|The Flash >> View Post|
Subj: Re: Flash Oct 31
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 at 03:44:46 pm GMT (Viewed 64 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Flash Oct 31
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 at 02:32:28 pm GMT (Viewed 67 times)
Quote:Yeah, I think it would have been better if they hadn't shown him yet. All we should know is that there is someone VERY smart manipulating events in ways that no one should be able to manipulate events.
Quote:The fact that we've seen him, just sort of ruins it. Because he doesn't seem intimidating in person at all.
Maybe that's a good thing. Even in the comics, I've never found the Thinker very intimidating. Here, he's confined to a floating chair and doesn't look very intimidating and I believe that is a good thing. Why? Because maybe Barry will end up thinking the same thing we do and that will lead to Barry underestimating the Thinker. In turn, that gives the Thinker an advantage "because" his appearance is not intimidating. He can actually use that against Barry, or any of his enemies. The Thinker's real power is in his head, his smarts, his capacity for strategy. He's not supposed to be intimidating on the outside because a lot of brainy people aren't (at least in real life). The Thinker's real asset is his brain.
It's interesting that a hero/villain performs one amazing feat, or use a power they haven't used for 20+ years, and that automatically propels them to a high status despite scans and evidence to the contrary. I don't know what is worse, selective feat picking that has only been done once or twice 20, or more, years ago or ignoring evidence from scans or the lack thereof. We need to stop putting our favorite heroes/villains on pedestals and start putting them where they really belong. But it's evident that people never will because they would rather accuse others of cherry picking feats, when they don't, and being 'morally superior' when they aren't. I guess being honest and as fair as possible only opens one up to being the target of childish accusations and fault finding by those who insist on acting petty and childish. What happened to a good debate between two civil, mature, adults?