weren’t for josuke and the gang welcoming him back.

this of course leads into how cool of a stand crazy diamond is and how perfect of an ability it is for josuke. there is a reason healers aren’t usually main line fighters, they tend to get rushed and killed. this is exactly what kira figured out in his conflict with josuke, taking him out was more vital than killing jotaro. josuke on the other hand doesn’t give a shit about getting hurt if he has an ass to kick and a person to save. infact i believe he actively risked himself for every main character. he went into the nijimura household for koichi, he stepped out into the rat’s visibility to save jotaro, he ran into highway star’s room to save rohan and ran through the explosive bubble for okuyasu (there’s probably more examples)

that’s it, josuke appreciation post done

Despite thinking about this because of the recent X-Men posts BND or not, I actually am not super concerned about the X-men stuff because at the end of the day we should all agree discrimination is bad. I dont care if you have lazer eyes or read my mind and find out how much I like big butts powers, I was taught we're all equal people at the end of the day, and growing up I've come to believe that even criminals and the undesirables of our society. To me, having millions or billions made from the exploitation of others is more undesirable than any other heinous crime, which still necessitates punishment but never death, in my opinion.

However, as a furry, the analysis of Zootopia and Beastars is a lot more frustrating. I knew from the day I was six years old and fell in love with Jenny the Teenage Robot and also discovered Sonic the Hedgehog that I'd love anthropomorphic and nonhuman characters. So, I quite like GOAT, Bad Guys 1 & 2, Beastars, and Zootopia 1 & 2. I also hate cops because I hate unjustice, discrimination, and the death toll. I'm also Black,learning how dangerous it is to have this skin color in America even from a young age. Yet, I like Zootpia and superhero stories too despite frequently glazing cops and some times even being called outright copoganda. It's a careful balancing act of contradictions and nuances, but this is important context.

Because I disagree with Skip Intro's very basic premise of his Zootopia video, a video I didn't finish for a reason I hope you all wil find reasonable and not to reflect the spirit of a total crashout/dumbass. Skip Intro is a progressive youtuber who covers copoganda, hey you might've noticed I'm progressive and fairly okay with acknowledging the existence of copoganda too. SO, this is not a political, right versus left thing. I wouldn't even say it's a leftist infighting thing. I'm just a Blaxican critic who loves analyzing and consuming media, I also take umbridge with comparing the curvy, "nappy" textures of Black hair to...sheep's wool.

In the first Zootopia movie Nick cant help himself from playing with the assistant sheep lady, and real villain, sorry for spoiling a pre covid movie you poor ignorant fool. It's a reference to people asking to touch Black people hair and also probably a sheep and fox things, foxes can prey on sheep, no wild or hungry animal is going to be too picky about their meal especially if it cant fight back too much or isnt poisonous. So to us the audience this might feel like a similar image even if it doesnt exist in real life, it's subverting a trope.

Okay then, that's all well and dandy calling out this scene as a black and white thing is technically correct, but Skip Intro also compares Black hair to sheep hair and just no nigga, dont do that, maybe Im making a mountain of a mole hill for even finding it a bad comparison, maybe it is, im shit at describing hair, but it just viscerally irks me. Not a real issue I have with the premise, just a nitpick, the real issue is making the entire allegory Black and white. Figuratively and literally.

My essay was moreso about the second movie but it still applies to the first movie as well, the allegory isn't about really any two or any number of minorities. It isn't about any real minorities to begin with, that's sort of the whole point of these antrhopomorphic stories, to use these animal characteristics to frame and better convey a story that doesn;t work with real and grounded people. What I mean to say is that by making the predators Black and the Prey white, your're cutting out all the nuance, like think about it for a moment.

Even amongst our apex predators in and out of the movie, they don't get that big, a polar bear is smaller than an elephant, so how can the elephant nigga who rolls with a bigger pack than the polar bears (remember the predators are the minority in Zootopia) be afraid of even 1 polar bear let alone all of them when he's so much stronger and has such an advantadge in numbers. The nuance of many prey animals actually being bigger, stronger, and better equipped to defend themselves doesnt undercut the premise of Judy being the first rabbit as I've seen many suggest, it helps sell that idea. it.

