_My_ superpower is pinning comments asking for your support on Patreon (www.patreon.com/pillarofgarbage) - consider joining up in exchange for exclusive videos and much, much more!
@@slader6079 No, I’m just curious what he thinks of the controversy. It’s a problem that doesn’t ruin the story, but does hold it back from being 10/10 . However, I am sorry. I didn’t consider that some people were sick of hearing about this. So, I apologise if I’ve annoyed you.
Much more then that. I really hope the show lasts a long time so I can talk about the big twists without spoiling people. Because what the comic does with Onmiman will turn everyone's current ideas about him on their head. I will keep my mouth shut.
Invincible book employs one of my favorite worldbuilding techniques that is introducing a character that you think is going to be a one off joke only to give them a deep backstory and genuinely touching arc
Mark's character trait is very similar to that of Peter Parker. You can beat them down as much as you want, they'll always get back up. You can never beat their spirit.
As the boys is a deconstruction of superheroes for people that hate superheroes, Invincible is a deconstruction of superheroes for people that love superheroes.
I’d disagree, just because I’m someone who hates superhero media/power fantasy, but loved invincible and watchmen. It really is a brilliant deconstruction. All the complaints I have had about ‘boys cartoons’ that would glorify violence and a black and white morality get addressed, thought experimented, and torn apart under the weight of the complexity of interpersonal dynamics. I loved invincible because I love psychological horror. And that’s what this show has been so far.
I think the deconstruction is a part of the love letter. Deconstruction doesn’t really mean “the original thing was bad”, just that this new nothing is doing something different and interesting with it
I can’t remember who said it but I heard someone say that The Boys is a deconstruction of the superhero genre made by someone who hates superheroes and Invincible is a deconstruction of the superhero genre made by someone who loves superheroes. They were talking about the original comics but I think it still holds true
Agreed, if anything it’s a reconstruction. And show that doesn’t go, this is dumb and doesn’t work and let me break it down why. It feels more like “these ideals, of fighting the good fight, yeah it’s tough, but it’s worth it and works”
Invincible is a reconstruction not a deconstruction. The show is still on the deconstructing phase but as a reconstruction the idea is to rebuild after they are torn down. That is what the comics did and likely what the show will do too. If it lasts long enough.
I'd argue it's still constantly reconstructionist. The world isn't remotely as cynical as deconstructions are. The heroes mostly still want to do good. The government (Cecil) still wants to believe in them. Heck, it's less cynical than some seasons of Justice League in that regard. It's a reconstructionist world with deconstructionist events.
Exactly! It's a lot like Madoka Magica- a reconstruction of the magical girl genre, showing the importance of hope, but it started this trend of "dark magical girls" that goes against everything Madoka stood for, because so many misunderstood it.
A reconstruction involves keeping the tropes but explaining why they would actually happen. The effect remains but the cause is changed to be more reasonable. A deconstruction is the inverse. The cause remains the same...but the cause is more reasonable. Invincible tends to fall far more in line with a deconstruction. Buildings fall? People fucking die. Villains die. Heroes may live, but having teenagers as the major protectors results in...failure. Invincible plays with the effects, or consequences, far more than it plays with the cause.
Later in the comic run a character named Dinosaurus appears, being quite relative in strenght to Mark at the time he also challenges mark's mentality quite a lot. changing a lot of his perspective from superheros existing to react to justice to being proactive with his powers. helping the planet environmentally, agriculturally which Mark would just not consider in season 1.
That sounds amazing. I've only seen the show and my favorite character is eve, because she's like: "beating up people isn't cutting it, I'm gonna help some farmers." and she probably ends up helping a lot more people.
I saw invincible as not "being a super hero would suck actually" cause we have a million of those already. But what I see it as is "what if being a super hero would suck actually, but you did it anyways."
It's not as much as. "If being a superhero sucked." as it is. "Yeah being a super hero would absolutely suck, but what makes them HEROE'S is that they aim to do good anyway." And the best classic Marvel and DC stories has that message too. It's actually not all that great being Spiderman or Batman or even Superman, it sucks in so many ways, it's lonely. But what makes them HEROES is that they still see the good in the world worth fighting for and put up that fight.
Another great synopsis. As a 51 year old. Invincible took me back to the mid 1980’s. The look and feel of Invincible reminded me of how captivating shows like M.A.S.K and G.I.Joe and Transformers looked when I was young. The storytelling turns everything on its head and I absolutely love that about Invincible. Another great video and great thumbnail choice.
Now that you mention it, that thumbnail looks pretty good. TH-camrs seem to find it hard to strike a balance between truthfulness and obnoxiousness in their thumbnails.
when invincible released in 2003 it was meant to be and written as a 80s comic in 2000. corny tropes jokes random adventures Robert Kirkman did everything to somewhat bring it back. i highly recommend reading the full invincible comic if you have the time. its an 144 issue run with extra books if you're interested like atom eve and rex splode or guardians of the globe.
@@JwadeProductions7 now that you mention it, yeah, definitely closer to the 90’s Batman animated series. I completely forgot about what a great show that was. I guess I was reminiscing too far back lol
Invincible is one of the few series that goes out of its way to be Reconstructive rather than focusing on Deconstruction and I admire it a lot for that.
@@tylersimmons4287 Interesting point, I wonder if they were more willing because it was essentially the expected way to do battle back in those days. Like, other than archers, they didn't have many options to make the killing less personal. That's just speculation on my part, though!
@@butHomeisNowhere___ afaik it's all speculation! We have a bunch of weapons & birds-eye views through artwork & writing, but nobody ever gets into the grisly details of what it was actually like hand-to-hand, when two lines clashed. I imagine there was a heavy social aspect, like in sports, your blood's up cause you're there with all your boys from your hometown
God i love invincible, honestly it is the comic that made me realise a main charecter/s shouldnt be actually "invincible" they should be able to be beaten into the ground, but they do have to get back up in some kind of way whether thay be in the fight or later, and thats okay for a charecter its not a bad thing it builds them into aomething more because theyre able to build and grow
Invincible reinforces the idea that in every person is the desire and capacity to do good and be kind. Mark's most personal victories are the ones that cause his enemies to reconsider, to look down at his battered body and think "Christ, what the hell am I doing?" Obviously this will not work for everyone, and the effects it has on Mark get explored further, but it's a really interesting dynamic.
I was hoping you would show the scene of where/how that climactic battle ends, where Omni-man asks Invincible something like: "...Once everything/everyone is gone, then what will you have?" "I'll still have you, dad." If even one little thing was off, this would have come across as cheesy or melodramatic, but I was truly impressed by how successfully the show stuck the landing. I never expected this thoughtful, and often gross and goofy, take on superheroes to also do the seemingly impossible: create the most emotionally powerful moment I've ever experienced in the genre.
Honestly, show fumbles a lot and even that scene isn't without a screw up: in the comic there a page of him actually considering and rising a fist to kill Mark, only to go ugly crying (which show for some reason downplays to one tear) and fly off.
@@MaurDL how making Nolan more of a jerk compared to the comic and cut the actual great scene of showing his indecision and guilt makes adaptation effective? Bare bones? Yes. Effective? What are we smoking?
@mikhaelgribkov4117 But the show does show that. It just doesn't linger on those moments because it's trying to emphasize that the issue is not resolved and that Nolan is still conflicted. His wrath lost out to love, but not his pride. It's the level of discretion and expediency that this is executed with that makes it work so effectively.
"If you hold the monopoly on violence, then you're the one who decides whether or not your violence is justified". Didn't expect to hear some Weberian state analysis.
I like how Mark is a damage sponge that forces the enemy to take a look at themselves and what they're doing. Winning a physical fight is cool but winning the argument and moral high ground is so goddamn important it's a privilege. And that's what makes Mark awesome!
One of the design elements I like most about invincible is that his suit has those goggles. They make him expressive, unique, and give the bad guys something to break before they’re able to damage his body
I think the beginning of this show communicates this idea just as well as the horrifying climax. The violence that Omniman demonstrates against the Guardians is unmatched until the finale, it feels fundamentally out of place compared to the rest of the show. In presenting it this way, it places both the viewer and eventually the cast in this position of trying to justify why he would carry out such an act, even though we are presented with no evidence or defense from him until the end. In this way, the realisation that it can only be viewed as justified from the perspective of an imperialist empire highlights this nagging sense that there couldn't ever be a moral justification for total might.
I agree it was unmatched, but I don’t think it felt out of place. Just think of the first Thraxan invasion as Invincible held on to the grandma as she was battered and her flesh tore like tissue paper. The show’s pretty brutal.
Great point, now that I think about it there are quite a few more situations with similar levels of violence. However, I still think it was out of place in the context of the first episode, the show seems to have two main kinds of violence that it employs: one more straight-faced positive super hero fantasy, and a darker, more critical brutal violence.@@zen_tewmbs
@@omwda2412 OH, I misunderstood you. Absolutely, the ultraviolence of Omniman’s murder of the guardians of the globe absolutely felt out of place in the *first episode itself*, which was the intent of the show. I thought you meant that the Guardian’s murder felt out of place *in the show as a whole*. My b.
