>>78998338Then their children would become vigilantes and push you into a vat of chemicals.
>>78998470>>78998386He's just setting out his feelings on viewing a trailer. What's wrong with that? Do you feel he has a point? Do you think that regardless of whether he has a point, the movie is in trouble?
Why does it matter to you?
Also I assume by "refutes" you mean he starts out by saying there are visual and thematic similarities between Abomination from the 2008 Hulk and Doomsday, which is fair comment, but then complains of it being a retelling of 2008's The Dark Knight.
The problem with that is that he's not refuting anything; he's making complementary statements to build a picture for you, the reader, of his thoughts. Sure, he probably didn't expect them to be subjected to a great deal of scrutiny, and maybe they won't hold up when the movie - which none of the people currently arguing about it have seen - is released. But he's entitled to his opinions just as you are to yours, and his are based on what the press have been told so far and what we've seen in the trailers - older Batman, questioning his own effectiveness, using increasingly extreme methods and putting himself unnecessarily at risk.
There's no reason Doomsday can't be the McGuffin in that story, the thing around which Batman's personal journey is based just as the Joker/the League were the McGuffins in the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight Rises. The bad guy exists to give the good guy a backdrop to tell his story in front of, that's all.
It's true that the statements are superficially contradictory, if you're incapable of grasping abstract meaning from words.