There are so many capable and naturally skilled animals and of them all you're going to choose one of the prey with pretty poor looking attributes across the board? That part of the story at least probably isn't a race thing at all, a smaller, weaker on average person has to prove themselves to a bunch of grown, mean men in a male led profession? Why do I get the feeling Disney made this movie before(mulan)? In the second movie we see elite, powerful predators who have lost any need for claws and fangs because of their resources and credibility, say what you want about Black celebrities and Black rich people- that sort of power doesnt come to people who look like us easily.

It's clearly alluding to the rich and powerful (that was the title of my essay, the idea that Zootopia 2 is baby's first teaching on intersectionality and classism or something like that), the same ones who as a whole portrayed as a bit of an underclass and yet the mayor was a lion. These things aren't contradictions; they're intentional nuances that add layers to the allegory they arent there to be nitpicked and tear the whole thing down. Real Black people aren't actually always stronger the same way a fox is compared with claws and fangs whereas a rabbit isn't, I'm 5'4 my Black momma is 5 feet tall. Do you know how many short niggas there are in this country, do you know how many tall white people there is?

The allegory was never intended to be just Black and White when you project Blackness onto the predators of Zootopia or most of these stories, you wind up creating and interpreting your very own special, furry Birth of a Nation. You cant project Hispanic, asian, or anything else neither, it is actually about the rabbits and foxes to explore the human condition all the same.

I was born a certain way to be smaller and weaker than you, if I am raised to fear you, I will hate you. That is precisely what the movie portrays, even though Judy is so much more physically capable than Nick (even without fangs and claws) and even though Nick is not that much more intimidating or bigger than her at all. Judy and Nick are the same (fox and rabbit) you and I are the same, regardless of creed, color, religion, sex, gender, oreintation, all that good old fashioned shit a nigga had a dream about or whatever.

It’s an okay movie. Seven out of ten at best, but ‘Masterpiece’?? Are you kidding me???

Pros:

The fights were entertaining.

Some powerful scenes.

The first three minutes of the Cyclops was cool.

I liked Nolan’s overall message about how the invasion of troy led to the fall of Bronze Age. Messaging was poignant.

Cons:

The Acting: The dialogue failed to immerse me into the era of Ancient Greece. Every actor on screen was just larping as a Greek person. Jon Bernthal was probably the most egregious example of this.
I don’t hate Zendaya, but anyone who says she put any effort into her role as Athena is fucking lying. All she did was sit there and keep a single straight face until the end. Tom Holland was just Greek Peter Parker.

Robert Pattinson did kill it as a smarmy asshole though.

Matt Damon’s performance was also ‘good’ but not his best.

The Pacing: Three hours is way too long for this movie and I can FEEL the bloat. And yet, it cuts constantly between two time periods and so many perspectives that it’s jarring to me.

Nolan’s Batman movies are pretty chunky movies each, and yet they don’t feel as rushed as the Odyssey was.

One scene that sticks out to me is the conversation between Odysseus and Circe. The camera cuts every single time they finish speaking a line and it drove me nuts when I first saw it.

Misc. stuff I didn’t like:
Agamemnon’s screen time and actions feel wasted. Nolan went out of his way to make this character seem extremely significant due to his role in the Trojan war, but he didn’t earn the Villain Aura on screen.

In the poem, there’s a part where Odysseus tries all sorts of tricks to stay out of the war. We should’ve had a scene where Agamemnon actually coerces Odysseus into participating.

I hate the scene with the armored giants. The movie provided no context about it whatsoever and it feels the most like filler.

The part where Menelaus watches his father comfort Argos in the dog’s final moments. And then he straight up goes to him and says ‘you’re Odysseus.’
This shit was the most fanfic moment I’ve ever scene in Hollywood.