Invincible does the one thing I wish more original universes based on “what if a character or super hero was____”. It made a unique world that’s not just Superman but he’s a super predator or what if iron man was a sex pest (looking at you boys).
Mark being a hero not by having a monopoly on power but by denying one. Is such a great analysis of the series I’ve been a long time fan - read the comics several years back and it never occurred to me. Occasionally I’d wonder why, despite how strong he’s gotten, he still got the shit kicked out of him. But I think, in that way, Mark is able to remain humble and in touch with humanity. In more ways than one once we rise above being in a certain power group, people often throw out the memories and understanding of what it once was like - be it growing up - powerless as an elementary school kid, only power that can be exerted is rebellion as a teenager, the thrill of being able to direct your life as a young adult, and then (potentially) being that all powerful authority to your own kids - Or as another example trying to get political power to enact change that you see as good, but once in that position disregarding the opinions and thoughts of the people whose place you used to be in. Mark’s character is one who can never forget what it’s like to lose, to really really lose, and that keeps him bound to the people he swears to protect
I do adore the myriad ways in which Invincible's core thematic expression of the fragility, transience, and subsequent beauty of life and humanity can be observed as defining every aspect of its narrative and metatextual construction, such that each aspect assumes a form all its own, whilst coalescing in a succinct ode to the aforementioned. The visceral duality of brutality and sentiment in particular serves as a splendid means by which to dissect all the series wishes to say, entirely emblematic of its articulation of the paradoxical volatility and eternity of forging purpose and connection for oneself ("What will you have after five-hundred years", and so forth). In essence, it purports to both challenge and encapsulate such central and universal ideas, ideas ofttimes wholly intrinsic to the core of superhero storytelling, employing all it inherits from its functional and spiritual predecessors to exemplify its ideas. This also works to bolster its sociopolitical critiques of the corrosive amorality of power, the constraining bureaucracy of systemically-reinforced control, and the vitality of passionately opposing said mechanisms as a means by which to truly progress, integrating the marginalized roots of superheroes into its core narrative. Excellent video, as always. I do hope everyone is well
My best attempt to turn this into a comment that is written for people to actually read: *"I really love all the ways Invincible expresses these ideas of the fragility and temporary nature of human life, and the ensuing beauty both in spite of and because of these ideas. It does an excellent job of handling the different sides or variants of these themes without mixing them up too much, while still resolving the individual thematic lines to a good conclusion. The combination of incredibly brutal violence with genuine, heartfelt sentiment is especially effective at highlighting these themes and how they interact, compare, and contrast in a way that is honest to the intentions of the authors, especially the ideas revolving around the dually fickle and persistent nature of any attempt to find purpose, meaning, or connection in such an over-the-top world and scenario. The show challenges ideas of the superhero genre and expresses ideas antithetical to it on the whole, while also effectively representing many of the core concepts that make a superhero story what it is, and paying great respect to the media and materials that came before and laid the path, using them as a foundation for its expression and unique perspective. The honesty and high-quality craft of the show as has been previously referred to in this comment can also be seen in how effectively the show handles commentary and critique of mid-to-high level political and sociological issues and concepts, such as the nature of corruption by power, the failures of bureaucratic systems of control, and how important it is to challenge assumptions and systems that are flawed and backwards in order to make change that truly matters. These ideas can also be traced back to inherent connection to the experiences, struggles, and desires of marginalized groups that lie at the root of the superhero genre and its origins, and the show effectively represents these as well."* I'm sure it's not entirely accurate, and it is certainly longer, but this is the best I can do when you compress your comment with language that isn't actually useful outside of academia. No, your linguistic choices are not counter-effective to an erudite reader, however the audience most likely to encounter this comment not only is unlikely to comprehend it, but should not be expected to. I'm having trouble with it, and I tend to outpace PhD students when it comes to reading comprehension. You do not have to use the big words to be smart; you already wrote a perfectly good analysis before you overly compressed it. Furthermore, you actually made several mistakes in your sentence structure and grammatical understanding. I can forgive this considering the fact that I make mistakes all the time with grammar as an intuitive speaker rather than a formally educated one, but it does weaken the point of using this high-level master thesis language. You also missed one punctuation mark, which I am far more critical of. Your grade is an 86.
Was just reading Utopia of Rules by David Graeber the other week and you brought up something that struck me: the monopoly of violence. In superhero media, the monopoly of violence is controlled by heroes, except for a few outlying stories. And in those outliers, the monopoly of violence belongs to who it does in real life: the state. Things like the Mutant Registration Act or the Keene Act effecticely asserting dominance and control through the filter of legislation backed by the force of arms. And while limiting the control of violence is great in that it should, practically, reduce violence, its also harrowing in that it concentrates said violence and strengthens it, making it that much harder to oppose in applications that a society might deem unfit. Superheroes, I guess, are just a grim look at the idealism and reality of violence in our world.
I forget who the quote is from, but I remember reading that detective fiction requires a police force that is unwilling or unable to act to stop the villain. Otherwise, what you get is a "police procedural" like Law and Order and not a Sherlock Holmes type story. That's also true of the superhero genre. Even when heroes aren't acting as vigilantes, they're often acting in a capacity similar to Holmes. For example, in My Hero Academia "heroes" operate their own private security companies and can be (essentially) deployed as a kind of militia by the State during emergencies like acts of domestic terrorism.
Another great PoG video that looks at one of my faves and makes me like it even more. Art is so cool when we can share about it and discuss it and appreciate it from different PoV. What I liked most about Invincible is how full that universe is. Like, I'm invested in the saga between the security guard in the opening and his step son, and all the regular people we see on the show. We have all these moments with civilians that sink it in that everyone on that train Omniman put Mark through had a life and dreams and significant relationships. And you're right. It's one of the only shows that depicts violence correctly, by having its main character RECEIVE it and bear WITNESS to it.
@@hasanmuttaqin464 he is supposed to be a villain who then redeems himself..but you know he actually has to do bad shit. He wasn’t doing it for fun he was fully a victim of his culture’s indoctrination and went on to become a piece of shit. His love for Mark and Debbie actually came early on during his time on Earth but he didn’t have much respect for others. Nolan will eventually turn himself around but he isn’t just some naughty street punk…dude was a full on super space Nazi…a lot of work is required
My God I never realized that before. You're right, the name invincible doesn't mean that he can't be hurt. It means he can't be conquered. He gets beaten up so many times and people make fun of his name for that. That's not what his name means. No one ever conquers Mark.
I love this video! Living in an era where the superhero genre has become just as popular as the Western genre was at one point, it can feel like so many of these superhero stories are exactly the same, and very few try to dissect the nature of the superhero and what it means 4-Hour Society. But this show introduces a new way of thinking about heroics. A different way of fighting Injustice, and deciding whether it is morally right to even do so, and who gets to make those decisions as you pointed out. Thank you so much for making this video. So much more than kicks and punches
There are 2 scenes that I think are incredible and answer both the power fantasy and the doing good part of being a hero (aside from the fight with his dad) The first invasion is where Mark Is unable to save anyone, and the one person he tried to save died due to his rough handling of her. The second final "recap" scene where we see the consequences of Mark trying to do good - Mars will be colonized by another alien species because he tried to save the astronauts. - Doc seismic discovered he could create an army after his fight with invincible - A gang leader just replaced another after Mark helped him - the government use the tech of someone he took down without killing to create an army of cyborg (meaning a lot of test subject and sacrifice).
Another good deconstruction of the superhero genre is James Gunn's "Super." I particularly like how it handles violence, and that it sways back and forth over the line between disturbing and entertaining.
You should read the web serial worm. Its a really good deconstruction of the super hero genre with some great character writing as well as unique super power fights.
@@PillarofGarbage One of my favorite characters from _Worm_ is the S-Class villain Sleeper, known for being as mysterious and he is powerful, dangerous, and feared. People tend to leave him alone because of how (mostly) dormant he is. During a multiversal crisis where the heroes were teaming up with some of the worst S-class supervillains (some of whom have a kill count in the tens of millions and have displaced much more) against an even worse threat (the Godzilla Threshold had been passed by that much), one character noticed Sleeper sitting on a lawnchair on a balcony, reading a book out loud, and decided that even in the face of a multiversal/multidimensional crisis, Sleeper would be more trouble than he's worth and thus he was left alone. On a completely different note, _Worm_ 's MC's father is a dock union organizer and we respect union men.
I read worm long before I read or watched invincible and I'm now convinced its hugely influenced by the comic. While I have some issues with it's over the top edginess and pacing (and the less said about the sequel the better) I think it manages to do something particularly interesting with how it focuses on how *juniville* the superhero power fantasy is. The fact that so much of the main characters morality is based around one of the most brutally realistic depictions of bullying I've seen in fiction genuinely spoke to me when I read it as a nerdy teen. It was at once my *exact* power fantasy and a brutal deconstruction of it. I'm not sure I'd enjoy it so much of I read it now, because it spoke to a very, very specific time of my life- but I think theres something really clever in how it acknowledges how and why violent power fantasies are appealing to young adults and teens.
