Yeah, but that movie had context to make up for the lack of background. We know there are dudes in space armor; we know there's a Force that people can control with their minds. With those two bits of info, we can assume that evil space wizard Darth Vader can exist in the Star Wars universe without explicitly being…

It really is! It's somehow this combination of ridiculously goofy and overly self-serious that just… works. It's never even remotely scary… instead, it elicits a feeling more like slipping on an old leather jacket, comfortable and familiar.

Well, fair enough. We'll find out soon enough. I just hope that it ISN'T Barry, because to me, that would be incredibly boring and disappointing. Especially if it's another goddamn "time remnant".

Yes. Thank you! I was beginning to think I was the only one who felt this way.

No, I'd say he's in the mask because if he wasn't, the first words out of his mouth would be "Hello, my name is Jay Garrick, could you get me the hell out of this fish tank?"

If that is actually true, I will stop watching this show. (Well, okay, not really, but I'll get really huffy about how bad a storytelling decision that is, and probably rant about it a lot.)

Well, he time-traveled to kidnap his time remnant! That's gotta count for something, I guess…

The whole "I killed my time remnant" thing makes a HELL of a lot less sense than if Zoom had just, y'know, forced his Earth-1 doppleganger to pose as him for a few hours.

"(Where did that name come from, anyway? Did Zolomon make it up, or was there a real Jay Garrick at some point?)"

The funny thing is, I feel like Vision worked perfectly as his own, self-contained thing. As a character, I liked him a lot. But as a part of the plot, he was disconnected from everything and served pretty much no purpose… which was not good, considering that all of act two is basically spent trying to justify his…

I liked it okay, too. It's a frustratingly directionless movie, but if you aren't expecting too much from it, it's satisfying enough.

The Flash, Arrow, and Supergirl. Plenty of good stuff to defend. Just not on the big screen.

I'd defend DC movies to the death if they started giving me a good reason to. The Dark Knight trilogy gave me hope for a while… But with this "DCEU", not only have they decided that every character has to be Batman, but now they can't even get Batman HIMSELF right.

Well, yeah, but at least in that film, her woodenness lent itself to the character's naivete and fish-out-of-water qualities. In this, she's playing a concerned mother, a heartbroken widow, and an inquisitive scientist… and everything she says comes out with a flat affect. It's one thing to be outclassed by Peter…

Oh, yeah. Routh was actually pretty solid, and he could have made the role his own. But he was hamstrung by a script that insisted on making Superman mopey and sad, and by the fact that he was stuck basically imitating Christopher Reeve.

Fair enough… like Batman, everyone has their own idea of who the best Superman was, I suppose.

Well, the list seems to have been made with the acknowledgement that these judgments are subjective, and a bunch of the people who contributed noted that they chose based on a childhood preference or who they were exposed to in the role earliest.

Exactly right.

Christopher Reeve.

Ya' know, I love that they hired Helen Slater to play Kara's adoptive mom and everything… it's a GREAT callback to the character's pop culture history, and it's wonderful to see Slater getting some work again (same goes for John Wesley Shipp on The Flash, who's been a great addition to that show)… but… well…