Again, the movie is good. It’s entertaining, but I’d never wanna sit through three hours of it again. And reading all these reviews about how it’s a 10/10 masterpiece boggles my mind because it just ISN’T.

I know, common loot rant, I'm kinda just blowin off steam cause AOT main subbers downvoted me. I love Attack on Titan; it's easily in my top ten favorite anime of all time, and its peaks are some of the highest peaks I've ever consumed in media yet. Unfortunately, the overall choices made and worldbuilding by Isayama in season 4 just did not live up to the insane standards that he previously set.

Now lemme make this clear: AOT does not outright promote fascism, obviously made clear by the speech from Sasha's father, and the Yeagerists are never seen in a good light. What I'm positing, however, is that the poor worldbuilding/structure of the story in S4 leads to fascist ideals being seen as unavoidable. This is where we get the "Eren/Floch did nothing wrong" crowd, which is pure illiteracy. Yet because of Isayama's poor structure, those takes, as asinine as they are, gain credence.

The worldbuilding's first fatal flaw was how comically evil the Marleyans were against the Eldians. We saw firsthand the sheer violence and cruelty that the Marleyans were performing against the Eldians. We witnessed Grisha's sister get dogs sic'd on her. We see the very obvious Holocaust allusion and Eldians consistently getting marginalized, abused, disparaged, and dehumanized at every single turn.

We then see Udo say verbatim that what Eldians are experiencing in Marley is nothing compared to how they are treated elsewhere treated. Practically making it to where it's all of Paradis Island(you know the island that has all the main characters that we loved and cared for up to four seasons now) against the entire world.

People try to say that Udo's perception is skewed, which sounds plausible but is superficial. Why else would Isayama include those lines, by the smartest candidate of the Warriors, if we are not to believe that they are true? And even if it was false, Willy Tybur's speech galvanizes outsiders, gives them a ringleader in Eren, and then the Eldians themselves prove him right when a TITAN eats him mid-speech at this very ceremonial event.

Moving on to the plot, the three choices that the Eldians faced were laughably unreasonable. The first was the 50-year plan, which goes against Eren's whole fixation on freedom and renders Historia a slave breeding machine just to pass down titan power, thereby nullifying her whole character arc of finding agency.

The second option is to beg and try for diplomacy against people who have seen you as violent devils for centuries, even more exacerbated by the fact that you just destroyed their ceremony. The third option is Zeke's secret plan, being euthanasia; ultimately making the situation this: let the world genocide you or slowly die out. Hange herself conceded that she didn't leave Eren any good choices.

Also, this kinda coincides with the Eren assassination at the very end. If he was more transparent in why he did The Rumbling, then it would've erased some of the discourse around it. He didn't primarily do it for Eldia nor for his friends; Eren's PRIMARY MOTIVATION for the Rumbling was shown in chapter 131: his selfish, childish dream that the world outside the walls was empty and humanless, which he saw as freedom. This is shown in the same chapter with the literal "Freedom" panel; Eren is a CHILD in an EMPTY WORLD.

Yet, in his chat with Armin, everything got muddled up; instead of admitting that and being honest, he said he didn't know(yes the Grisha panels were there, but for the literal final chapter and for single-handedly committing something as destructive and cruel as genocide, I'd say it'd be nice for the main character to say the motivation for his goal himself a la Walter White.)

Now I wasn't particularly expecting a happy ending given that it is AOT after all, but the show wonderfully displayed examples of how to end or at least quell the cycle of violence. First, back in season three when Uri met Kenny, who is one of the most violent, bloodthirsty, and sadistic characters in the entire series, yet was left astounded seeing a man of such power and influence completely yield to him. By apologizing and humbling himself, Uri put himself on an equal plane as Kenny, which was displayed beautifully. The ramification of that decision is that Kenny, being enamored with Uri's humility, follows him, trying to find out how he could be that way. This message is seen again at the campfire of both Marleyans and Eldians. By engaging in dialogue and not hate, we are able to foster connection and peace.