Invincible is a show that does something a lot of modern superhero shows tend to overlook: It focuses more on the "hero" aspect, and less on the "super".
Honestly, I love Omni Man as a villain, he's not evil just for evils sake. He's principaled,strong and militant. He fights for what he believes is the greater good in a universe of nothing but shades of grey.
He is what he was made to be. "Evil" to him would be not conquering weaker civilizations, not ensuring that the strong rule, and not following the culture that raised him and made him what he is. He actually comes further than anyone else to what we cinsider "good" because he is the extreme outlier of his people and culture. Other Viltrumites simply do not go off the red. He defied everything he was taught and gave up what would be, for him, a very fulfilling and righteous life, to plunge head first into uncertainty, fear, and being hunted by his own people.
I really like this take. The show is literally called Invincible for a reason , I just never really thought about it this way. (Season 2 spoilers) It's added to in s2. Mark is considered "worthy" by the viltrimites for surviving the battle. He clearly hadn't "won" it, but he didn't lose.
Would love to see your take on season 2! Tying into these themes, I think it’s interesting how Angstrom flips this on its head by forcing Mark into a very extended fight with him, but it has the opposite effect. Angstrom brings out the worst in Mark through their extended exchange, enraging him enough to make him want to commit murder and go through with it. He also does this a different way than Mark, who puts his own body on the line for each beating. Angstrom tricks him and throws Mark against other people while keeping himself perfectly untouched until the end when he tries to finish Mark off. This strategy for a weaker opponent is way worse than simply fighting straightforwardly like Mark did against Nolan. It’s also interesting how losing a fight makes Allen stronger (esp because he represents the last effort of a whole species losing a war).
I think of that one panel of The Flash a lot. Where one of the rogues die and Flash finds their usual hang out. At first, his villains think he's there for a fight, but it becomes clear he isn't. He's their to mourn with them. They have a drink. Even people doing illegal, criminal or bad things are still people, who have reasons for doing what they do and people they care about. Those stories are interesting. I like a good punch up myself, but the fight behind the fight is maybe more important.
My absolute favorite thing about Invincible is that he loves his powers and constantly tries to get stronger. None of that “these powers are a curse” bull shit
When I first watched episode 1, I had shit to do and skipped the post-credit scene. I ended up watching it. But imagine how different my experience would be if I'd missed Omni-Man murdering the Guardians! I would've been trying to piece together the 'mystery'!
Just wanted to let you know that Xanderhal sent me to your channel and honestly it’s some of the best quality reviews I’ve seen so far. You really are criminally underrated and I can see you blowing up some day
Marks philosophy is mirrored by a big figure in Irish history called Tomas MacCurtain. Fascinating figure if you want to see the real world application of this strategy
Nolan fails as a metaphor for the type of necessary violence described though. Nolan doesn't help people because he can nor does he believe in caring about anyone but his own kind. He's a bully trying to force homogeneity and what he was taught to be the only acceptable way of living.
Except, before he fights Mark he never sees himself as a bully. He truly believes what he's doing is for the greater good. He, and other Viltrumites truly believe they are the force for good in the universe. That they are the epitome of civilization, and they want to bring others into the light. He is exactly a critique of that kind of hero.
@@Burger_Nun most bullies don't see themselves as bullies and justify their actions with some form of logic. With their exceptional life spans the Viltrimites have every opportunity to learn about other cultures, but don't and either wipe out or enslave them. "Might makes right therefore superheroes bad" is a ridiculous argument because supes live in a world with villains. They're inherently necessary and just like in real life power exposes rather than corrupts. Proud boy Omniman and his people are basically just Nancy from The Craft who think being different and having power makes them special/better rather than simply different.
Invincible is a deconstruction, but unlike other deconstructions of super hero media (The Boys, Wanted, Dark Knight returns, The Watchmen, etc.) Invincible wasn't written by someone who hates the classic ideal of a super hero.
Another thing I find interesting is that mark and the world to an extent blame him just as much as Omni man for not being able to stand up to him, his shit getting rocked still lead to death on a massive scale
Great video. Whenever I read the comments though, giving some people the vocabulary of media analysis wad a mistake because they can't apply it. It's a deconstruction
You have given me different tools to dissect my media with. I appreciate your efforts and hope you persist. Take this! MY LIKE, MY COMMENT, and ALL OF MY SUBSCRIBE!
Since I have read the comics... this is only half true. As in literally half true. Though endurance definitely is Mark's strength, no doubt about that.
I have seen the term "deconstruction" used over and over and I feel it suffers from a lot of misuse, many times I have seen it, it amounts to the use of juvenile shocks, often by making lots of characters jerks. Invincible certainly deconstructs aspects of the superhero genre. Many have probably noticed influences from Spider-Man on our title character with him balancing his personal life and superhero life. A minor spoiler from someone who read the comic, we later see Mark drop out of college because missing classes due to his superhero work means he has no chance of passing. In other respects, Invincible is a reconstruction which takes apart aspects of the genre and also puts them back together (Andor is another reconstruction with Star Wars). Invincible points out that because you are the superhero protagonist, you aren't guaranteed to win. When Mark helps Titan against Machine Head, he gets demolished by Battle Beast. When the show got to the clash with Omni-Man that the first season had been building up to, Mark predictably had zero chance of winning. However, the series shows that Mark surviving is still able to prevail in his own way. Machine Head was still defeated. Humanity defeated Omni-Man before Mark's battle with him even began. In later stories in the comic, we frequently see that Mark is not an ideal superhero with the MANY mistakes he makes. That doesn't mean he still cannot do good.
Can’t wait for Season 2. I really do prefer Invincible to other deconstructions of the superhero genre such as The Boys (particularly after what I thought was an underwhelming and unsatisfying Season 3 finale.) Invincible, despite being more “realistic” regarding “superheroing,” never disregards the idea of hope and conveys that even in the worst of times, good people will stand up to do the right thing for the right reasons. Whereas The Boys, at the moment, is making me struggle to actually like ANY of the protagonists besides Queen Maeve, the ONLY one in the finale to remember that Homelander is the greater threat, and MM, who is the only one I will give a pass for not supporting the plan of using Soldier Boy against Homelander because I imagine that the combination of OCD, trauma, and justified rage makes it quite difficult to see the “big picture.” Other than that we have Butcher, the cold-hearted hypocrite who blew up a house with a baby in it and discarded his plan the one time it was fully justified for him to be a ruthless bastard; Starlight, the delusional idealist whose only plan to deal with the apocalyptic threat in Homelander is to expose him on social media; Hughie, whose season 3 arc felt incredibly forced and out-of-character; Kimiko, the Supe whose season 3 arc was rendered meaningless by having her sadistically kill a bunch of Red Shirts in the finale; and Frenchie, the child-killer who really doesn’t have any ground to stand on when it comes to morality. Invincible’s protagonists, on the other hand, despite having realistic flaws and making the occasional mistake, are much more wholesome and easy to root for. I’ll also take Omni-Man over Homelander as the ideal “Evil Superman” figure any day, as I find the former to be much more complex and three-dimensional. And as a bonus, the writers don’t feel the need to pattern Omni-Man’s quotes and actions after a double-digit IQ idiot.
I don't disagree with all you said and I feel like the writers on The Boys being unable to restrain themselves from inserting "current year" politics is to its detriment. That being said I think part of the point of season 3s ending is Starlight realizing she was being naive and giving up on her plan in favor of doing things Butcher and Hugh's way. The point of Kimiko's arc seemed to be her realizing that the V isn't what made her a monster, and that getting rid of it won't let her stop being one, so her killing some security mooks was just an explication of that. Also, how is Frenchie a "child-killer"? I feel like I missed something there.
@@dark7elementFrenchie didnt save the children Lamp lighter(arguably too lost to be saved) burned and instead chased after lamp lighter and failed to confront him. This ate at frenchie in season 2
I don´t want to spoil anything, but the show just caught the tip of the iceberg yet. There is so much more to this story in the upcoming seasons (I can just hope they push this to the end of the comic) that makes me excited to see what people will think of it. The whole "mark keeps gettin punched" is just the beginning. I see the whole arc more as a deconstruction of the modern superhero that is powered without earning it than anything else. Mark earns everything he gets with blood, effort and resiliense. But what endears me the most is not how he gets more powerful, but how he keeps refusing to get more cruel along his journey.
You know that deconstructing the superhero genre is nothing new though, right? The Watchmen did it near 40 years ago and it has been a huge influence ever since (and for a long time after it was all the rage for comics to have superheroes do really awful things). What Invincible does (and does well I think) is synthesize. It combines the deconstructed with the old power fantasy ideals.
