Spoilers Daredevil: Born Again (Spoilers)


log in or register to remove this ad

No.

You literally are failing to understand the basic fact that shapes are shapes, and no amount of sensitive touch will let you see an image in oil paint when the shape of the paint is very different to the actual image. It's simply not possible. You cannot argue that it is.

It's fine to not be bothered by it, but it's a goof.
I'm not failing to see that. I know that as a fact in the real world. But this is comics, and he has the ability to feel the strokes. But, it's not that big a deal for me, so let's just drop it there.
 

But this is comics, and he has the ability to feel the strokes. But, it's not that big a deal for me, so let's just drop it there.
I'm happy to drop it but my problem is precisely that this isn't "the comics", but rather a TV series which for three seasons, attempted of a kind of quasi-realism despite superhuman powers, ninjas, etc. It doesn't fit to pretend to realism in the way this series has continued to and then have pure comic book stuff in there. Maybe this is another remnant of when it was more of an MCU series?
 

No.

You literally are failing to understand the basic fact that shapes are shapes, and no amount of sensitive touch will let you see an image in oil paint when the shape of the paint is very different to the actual image. It's simply not possible. You cannot argue that it is.

It's fine to not be bothered by it, but it's a goof.
That's true for your senses and mine. Likely to not be true with someone gifted with a superhuman sense of touch. For instance, the brushstrokes creating say, a nose, or an apple, or a cloud, are applied at different points in time to the rest of what's happening on the canvas. If your sense of touch was sensitive enough, it's not that hard to imagine that you could extrapolate the contours of various figures on the canvas, because of differences in the amount of paint on the brush, the directions of the strokes, maybe different brushes (which might differ in size, bristle material, etc.) are used to create certain parts of the painting.
 

My basic attitude with ay sort of fantasy or sci-fi or supers is this: if they show a character do a thing unironically, then just accept it as the way stuff works in that universe. It absolutely does no good and adds no pleasure to argue with the premise.
Sorry, no. If you pretend to realism, as this show has, and you pretend powers work in specific ways, you, the writer of the show, have to engage your brain before casually using wacky comics stuff. There's tons and tons of stuff from the comics that MCU and indeed the Netflix shows knew was far too silly or just plain dimwitted to bring into a TV series or movie which wasn't pure vague fantasy.

If the powers are vague and mystical and highly supernatural, then sure, it's all out of the window, but touch is touch is touch and paint is paint is paint. These are everyday things, and magnifying touch doesn't change what it is or what paint is.

This is absolutely NOT the same thing as a true unknowable supernatural power (like, say Wolverine's regeneration, or Nightcrawler's teleportation, or indeed Matt Murdoch's sense of hearing, or even the degree to which his touch might be sensitive, and him able to assemble an image in his mind) which I agree, it's not worth arguing with. If I'm missing something from the comic books and Daredevil is supposed to be psychic, clairvoyant, specifically, then sure I take that back, it's fine. But super-touch? This is too silly on its own terms!

As I said too, what really shows this was an actual screw up, is that they could trivially have dealt with this by having it be charcoal drawing (which the guy was doing). Charcoal leaves a thin layer on the paper, and if pressed hard, indents it too. Just brain-off writing. Like the weird behaviour and the obvious plot-hole in the bank robbery episode (i.e. that the robber with the shotgun would know it was Matt Murdoch who took him out). No wonder the previous showrunner got the chop.
 

That's true for your senses and mine. Likely to not be true with someone gifted with a superhuman sense of touch.
Yes it is.
If your sense of touch was sensitive enough, it's not that hard to imagine that you could extrapolate the contours of various figures on the canvas, because of differences in the amount of paint on the brush, the directions of the strokes, maybe different brushes (which might differ in size, bristle material, etc.) are used to create certain parts of the painting.
No. That wouldn't work. That's not how paintings work, I know, I've done enough of them! The image is not the texture. It doesn't matter if you can figure all that out, not with a thick-ass oil painting like that (what was particularly silly here was that they seemingly intentionally used an extremely lumpy painting where the texture was visually obviously completely distinct from the image).

< mutters darkly about ice-skating uphill >
 
Last edited:

Yes it is.

No. That wouldn't work. That's not how paintings work, I know, I've done enough of them! The image is not the texture. It doesn't matter if you can figure all that out, not with a thick-ass oil painting like that (what was particularly silly here was that they seemingly intentionally used an extremely lumpy painting where the texture was visually obviously completely distinct from the image).

< mutters darkly about ice-skating uphill >
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one! The context neither you nor I have here is knowing what information a sense of touch that sensitive gives you. We can guess... but we don't know.
 

Yes it is.

No. That wouldn't work. That's not how paintings work, I know, I've done enough of them! The image is not the texture. It doesn't matter if you can figure all that out, not with a thick-ass oil painting like that (what was particularly silly here was that they seemingly intentionally used an extremely lumpy painting where the texture was visually obviously completely distinct from the image).

< mutters darkly about ice-skating uphill >
I mean, I understand what you're saying about the texture of the painting and how unlikely it seems that would convey the level of information that Daredevil received from running his fingers across the painting. To us, that info would be meaningless, especially with the roadblocks you mentioned. To him... who knows.
 

I'm happy to drop it but my problem is precisely that this isn't "the comics", but rather a TV series which for three seasons, attempted of a kind of quasi-realism despite superhuman powers, ninjas, etc. It doesn't fit to pretend to realism in the way this series has continued to and then have pure comic book stuff in there. Maybe this is another remnant of when it was more of an MCU series?
And this is a bridge too far? Not a ninja coming back from being burned alive? Nor someone able to use a tooth to incapacitate a guard? How about someone with bulletproof skin? Or able to lift a car? Or able to affect people with merely their voice? Or if we're just sticking to daredevil, able to not just pick up, but isolate a conversation several blocks away?

There never was even a pretense at quasi-realism. They just never explained any of it. Which they aren't doing here.
 

I just chalk it up to Matt's training with Stick. As far as we know, Stick didn't gain superpowers through anything more than his Chaste training. In the comics, at least, "martial arts" is a legitimate source of superhuman abilities (not unlike the D&D Monk), and the same seems to be true of the MCU. The Hand (whom the Chaste were tasked with defeating) have their own mystical abilities as well.

If we assume Matt Murdock is a mutate, then his already impressive abilities may be augmented by Stick's training, thus potentially allowing him to do things that would be impossible just with his heightened senses alone.
 

Remove ads

Top