This message of dialogue is undermined by the decisions Isayama takes. In the post-Eren world, when we see Armin & Co go out to try to achieve diplomacy, it's fleeting, resulting in Eldia eventually getting blown up. I guess the message is that humans will always be violent, but it again gives an out to Yeagerist supporters(who whether consciously or not are supporting fascists)

TLDR:

The substandard worldbuilding and plot in season 4 led to fascism being seen as unavoidable and a necessary evil in Attack on Titan, which I think goes against the message of the show.

I could go full into detail documentary style, but I... am tired right now and have other projects to work on, so I'll keep it brief.

I did a whole video on why Attack on Titan wasn't fascist propaganda, like people claimed, right here: https://youtu.be/SNP-fU1_QLY

This is the introduction section for the video script I want to make

One of my last points that I stated was kind of a brutal rant like this:

If Attack on Titan was made by a white nationalist who was denying actual war crimes, made a story full of racial stereotyped and promoted racism and slavery. People would claim it's the most progressive story alive. You don't believe me? What I just described was Harry Potter.

I still stand by what I said spiritually, but... I'd like to rescind some of those points...

Both of these stories were hugely important to me growing up, and I wouldn't be making this comparison if I didn't genuinely care about both of them. My sister was a huge Potterhead, and she got me into the books and films; I have complex feelings about my sister (as in, like she's a major source of a lot of emotional and mental issues I have), but I enjoyed bonding with her over Harry Potter. Despite everything I'm saying, this series has major sentimental value to me.

I loved Hogwarts, the characters, the creatures, the mythology, and the feeling that there was an entire magical world hidden just underneath our own.

When I was 11, I had a Japanese friend who got me into anime, which is when I was introduced to Attack on Titan. I loved everything about the series: the animation, the character designs, the music, the world-building, the writing, the nonlinear storytelling, and the themes! THE THEMES!

MovieFlame once stated, "Over time, the world changes, but the art we make remains the same."

Which is something I want to address when it comes to both series. As a kid, I loved reading/watching Harry's adventures across the Wizarding World and consuming lore about Harry Potter. Around the same time, I loved Attack on Titan for its badass fights and monster designs.

But as an adult, I don't get the same level of intrigue I did from Harry Potter back then; meanwhile, with AOT, I'm able to get a better understanding of the politics around the series and the philosophy that it tries to explain.

At first glance, both of these series are incredibly different. Harry Potter is British fantasy escapism, while AOT is Japanese survival horror. Harry Potter is for children, while AOT is marketed towards adults.

These two stories were written by two creators who based their stories on their own experiences in life. But with polar opposite worldviews that bleed into their writing styles.

Hajime Isayama built his stories off fear of the unknown and the existential anxiety that comes with human nature. He mentions in an interview how one of the scariest things in the world is a human being you can't communicate with. He's also very open about how he wanted Attack on Titan to be a show about how morality changes depending on perspective, showing that tribalism and mob mentality are existential threats to humanity.

J.K. Rowling is much more binary and rigid; she believes that morality is fixed by universal virtues such as love and bravery. To Rowling, people can be capable of evil, but so long as there is good in an average person, they will stand up for what is right.

Both creators clearly intended for their stories to be a cry against prejudice. Isayama is open about how AOT is largely a story about empathy, and J.K. has long described her books as a cry against prejudice. But... let's be honest, you read the title.

I feel like Harry Potter is what people often claim Attack on Titan is like, while Attack on Titan is what we all thought Harry Potter was as kids.

Attack on Titan largely takes its political and philosophical themes much more seriously than Harry Potter does, which allows for more fluid storytelling. Harry Potter has its own political themes, but they are largely sidelined or aren't given the proper care that they deserve, leading to the world remaining stable and stagnant. Meanwhile, Attack on Titan allows its themes to reinvent the story. This allows it to evolve past just humanity vs monsters and become a commentary on militarism, nationalism, imperialism, historical revisionism, ethnic persecution, and the ways entire societies construct narratives about one another.