@@seantylerfermin4927 Exactly. The Watchmen did point out that in real life being a superhero as presented in the comics was actually kind of insane. And it was very well written and its points were valid. But believe that Alan Moore came to regret the influence it had over comics in general. The thing was he grew up with these comic and absolutely loved them and, while if there was a real life Captain America, he would probably be a kind of fascist shill for the government, it didn't change the fact that what the comic Captain America represented was still valid and good. Which is kind of why I consider Invincible a reconstruction rather than a deconstruction. It goes back to what made comics cool but does so with a knowledge and representation of the what deconstruction had to say.
(preface: Haven’t watcher the whole video yet) I always interpreted Invincible as the incarnation of power fantasy every young boy actually wants to see. It was perfect to me because it’s exactly what I would have wanted to experience or watch for myself. Maybe that could be the deconstruction of power fantasy as we know it societally, but I could never call deconstructive in my pov. Just to explain what I mean a little bit more is that I always saw the fantasy of super heroism as being able to take any hit and keep moving forward. Rocky embodies the aspect of super hero content I adore watching. It’s why I enjoyed MHA early seasons when I was in high school. I loved getting to see someone I could picture myself as hold true to their ideals and be confident in themselves to keep moving forward! The purity of strength never was the whole picture I enjoyed looking at through my life.
Now imagine how powerful a Viltrumite/Saiyan hybrid would be. Like what if an alternate universe Omniman got stuck in the Dragon Ball Universe by Angstrom Levy. Depending on which saga Nolan arrives at I'm pretty sure he would be smart enough to notice the power gap between him and the saiyans and realize he would have to "learn their ways". What I mean is that he would learn how to control his ki in order to have a chance against them. This applies to him as in the DBZ universe every living being possesses ki. He would act as a hero to gain goku's trust, learn about ki control and ask him to teach him how to utilize it in exchange for daily battles(considering viltrumite stamina is much higher than a saiyan and goku loves to fight) Now consedering Viltrumite biology is extremely adaptive he wouldn't have much of a hard time learning how to control it and his potential could be quite impressive. I think he could get to Frieza's level but I might be wrong. Also once he realizes how powerful saiyans are compared to him he would devise a plan to create Viltrumite/Sayans hybrids once he finds a female saiyan(like Gohan's daughter... once she's an adult ofc) thus creating one of the most powerful species in that universe. The Viltraiyans Considering Goku, Vegeta, Gohan, Goten and Trunks won't live much longer than humans all he has to do is play hero until they die while spawning more Viltraiyans. Eventually there will be hundreds of millions of them and Nolan learning with Gohan that Saiyans/Human hybrids have much more potential than pure saiyans he would make the Viltraiyans mate with humans. With both Viltrumite and Saiyan dna being dominant their human dna would make up of less than 1% of their total dna. Making the new hybrids 99% Viltraiyans with MUCH more potential. Nolan will teach them the ways of Ki that he learned with Goku and the gang. They will use the time chamber to get stronger much faster and with their lifespans they would train and train for centuries. Once they populate the whole Earth they will expand their new empire through the galaxy. All hail The Viltraiyan Empire.
@@rustyshackelford4224 just look at the current conflicts. Or historical conflicts that people who endlessly pontificate on whether or not a superhero especially does the moral thing but with real people with real lives they will gleefully share videos of them getting blown apart and gloat about their suffering.
It deconstructs as well the relationship between the Superman and the human paramour. Why Omniman seduced and married Debbie? Because he both needed a cover and wanted to breed a son. Humans being 100% compatible with Vultrunites? That's the main reason for the eventual invasion, to turn the Earth into a GIANT BREEDING CAMP. And much like other tropes, it's also meant to be re-constructed later, thanks to Mark's efforts.
It is a parable. As a child your parents are the care givers that make the world have sense. As you grow in agency and are able to explore your values, you realise that these are different from your parents. Your parents also only become aware of this through conflict when you asert yourself and this can show an unpleasant mirror to them that they are not who they think they are. But each time you assert yourself you are forced to expand your capabilities and this is traumatic. You may or may not be correct to do what you did and you must learn from the consequences of your actions. Mark has a group of people also comming of age at the same time with their own challenges. As they grow these people both challenge and replace the establishment. This is the story. 1. You accept what is presented to you as how things are. You live by those values. 2. You see disconnect with presentation and values, you challenge this in an attempt to reconcille. 3. Reconcilliation is a difficult challenge and unravels other issues that need correction. It is the conflict to the new status quo. 4. You present how things are now and what you believe to be correct living by those values. 5. You are challenged and need to confront the errors of your efforts, now from the status quo side of the conflict. 6. You face the choice change, win (suppress) or lose (fall from power/die).
Honestly, the Viltrumites are proof a story's only good as its villains - because they're perfect for its themes. They're what happens when using violence to solve problems becomes...the go-to solution. It doesn't make you a proud honorable warrior people, it makes you imperialist monsters. There's more than one reason for a code like chivalry or bushido, it tells the warrior caste when to stop.
Nice vid! I don’t know if I agree with Invincible the show successfully deglamorizing violence outside of fights with Mark himself, (Omni man definitely lives up to the standard power fantasy in a lot of fights himself). I don’t know if deglamorizing violence was their intention, but very interesting video and look Mark!
_My_ superpower is pinning comments asking for your support on Patreon (www.patreon.com/pillarofgarbage) - consider joining up in exchange for exclusive videos and much, much more!
And making great synopsis video’s. 👍🏼
With great power comes great Patreon donation
- Uncle Garbage
What’s your opinion on Amber knowing Mark was a superhero and was struggling, yet still treated him like a jerk?
@@insectostrich4407 PLEASE STOP BEATING A DEAD HORSE WE GET IT
@@slader6079 No, I’m just curious what he thinks of the controversy. It’s a problem that doesn’t ruin the story, but does hold it back from being 10/10 .
However, I am sorry. I didn’t consider that some people were sick of hearing about this. So, I apologise if I’ve annoyed you.
There’s a line in season two that puts it really well: “Nolan was invulnerable, that’s not having strength that’s having it easy.”
I've heard invincible is less about "what if superman was evil" and more about "what if superman was a teenager and had an evil dad"
yeah pretty much
If superman's dad was Zod*
Much more then that. I really hope the show lasts a long time so I can talk about the big twists without spoiling people. Because what the comic does with Onmiman will turn everyone's current ideas about him on their head.
I will keep my mouth shut.
My message was deleted :(
I see you also watch OSP.
"Not by building a monopoly on violence, but by denying it" is such a powerful statement.
Invincible book employs one of my favorite worldbuilding techniques that is introducing a character that you think is going to be a one off joke only to give them a deep backstory and genuinely touching arc
Bulletproof?
@@DmandadudeRex Splode
The Viltrumites
Oliver
it may seem out of place but this can be applied to so many characters in adventure time lol
Sokka Moment
@@landy4497hell yes
Mark's character trait is very similar to that of Peter Parker. You can beat them down as much as you want, they'll always get back up. You can never beat their spirit.
And they are also similar in the sense that they have borderline miserable lives and really bad luck XD.
@@tetraxis3011Yeah. That too.
As the boys is a deconstruction of superheroes for people that hate superheroes, Invincible is a deconstruction of superheroes for people that love superheroes.
Yep, especially in the comics, both are interesting
I’d disagree, just because I’m someone who hates superhero media/power fantasy, but loved invincible and watchmen.
It really is a brilliant deconstruction. All the complaints I have had about ‘boys cartoons’ that would glorify violence and a black and white morality get addressed, thought experimented, and torn apart under the weight of the complexity of interpersonal dynamics.
I loved invincible because I love psychological horror. And that’s what this show has been so far.
I've never looked at Invincible as a "deconstruction" as to me it was always a love letter to superheroes but yeah this is a great take.
I think the deconstruction is a part of the love letter. Deconstruction doesn’t really mean “the original thing was bad”, just that this new nothing is doing something different and interesting with it
@@TSDTalks22 No Ik that.
I can’t remember who said it but I heard someone say that The Boys is a deconstruction of the superhero genre made by someone who hates superheroes and Invincible is a deconstruction of the superhero genre made by someone who loves superheroes. They were talking about the original comics but I think it still holds true
Agreed, if anything it’s a reconstruction. And show that doesn’t go, this is dumb and doesn’t work and let me break it down why. It feels more like “these ideals, of fighting the good fight, yeah it’s tough, but it’s worth it and works”
@@TSDTalks22
I’ll be honest, I don’t see the love-letter aspect.
Maybe if I read it more, I suppose.
Invincible is a reconstruction not a deconstruction. The show is still on the deconstructing phase but as a reconstruction the idea is to rebuild after they are torn down. That is what the comics did and likely what the show will do too. If it lasts long enough.
Well, as Kropotkine would say, “the passion for destruction is also a creative passion.” ;)
I'd argue it's still constantly reconstructionist. The world isn't remotely as cynical as deconstructions are. The heroes mostly still want to do good. The government (Cecil) still wants to believe in them. Heck, it's less cynical than some seasons of Justice League in that regard. It's a reconstructionist world with deconstructionist events.
Exactly! It's a lot like Madoka Magica- a reconstruction of the magical girl genre, showing the importance of hope, but it started this trend of "dark magical girls" that goes against everything Madoka stood for, because so many misunderstood it.
That is deconstruction mate.
A reconstruction involves keeping the tropes but explaining why they would actually happen. The effect remains but the cause is changed to be more reasonable. A deconstruction is the inverse. The cause remains the same...but the cause is more reasonable. Invincible tends to fall far more in line with a deconstruction. Buildings fall? People fucking die. Villains die. Heroes may live, but having teenagers as the major protectors results in...failure. Invincible plays with the effects, or consequences, far more than it plays with the cause.
Later in the comic run a character named Dinosaurus appears, being quite relative in strenght to Mark at the time he also challenges mark's mentality quite a lot. changing a lot of his perspective from superheros existing to react to justice to being proactive with his powers. helping the planet environmentally, agriculturally which Mark would just not consider in season 1.
Love me some Dinosaurus such a cool character I don't think the *real fans™* are prepared for some of the things that happen throughout the series
I’m so excited for Dinosaurus’s introduction
@@BlueBeetle1939they definitely aren’t. Lowkey they might get flak or pressure from TV audiences or Amazon itself lol
That sounds amazing. I've only seen the show and my favorite character is eve, because she's like: "beating up people isn't cutting it, I'm gonna help some farmers." and she probably ends up helping a lot more people.
@@tmnt9001eve is probably the “goodest” character, love her
I saw invincible as not "being a super hero would suck actually" cause we have a million of those already. But what I see it as is "what if being a super hero would suck actually, but you did it anyways."
Maybe more Spiderman writers should use that as inspiration
It's not as much as. "If being a superhero sucked." as it is. "Yeah being a super hero would absolutely suck, but what makes them HEROE'S is that they aim to do good anyway."
And the best classic Marvel and DC stories has that message too. It's actually not all that great being Spiderman or Batman or even Superman, it sucks in so many ways, it's lonely. But what makes them HEROES is that they still see the good in the world worth fighting for and put up that fight.
It's a job that he does and some days are better others.
Another great synopsis. As a 51 year old. Invincible took me back to the mid 1980’s. The look and feel of Invincible reminded me of how captivating shows like M.A.S.K and G.I.Joe and Transformers looked when I was young. The storytelling turns everything on its head and I absolutely love that about Invincible.
Another great video and great thumbnail choice.
I like transformers too.
Is the m.a.s.k. show the same for the mask anti hero comic books/movie or different?
Now that you mention it, that thumbnail looks pretty good. TH-camrs seem to find it hard to strike a balance between truthfulness and obnoxiousness in their thumbnails.
when invincible released in 2003 it was meant to be and written as a 80s comic in 2000. corny tropes jokes random adventures Robert Kirkman did everything to somewhat bring it back. i highly recommend reading the full invincible comic if you have the time. its an 144 issue run with extra books if you're interested like atom eve and rex splode or guardians of the globe.
I would say the look is closer to DC animations of the 90’s or DC animated of the late 2010’s then gi Joe
@@JwadeProductions7 now that you mention it, yeah, definitely closer to the 90’s Batman animated series. I completely forgot about what a great show that was. I guess I was reminiscing too far back lol
Invincible is one of the few series that goes out of its way to be Reconstructive rather than focusing on Deconstruction and I admire it a lot for that.
Good shit, PoG. I liked the point about "would a soldier keep killing if killing was this hard and took this long?"
Makes me think about ancient battles, which aside from archers & calvary were all up-close, bloody, and personal. How did they do it?
@@tylersimmons4287 Interesting point, I wonder if they were more willing because it was essentially the expected way to do battle back in those days. Like, other than archers, they didn't have many options to make the killing less personal. That's just speculation on my part, though!
@@tylersimmons4287 the truth is we have some ideas, but we honestly don't know for sure.
@@butHomeisNowhere___ afaik it's all speculation! We have a bunch of weapons & birds-eye views through artwork & writing, but nobody ever gets into the grisly details of what it was actually like hand-to-hand, when two lines clashed. I imagine there was a heavy social aspect, like in sports, your blood's up cause you're there with all your boys from your hometown
Remember reading a book ( the Iliad I think) and there was an ancient Greek battle and the book goes into lots of detail on the violence.
God i love invincible, honestly it is the comic that made me realise a main charecter/s shouldnt be actually "invincible" they should be able to be beaten into the ground, but they do have to get back up in some kind of way whether thay be in the fight or later, and thats okay for a charecter its not a bad thing it builds them into aomething more because theyre able to build and grow
Watch One Punch Man. I think your mind will change again
@@MerlinTheCommenter I've seen it, I love it, I still hold to what I said
@@MerlinTheCommenter OPM is a satire exception.
@MerlinTheCommenter Saitama's "get back up again" is choosing to get up from bed in the morning and be a superhero despite being extremely depressed
Invincible reinforces the idea that in every person is the desire and capacity to do good and be kind. Mark's most personal victories are the ones that cause his enemies to reconsider, to look down at his battered body and think "Christ, what the hell am I doing?" Obviously this will not work for everyone, and the effects it has on Mark get explored further, but it's a really interesting dynamic.
I was hoping you would show the scene of where/how that climactic battle ends, where Omni-man asks Invincible something like:
"...Once everything/everyone is gone, then what will you have?"
"I'll still have you, dad."
If even one little thing was off, this would have come across as cheesy or melodramatic, but I was truly impressed by how successfully the show stuck the landing.
I never expected this thoughtful, and often gross and goofy, take on superheroes to also do the seemingly impossible: create the most emotionally powerful moment I've ever experienced in the genre.
Honestly, show fumbles a lot and even that scene isn't without a screw up: in the comic there a page of him actually considering and rising a fist to kill Mark, only to go ugly crying (which show for some reason downplays to one tear) and fly off.
@@mikhaelgribkov4117 Not sure how|why that's a screwup. Seems like a reasonable adaptation to make the scene more effective?
@@MaurDL how making Nolan more of a jerk compared to the comic and cut the actual great scene of showing his indecision and guilt makes adaptation effective? Bare bones? Yes. Effective? What are we smoking?
@mikhaelgribkov4117 But the show does show that. It just doesn't linger on those moments because it's trying to emphasize that the issue is not resolved and that Nolan is still conflicted. His wrath lost out to love, but not his pride.
It's the level of discretion and expediency that this is executed with that makes it work so effectively.
An excellent take. I didn't realise that this is the purpose of Mark's superpower. Or that you want to hit the "Mark."
"If you hold the monopoly on violence, then you're the one who decides whether or not your violence is justified". Didn't expect to hear some Weberian state analysis.
I like how Mark is a damage sponge that forces the enemy to take a look at themselves and what they're doing. Winning a physical fight is cool but winning the argument and moral high ground is so goddamn important it's a privilege. And that's what makes Mark awesome!
I can’t tell you how excited I am to have gotten this notification that you did a video about inv- *cue title card*
*blood splatter*
One of the design elements I like most about invincible is that his suit has those goggles. They make him expressive, unique, and give the bad guys something to break before they’re able to damage his body
“The victor is not victorious if the vanquished does not consider himself so.”
― Ennius
I think the beginning of this show communicates this idea just as well as the horrifying climax. The violence that Omniman demonstrates against the Guardians is unmatched until the finale, it feels fundamentally out of place compared to the rest of the show. In presenting it this way, it places both the viewer and eventually the cast in this position of trying to justify why he would carry out such an act, even though we are presented with no evidence or defense from him until the end. In this way, the realisation that it can only be viewed as justified from the perspective of an imperialist empire highlights this nagging sense that there couldn't ever be a moral justification for total might.
I agree it was unmatched, but I don’t think it felt out of place. Just think of the first Thraxan invasion as Invincible held on to the grandma as she was battered and her flesh tore like tissue paper.
The show’s pretty brutal.
Great point, now that I think about it there are quite a few more situations with similar levels of violence. However, I still think it was out of place in the context of the first episode, the show seems to have two main kinds of violence that it employs: one more straight-faced positive super hero fantasy, and a darker, more critical brutal violence.@@zen_tewmbs
@@omwda2412 OH, I misunderstood you.
Absolutely, the ultraviolence of Omniman’s murder of the guardians of the globe absolutely felt out of place in the *first episode itself*, which was the intent of the show. I thought you meant that the Guardian’s murder felt out of place *in the show as a whole*. My b.
If Mark is invincible then how come I can still see him?
🤯
*Cue riff*
Invincible does the one thing I wish more original universes based on “what if a character or super hero was____”. It made a unique world that’s not just Superman but he’s a super predator or what if iron man was a sex pest (looking at you boys).
Mark being a hero not by having a monopoly on power but by denying one.