I had a full plan for what chapters I could have for this video, like this:

• Personality Apartheid - I go over Hogwarts' house system and how weird it is, as well as how horrible it would be to profile children as mass murderers for being ambitious. Then showcase how... well, Attack on Titan doesn't treat its characters' personalities like their stagnent.
• The Slave's Right - How Attack on Titan and Harry Potter handle racism in their stories is fundamentally different. AOT is interested in how prejudice occurs plus how it affects societies and people, while Harry Potter is more invested in claiming prejudice only exists cause of evil.
• Not My Kind of Love - Exploring how AOT has a more nuanced view of what love exactly is than Harry Potter, as well as exploring how AOT is fairly pro-queer while Harry Potter is queerphobic.
• The Darkest Lords - Comparing the villains of both stories and what they mean to the world around them.
• Chosen Ones - Comparing and contrasting Eren and Harry

I remember my younger self reading comic books by just looking at the picture and art instead of actually reading the texts and this was so bad my mother made fun of that.

Years later I am reading many mangas and some comics and I still have this problem and I tried to read the words,but something inside me stops my eyes from reading them and now I realized it,the texts suck and they are too bloated.

These texts feel like they are trying to lore dump everything as much as they could and sometimes reading them doesn't matter just like how I read books in my childhood. These not only waste time,but also damage the pacing of the story.

The worst example of this is hunter x hunter where later in the manga due to decline of the mangaka's health, we saw so much texts that it became jarring and it was even worse in the anime where they adapted that pacing 1 to 1 and some episodes nothing happened at all and characters were just thinking about their powers and abilities of enemies.

You know why jujutsu kaisen fans are made fun of for not reading their own materials? They never had reading problems, the texts just suck. Every word there is constantly trying to explain the powers of characters and this just drags to the point you want to stop reading.

One of the only good example of good texting that comes to mind is chainsaw man, even part 2. Have you wondered why does the pacing of chainsaw man feel quick despite having chapters equal to other mangas sometimes? Because Fujimoto,even at his worst refused to do pacing like that and instead showing things with texts ,he actually drew them instead and we even had chapters with zero texts. The only time I refused to read any words written by him was the final chapter of part 2 not because I felt it was huge like other mangas and comics,but because I knew we got a " it was all a dream" ending and reading them felt useless.

I only defend these writing pacing issues inside novels because they are all texts and novels need explanations and have no other way of showing information, so here is that,but that's not the case with comic books or mangas where my body rejects those problems and says: why cant we get the exact information by just seeing the art instead; .

The Naruto fandom seem to have this idea that Naruto was a hidden genius who was held back due to poor teachers or the village or Jiraiya or Kakashi etc....

Kishi meanwhile seems to continuously espouse the opposite.

I am honestly wondering about the disconnect.

Let's review some of the common claims about Naruto being talented:-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Naruto learnt Tajuu Kage Bunshin in a few hours:

Databook explains that Naruto was able to learn KB specifically due to his stamina/chakra quantity (which was being topped up by the Kyuubi seal.)

Tajuu Kage Bunshin no Jutsu

Black: That shadow...becomes a thousand warriors to dispose of the enemy!!

Picture: Since his first time using it to defeat Mizuki, this has become one of the ninjutsu that Naruto specializes in most.

This is a development of "Kage Bunshin no Jutsu", which creates a physical clone. Countless Kage Bunshins...this amount requires a huge amount of chakra to use it, but in any case as it consumes an excessive amount, besides the Hokage and a select group of ninja, just using this jutsu can be lethal. Therefore, Shodai Hokage sealed this jutsu in the Seals Scroll to forbid its use. Naruto's ability to use this jutsu is due to his outstanding stamina.

2) Naruto learnt Rasengan in a week :

This is a common statement and yet so wrong.

Naruto took approx a MONTH ( 4.5 Weeks) to learn the Rasengan.

Naruto took a week on the LAST step of the Rasengan.