Is such a great analysis of the series I’ve been a long time fan - read the comics several years back and it never occurred to me. Occasionally I’d wonder why, despite how strong he’s gotten, he still got the shit kicked out of him. But I think, in that way, Mark is able to remain humble and in touch with humanity.
In more ways than one once we rise above being in a certain power group, people often throw out the memories and understanding of what it once was like
- be it growing up - powerless as an elementary school kid, only power that can be exerted is rebellion as a teenager, the thrill of being able to direct your life as a young adult, and then (potentially) being that all powerful authority to your own kids -
Or as another example trying to get political power to enact change that you see as good, but once in that position disregarding the opinions and thoughts of the people whose place you used to be in.
Mark’s character is one who can never forget what it’s like to lose, to really really lose, and that keeps him bound to the people he swears to protect
I do adore the myriad ways in which Invincible's core thematic expression of the fragility, transience, and subsequent beauty of life and humanity can be observed as defining every aspect of its narrative and metatextual construction, such that each aspect assumes a form all its own, whilst coalescing in a succinct ode to the aforementioned. The visceral duality of brutality and sentiment in particular serves as a splendid means by which to dissect all the series wishes to say, entirely emblematic of its articulation of the paradoxical volatility and eternity of forging purpose and connection for oneself ("What will you have after five-hundred years", and so forth). In essence, it purports to both challenge and encapsulate such central and universal ideas, ideas ofttimes wholly intrinsic to the core of superhero storytelling, employing all it inherits from its functional and spiritual predecessors to exemplify its ideas. This also works to bolster its sociopolitical critiques of the corrosive amorality of power, the constraining bureaucracy of systemically-reinforced control, and the vitality of passionately opposing said mechanisms as a means by which to truly progress, integrating the marginalized roots of superheroes into its core narrative.
Excellent video, as always. I do hope everyone is well
Dude dusted off the Thesaurus for this comment lol
My best attempt to turn this into a comment that is written for people to actually read:
*"I really love all the ways Invincible expresses these ideas of the fragility and temporary nature of human life, and the ensuing beauty both in spite of and because of these ideas.
It does an excellent job of handling the different sides or variants of these themes without mixing them up too much, while still resolving the individual thematic lines to a good conclusion.
The combination of incredibly brutal violence with genuine, heartfelt sentiment is especially effective at highlighting these themes and how they interact, compare, and contrast in a way that is honest to the intentions of the authors, especially the ideas revolving around the dually fickle and persistent nature of any attempt to find purpose, meaning, or connection in such an over-the-top world and scenario.
The show challenges ideas of the superhero genre and expresses ideas antithetical to it on the whole, while also effectively representing many of the core concepts that make a superhero story what it is, and paying great respect to the media and materials that came before and laid the path, using them as a foundation for its expression and unique perspective.
The honesty and high-quality craft of the show as has been previously referred to in this comment can also be seen in how effectively the show handles commentary and critique of mid-to-high level political and sociological issues and concepts, such as the nature of corruption by power, the failures of bureaucratic systems of control, and how important it is to challenge assumptions and systems that are flawed and backwards in order to make change that truly matters.
These ideas can also be traced back to inherent connection to the experiences, struggles, and desires of marginalized groups that lie at the root of the superhero genre and its origins, and the show effectively represents these as well."*
I'm sure it's not entirely accurate, and it is certainly longer, but this is the best I can do when you compress your comment with language that isn't actually useful outside of academia.
No, your linguistic choices are not counter-effective to an erudite reader, however the audience most likely to encounter this comment not only is unlikely to comprehend it, but should not be expected to.
I'm having trouble with it, and I tend to outpace PhD students when it comes to reading comprehension.
You do not have to use the big words to be smart; you already wrote a perfectly good analysis before you overly compressed it.
Furthermore, you actually made several mistakes in your sentence structure and grammatical understanding. I can forgive this considering the fact that I make mistakes all the time with grammar as an intuitive speaker rather than a formally educated one, but it does weaken the point of using this high-level master thesis language.
You also missed one punctuation mark, which I am far more critical of.
Your grade is an 86.
I can smell the arrogance.
Looks like Chat-GPT got a workout.
Love how you said "Bro is cooked" in the most serious video essay voice
well, bro was _seriously_ cooked
Was just reading Utopia of Rules by David Graeber the other week and you brought up something that struck me: the monopoly of violence. In superhero media, the monopoly of violence is controlled by heroes, except for a few outlying stories. And in those outliers, the monopoly of violence belongs to who it does in real life: the state. Things like the Mutant Registration Act or the Keene Act effecticely asserting dominance and control through the filter of legislation backed by the force of arms. And while limiting the control of violence is great in that it should, practically, reduce violence, its also harrowing in that it concentrates said violence and strengthens it, making it that much harder to oppose in applications that a society might deem unfit. Superheroes, I guess, are just a grim look at the idealism and reality of violence in our world.
I forget who the quote is from, but I remember reading that detective fiction requires a police force that is unwilling or unable to act to stop the villain. Otherwise, what you get is a "police procedural" like Law and Order and not a Sherlock Holmes type story.
That's also true of the superhero genre. Even when heroes aren't acting as vigilantes, they're often acting in a capacity similar to Holmes.
For example, in My Hero Academia "heroes" operate their own private security companies and can be (essentially) deployed as a kind of militia by the State during emergencies like acts of domestic terrorism.
@@GrizabeeblesDon’t forget One Punch Man, where any superheroes not affiliated with the Hero Association are regarded as oddballs at best
See ‘Beau of the Fifth Column’ for nuanced discussions about the monopoly of violence by the state.
The fight with battle beast always confused me until now, but this completely explains it
Invincible: I take the biggest beatings in Invincible
Allen: Hold my intestines
“A hero is just a guy who doesn’t give up” -Jefferson Davis 2018 ( Marvel Spider-man )
Another great PoG video that looks at one of my faves and makes me like it even more.
Art is so cool when we can share about it and discuss it and appreciate it from different PoV.
What I liked most about Invincible is how full that universe is. Like, I'm invested in the saga between the security guard in the opening and his step son, and all the regular people we see on the show. We have all these moments with civilians that sink it in that everyone on that train Omniman put Mark through had a life and dreams and significant relationships.
And you're right.
It's one of the only shows that depicts violence correctly, by having its main character RECEIVE it and bear WITNESS to it.
And yet so many people just watch the show for the Omni Man power fantasy and unironically consider him the best/their favorite character.
People liking a character doesn’t mean they support that character’s in universe actions.
Seriously? Everyone I have spoken to hates Nolan.
why make him such a banger if he was supposed to be the villain then
@@hasanmuttaqin464 he is supposed to be a villain who then redeems himself..but you know he actually has to do bad shit. He wasn’t doing it for fun he was fully a victim of his culture’s indoctrination and went on to become a piece of shit. His love for Mark and Debbie actually came early on during his time on Earth but he didn’t have much respect for others. Nolan will eventually turn himself around but he isn’t just some naughty street punk…dude was a full on super space Nazi…a lot of work is required
@@Teddy3230-u4d like my hedonist ass could leer deeper into the nuance of the show and not just marvel and ponder at the animation
Omniman is a G. Overcoming 2000 years of programming.
My God I never realized that before. You're right, the name invincible doesn't mean that he can't be hurt. It means he can't be conquered.
He gets beaten up so many times and people make fun of his name for that. That's not what his name means. No one ever conquers Mark.
I love this video! Living in an era where the superhero genre has become just as popular as the Western genre was at one point, it can feel like so many of these superhero stories are exactly the same, and very few try to dissect the nature of the superhero and what it means 4-Hour Society. But this show introduces a new way of thinking about heroics. A different way of fighting Injustice, and deciding whether it is morally right to even do so, and who gets to make those decisions as you pointed out. Thank you so much for making this video. So much more than kicks and punches
There are 2 scenes that I think are incredible and answer both the power fantasy and the doing good part of being a hero (aside from the fight with his dad)
The first invasion is where Mark Is unable to save anyone, and the one person he tried to save died due to his rough handling of her.
The second final "recap" scene where we see the consequences of Mark trying to do good
- Mars will be colonized by another alien species because he tried to save the astronauts.
- Doc seismic discovered he could create an army after his fight with invincible
- A gang leader just replaced another after Mark helped him
- the government use the tech of someone he took down without killing to create an army of cyborg (meaning a lot of test subject and sacrifice).
The comics are fire too
They're actually clever.
Another good deconstruction of the superhero genre is James Gunn's "Super." I particularly like how it handles violence, and that it sways back and forth over the line between disturbing and entertaining.
If he's so invincible, how come I can see him?
the writing in this essay is absolutely gorgeous. you're very gifted.
If there is one thing that can cure superhero fatigue it's.....TITLE CARD.
Invincible is a great series. This is a great video that does it justice.
You should read the web serial worm. Its a really good deconstruction of the super hero genre with some great character writing as well as unique super power fights.