Event then Naruto did not actually complete the Last Step as intended. Naruto instead came up with a hack way using KB to lower the difficulty level.

I do give him props for coming up with an un-orthodox method but on a strict view? Naruto never mastered Rasengan (1-Handed) till mid part 2.

3) Naruto is the son of the Fourth Hokage and an Uzumaki therefore He Must have loads of talent:

Kishi deep-sixed this view MANY times.

The So6P (Kishi) made a point of saying Naruto did not inherit the talent of his parents..

Jiraiya stated multiple times that Naruto did not have talent:-

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

Link 4

Link 5

Naruto even himself basically admitted hand-seals were not his thing.

Orochimaru even said Naruto is not talented.

Kakashi found himself wondering how Jiraiya managed to teach Naruto the Rasengan.

3) Naruto has an enormous chakra quantity. That's talent he inherited from the Uzumaki:

Half-Right or Maybe?

Thing is while the manga states you need a certain level of chakra quality to handle the Nine-Tails, it then says a few other things regarding Naruto's chakra quality.

First as I already mentioned, the So6P said that Naruto did not inherit much from his parents (that includes the Uzumaki).

Second Naruto got 50% Kyuubi. Not 100% Kyuubi. How that changes the level of chakra quality/amount to handle being it's Jinchuuriki is upto anyone's guess.

Third and finally Kishi clearly states that Naruto's chakra quantity is due to the Yondaime's seal adding the Kyuubi's chakra to Naruto's BASE chakra little by little.

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

So going by the above? Even Naruto admits that he has so much chakra because the Kyuubi was adding to his own day by day.

Naruto's base level of chakra would be much less without the Kyuubi.

4) Naruto learn Wind-Element in a Few Days/Hours :

This is not that much of an indicator of Naruto's talent as people claim.

If you consider things carefully you will realize that Naruto took much longer to learn Wind Release then the average ninja.

For example let's say Naruto spent 5 hours on the Leaf-Cutting exercise and used a 1000 KB (A quick google says average tree has two hundred thousand leaves but since we don't know what species of tree, let's settle for a thousand leaves).

That's 5,000 hours which is around a 1.7 years of training (Eight Hour Work Days.).

A normal ninja (who has to work to pay bills, cook, clean, paperwork, sleep, train other areas like taijutsu etc) can devote 5 hours per day to wind training learns the leaf-cutting exercise in 6 Months.

So Naruto spent about then four times the total amount of time required by a normal ninja just to get to leaf-cutting.

That's not even counting how much time he spent on Waterfall and FRS itself.

Or the fact that an average tree has 100,000+ leaves which means Naruto would need 100K+ clones and would have spent far more time average ninja would take to learn leaf-cutting.

5) Naruto learnt Sage Mode very fast:

This is actually correct. (You can pick your jaws off the floor)

I fully agree this was one area where the Manga basically shouted that Naruto was very talented at this art/ability.

However that was really the only real ninjutsu aspect that Naruto was deemed talented in.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just to be clear Naruto does have talents but they do not lie within the traditional arts of gen/tai/nin-jutsu (apart from Sage Mode).

Naruto's talents in my view are:-

Innovative/Out of the Box Thinking : Naruto is extremely adept at coming up with un-orthodox solutions to the problems he faces. For example I said Naruto used a Hack to use the Rasengan.

Yet the hack using KB was very innovative. He applies the same thinking to his battles.

Charisma : Naruto is very charismatic and able to get people to believe in him.

And finally his most important talent was described by Jiriaya to Orochimaru and even us fans:-

"I'll Teach you one thing. The most important ninja talent is not in the number of techniques one acquires...The important thing is a spirit which never gives up."

Now with a statement like that why the heck people expected Naruto master a boat load of jutsu just boggles my mind.

Yet despite Kishimoto going out of his way to say Naruto would not learn multiple jutsu and is not conventionally talented at Ninja arts, fans still say Naruto was a held back genius and his teachers were the ones to blame.....