Added to _the list_ 🖊️
@@PillarofGarbage
One of my favorite characters from _Worm_ is the S-Class villain Sleeper, known for being as mysterious and he is powerful, dangerous, and feared. People tend to leave him alone because of how (mostly) dormant he is. During a multiversal crisis where the heroes were teaming up with some of the worst S-class supervillains (some of whom have a kill count in the tens of millions and have displaced much more) against an even worse threat (the Godzilla Threshold had been passed by that much), one character noticed Sleeper sitting on a lawnchair on a balcony, reading a book out loud, and decided that even in the face of a multiversal/multidimensional crisis, Sleeper would be more trouble than he's worth and thus he was left alone.
On a completely different note, _Worm_ 's MC's father is a dock union organizer and we respect union men.
@@ajiththomas2465 sleeper just wants to grill
@@torchdreemurr4082
Sleeper especially wants to grill birds like Ziz, haha.
I read worm long before I read or watched invincible and I'm now convinced its hugely influenced by the comic. While I have some issues with it's over the top edginess and pacing (and the less said about the sequel the better) I think it manages to do something particularly interesting with how it focuses on how *juniville* the superhero power fantasy is. The fact that so much of the main characters morality is based around one of the most brutally realistic depictions of bullying I've seen in fiction genuinely spoke to me when I read it as a nerdy teen. It was at once my *exact* power fantasy and a brutal deconstruction of it. I'm not sure I'd enjoy it so much of I read it now, because it spoke to a very, very specific time of my life- but I think theres something really clever in how it acknowledges how and why violent power fantasies are appealing to young adults and teens.
Invincible is a show that does something a lot of modern superhero shows tend to overlook: It focuses more on the "hero" aspect, and less on the "super".
0:10
Yeah I only watched this show back in September of this year.
It was pretty good.
This power fantasy of endurance is essentially at the core of a lot of popular shounen animanga!❤
0:08 u saved that guy balls with this cut
Honestly, I love Omni Man as a villain, he's not evil just for evils sake. He's principaled,strong and militant. He fights for what he believes is the greater good in a universe of nothing but shades of grey.
He is what he was made to be. "Evil" to him would be not conquering weaker civilizations, not ensuring that the strong rule, and not following the culture that raised him and made him what he is.
He actually comes further than anyone else to what we cinsider "good" because he is the extreme outlier of his people and culture. Other Viltrumites simply do not go off the red. He defied everything he was taught and gave up what would be, for him, a very fulfilling and righteous life, to plunge head first into uncertainty, fear, and being hunted by his own people.
I really like this take. The show is literally called Invincible for a reason , I just never really thought about it this way.
(Season 2 spoilers)
It's added to in s2. Mark is considered "worthy" by the viltrimites for surviving the battle. He clearly hadn't "won" it, but he didn't lose.
Would love to see your take on season 2!
Tying into these themes, I think it’s interesting how Angstrom flips this on its head by forcing Mark into a very extended fight with him, but it has the opposite effect. Angstrom brings out the worst in Mark through their extended exchange, enraging him enough to make him want to commit murder and go through with it. He also does this a different way than Mark, who puts his own body on the line for each beating. Angstrom tricks him and throws Mark against other people while keeping himself perfectly untouched until the end when he tries to finish Mark off. This strategy for a weaker opponent is way worse than simply fighting straightforwardly like Mark did against Nolan.
It’s also interesting how losing a fight makes Allen stronger (esp because he represents the last effort of a whole species losing a war).
Video on season 2 here! th-cam.com/video/mFwgll9-YUE/w-d-xo.htmlsi=e1Vkc4-YyF8mgpE7
@@PillarofGarbage thanks! Idk how I missed it lol
I think of that one panel of The Flash a lot. Where one of the rogues die and Flash finds their usual hang out. At first, his villains think he's there for a fight, but it becomes clear he isn't. He's their to mourn with them. They have a drink.
Even people doing illegal, criminal or bad things are still people, who have reasons for doing what they do and people they care about. Those stories are interesting. I like a good punch up myself, but the fight behind the fight is maybe more important.
i think this is the most intelligent analysis ive ever heard of superhero media!
I never thought of any of this while watching the show. Talk about an eye opener. Its so easy to get caught in the action!
My absolute favorite thing about Invincible is that he loves his powers and constantly tries to get stronger. None of that “these powers are a curse” bull shit
Tell me you didn’t watch the show without telling me
When I first watched episode 1, I had shit to do and skipped the post-credit scene. I ended up watching it. But imagine how different my experience would be if I'd missed Omni-Man murdering the Guardians! I would've been trying to piece together the 'mystery'!
NEW POG UPLOAD LETS GO
Just wanted to let you know that Xanderhal sent me to your channel and honestly it’s some of the best quality reviews I’ve seen so far. You really are criminally underrated and I can see you blowing up some day
INVINBLE
NVNCBL
When Omni Man asked “Do you have any idea how long we live?“ the look on Mark’s face says it all. He realizes he is cursed
Another european youtuber commentator. you guys really dominate every space..
Marks philosophy is mirrored by a big figure in Irish history called Tomas MacCurtain. Fascinating figure if you want to see the real world application of this strategy
This is basically undertale pacifist route cuz you have to outlast the opponent and learn about them as they try to defeat you
Nolan fails as a metaphor for the type of necessary violence described though. Nolan doesn't help people because he can nor does he believe in caring about anyone but his own kind. He's a bully trying to force homogeneity and what he was taught to be the only acceptable way of living.
Except, before he fights Mark he never sees himself as a bully. He truly believes what he's doing is for the greater good. He, and other Viltrumites truly believe they are the force for good in the universe. That they are the epitome of civilization, and they want to bring others into the light. He is exactly a critique of that kind of hero.
@@Burger_Nun most bullies don't see themselves as bullies and justify their actions with some form of logic. With their exceptional life spans the Viltrimites have every opportunity to learn about other cultures, but don't and either wipe out or enslave them. "Might makes right therefore superheroes bad" is a ridiculous argument because supes live in a world with villains. They're inherently necessary and just like in real life power exposes rather than corrupts. Proud boy Omniman and his people are basically just Nancy from The Craft who think being different and having power makes them special/better rather than simply different.
0:02 feels like netflix Daredevil to me. Meant that as a compliment
Youre analysis of an upcoming arc will be interesting, as itll definitely line up with 'the heroes decide what is good"
Invincible is a deconstruction, but unlike other deconstructions of super hero media (The Boys, Wanted, Dark Knight returns, The Watchmen, etc.) Invincible wasn't written by someone who hates the classic ideal of a super hero.
Another thing I find interesting is that mark and the world to an extent blame him just as much as Omni man for not being able to stand up to him, his shit getting rocked still lead to death on a massive scale
Great video. Whenever I read the comments though, giving some people the vocabulary of media analysis wad a mistake because they can't apply it.
It's a deconstruction
You have given me different tools to dissect my media with. I appreciate your efforts and hope you persist. Take this! MY LIKE, MY COMMENT, and ALL OF MY SUBSCRIBE!
Since I have read the comics... this is only half true.
As in literally half true. Though endurance definitely is Mark's strength, no doubt about that.
You have convinced me that the violence wasn't needlessly excessive.
this is a fantastic analysis. so much that i didn’t see, and it really expands on my appreciation of the show
Invincible is basically “Down but not out”
“might makes right, right justifies might, but might has not made right, not quite” yeah alright i guess
Strongest part of mark is that dudes brain for resisting all the brain damage he should have😂
You can destroy a man, but you can never defeat him.
4:37 - Was expecting a title card.
I have seen the term "deconstruction" used over and over and I feel it suffers from a lot of misuse, many times I have seen it, it amounts to the use of juvenile shocks, often by making lots of characters jerks.
Invincible certainly deconstructs aspects of the superhero genre. Many have probably noticed influences from Spider-Man on our title character with him balancing his personal life and superhero life. A minor spoiler from someone who read the comic, we later see Mark drop out of college because missing classes due to his superhero work means he has no chance of passing.
In other respects, Invincible is a reconstruction which takes apart aspects of the genre and also puts them back together (Andor is another reconstruction with Star Wars). Invincible points out that because you are the superhero protagonist, you aren't guaranteed to win. When Mark helps Titan against Machine Head, he gets demolished by Battle Beast. When the show got to the clash with Omni-Man that the first season had been building up to, Mark predictably had zero chance of winning.
However, the series shows that Mark surviving is still able to prevail in his own way. Machine Head was still defeated. Humanity defeated Omni-Man before Mark's battle with him even began. In later stories in the comic, we frequently see that Mark is not an ideal superhero with the MANY mistakes he makes. That doesn't mean he still cannot do good.
Can’t wait for Season 2. I really do prefer Invincible to other deconstructions of the superhero genre such as The Boys (particularly after what I thought was an underwhelming and unsatisfying Season 3 finale.)
Invincible, despite being more “realistic” regarding “superheroing,” never disregards the idea of hope and conveys that even in the worst of times, good people will stand up to do the right thing for the right reasons.
Whereas The Boys, at the moment, is making me struggle to actually like ANY of the protagonists besides Queen Maeve, the ONLY one in the finale to remember that Homelander is the greater threat, and MM, who is the only one I will give a pass for not supporting the plan of using Soldier Boy against Homelander because I imagine that the combination of OCD, trauma, and justified rage makes it quite difficult to see the “big picture.” Other than that we have Butcher, the cold-hearted hypocrite who blew up a house with a baby in it and discarded his plan the one time it was fully justified for him to be a ruthless bastard; Starlight, the delusional idealist whose only plan to deal with the apocalyptic threat in Homelander is to expose him on social media; Hughie, whose season 3 arc felt incredibly forced and out-of-character; Kimiko, the Supe whose season 3 arc was rendered meaningless by having her sadistically kill a bunch of Red Shirts in the finale; and Frenchie, the child-killer who really doesn’t have any ground to stand on when it comes to morality.
Invincible’s protagonists, on the other hand, despite having realistic flaws and making the occasional mistake, are much more wholesome and easy to root for.
I’ll also take Omni-Man over Homelander as the ideal “Evil Superman” figure any day, as I find the former to be much more complex and three-dimensional. And as a bonus, the writers don’t feel the need to pattern Omni-Man’s quotes and actions after a double-digit IQ idiot.
I don't disagree with all you said and I feel like the writers on The Boys being unable to restrain themselves from inserting "current year" politics is to its detriment.
That being said I think part of the point of season 3s ending is Starlight realizing she was being naive and giving up on her plan in favor of doing things Butcher and Hugh's way. The point of Kimiko's arc seemed to be her realizing that the V isn't what made her a monster, and that getting rid of it won't let her stop being one, so her killing some security mooks was just an explication of that.
Also, how is Frenchie a "child-killer"? I feel like I missed something there.
@@dark7elementFrenchie didnt save the children Lamp lighter(arguably too lost to be saved) burned and instead chased after lamp lighter and failed to confront him. This ate at frenchie in season 2
I don´t want to spoil anything, but the show just caught the tip of the iceberg yet. There is so much more to this story in the upcoming seasons (I can just hope they push this to the end of the comic) that makes me excited to see what people will think of it. The whole "mark keeps gettin punched" is just the beginning. I see the whole arc more as a deconstruction of the modern superhero that is powered without earning it than anything else. Mark earns everything he gets with blood, effort and resiliense.
But what endears me the most is not how he gets more powerful, but how he keeps refusing to get more cruel along his journey.
God this is brilliant
Great video! Thanks so much! 🙏🏾💛🕊🦉
Bro channeled his inner Dr. Seuss at 7:00
You know that deconstructing the superhero genre is nothing new though, right? The Watchmen did it near 40 years ago and it has been a huge influence ever since (and for a long time after it was all the rage for comics to have superheroes do really awful things). What Invincible does (and does well I think) is synthesize. It combines the deconstructed with the old power fantasy ideals.
Except there isn't a constant hate for the Superheroes in general... It actually celebrates them
@@seantylerfermin4927 Exactly. The Watchmen did point out that in real life being a superhero as presented in the comics was actually kind of insane. And it was very well written and its points were valid.
But believe that Alan Moore came to regret the influence it had over comics in general. The thing was he grew up with these comic and absolutely loved them and, while if there was a real life Captain America, he would probably be a kind of fascist shill for the government, it didn't change the fact that what the comic Captain America represented was still valid and good.
Which is kind of why I consider Invincible a reconstruction rather than a deconstruction. It goes back to what made comics cool but does so with a knowledge and representation of the what deconstruction had to say.
(preface: Haven’t watcher the whole video yet)
I always interpreted Invincible as the incarnation of power fantasy every young boy actually wants to see. It was perfect to me because it’s exactly what I would have wanted to experience or watch for myself. Maybe that could be the deconstruction of power fantasy as we know it societally, but I could never call deconstructive in my pov.
Just to explain what I mean a little bit more is that I always saw the fantasy of super heroism as being able to take any hit and keep moving forward. Rocky embodies the aspect of super hero content I adore watching. It’s why I enjoyed MHA early seasons when I was in high school. I loved getting to see someone I could picture myself as hold true to their ideals and be confident in themselves to keep moving forward! The purity of strength never was the whole picture I enjoyed looking at through my life.
Now imagine how powerful a Viltrumite/Saiyan hybrid would be. Like what if an alternate universe Omniman got stuck in the Dragon Ball Universe by Angstrom Levy.
Depending on which saga Nolan arrives at I'm pretty sure he would be smart enough to notice the power gap between him and the saiyans and realize he would have to "learn their ways". What I mean is that he would learn how to control his ki in order to have a chance against them. This applies to him as in the DBZ universe every living being possesses ki.
He would act as a hero to gain goku's trust, learn about ki control and ask him to teach him how to utilize it in exchange for daily battles(considering viltrumite stamina is much higher than a saiyan and goku loves to fight)
Now consedering Viltrumite biology is extremely adaptive he wouldn't have much of a hard time learning how to control it and his potential could be quite impressive. I think he could get to Frieza's level but I might be wrong.
Also once he realizes how powerful saiyans are compared to him he would devise a plan to create Viltrumite/Sayans hybrids once he finds a female saiyan(like Gohan's daughter... once she's an adult ofc) thus creating one of the most powerful species in that universe.
The Viltraiyans
Considering Goku, Vegeta, Gohan, Goten and Trunks won't live much longer than humans all he has to do is play hero until they die while spawning more Viltraiyans. Eventually there will be hundreds of millions of them and Nolan learning with Gohan that Saiyans/Human hybrids have much more potential than pure saiyans he would make the Viltraiyans mate with humans. With both Viltrumite and Saiyan dna being dominant their human dna would make up of less than 1% of their total dna. Making the new hybrids 99% Viltraiyans with MUCH more potential. Nolan will teach them the ways of Ki that he learned with Goku and the gang. They will use the time chamber to get stronger much faster and with their lifespans they would train and train for centuries.
Once they populate the whole Earth they will expand their new empire through the galaxy. All hail The Viltraiyan Empire.
You can wax poetic about violence and it’s justification in media but the blind spot is always real life violence.
Huh? Why do you say that?
@@rustyshackelford4224 just look at the current conflicts. Or historical conflicts that people who endlessly pontificate on whether or not a superhero especially does the moral thing but with real people with real lives they will gleefully share videos of them getting blown apart and gloat about their suffering.
@@rustyshackelford4224 looks at ruzzia-Ukraine war. Sometimes you need to put shit down.
It deconstructs as well the relationship between the Superman and the human paramour.
Why Omniman seduced and married Debbie? Because he both needed a cover and wanted to breed a son. Humans being 100% compatible with Vultrunites? That's the main reason for the eventual invasion, to turn the Earth into a GIANT BREEDING CAMP.
And much like other tropes, it's also meant to be re-constructed later, thanks to Mark's efforts.
Spoilers, damnit
6:20 he viewed it as discipline and that’s why be blamed Mark.
It is a parable.
As a child your parents are the care givers that make the world have sense. As you grow in agency and are able to explore your values, you realise that these are different from your parents. Your parents also only become aware of this through conflict when you asert yourself and this can show an unpleasant mirror to them that they are not who they think they are. But each time you assert yourself you are forced to expand your capabilities and this is traumatic. You may or may not be correct to do what you did and you must learn from the consequences of your actions.
Mark has a group of people also comming of age at the same time with their own challenges. As they grow these people both challenge and replace the establishment. This is the story.
1. You accept what is presented to you as how things are. You live by those values.
2. You see disconnect with presentation and values, you challenge this in an attempt to reconcille.
3. Reconcilliation is a difficult challenge and unravels other issues that need correction. It is the conflict to the new status quo.
4. You present how things are now and what you believe to be correct living by those values.
5. You are challenged and need to confront the errors of your efforts, now from the status quo side of the conflict.
6. You face the choice change, win (suppress) or lose (fall from power/die).
Damn this is a good video. Well done my guy. Well done.
Thank you, glad you liked it!
I would like to also say that spiderman 2 from sam raimi also has a very similar ending, to a similar effect.
Why is chris standing next to a Boulder?
HAHA nice intro...Excited for the new season of ....dun dun...
Good video.
Honestly, the Viltrumites are proof a story's only good as its villains - because they're perfect for its themes. They're what happens when using violence to solve problems becomes...the go-to solution. It doesn't make you a proud honorable warrior people, it makes you imperialist monsters. There's more than one reason for a code like chivalry or bushido, it tells the warrior caste when to stop.
Nice vid! I don’t know if I agree with Invincible the show successfully deglamorizing violence outside of fights with Mark himself, (Omni man definitely lives up to the standard power fantasy in a lot of fights himself). I don’t know if deglamorizing violence was their intention, but very interesting video and look Mark!