- 2,151
- 2,107
- Thread starter
- #41
Sorry, i will hopefully elaborate when i am free.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Mandrakk existing “at the end of all stories” to “devour the last traces of story” effectively creating a bad ending, is sufficient evidence that he’s interacting with the story, as Mandrakk would need to be able to interact with the story to devour its last traces. Furthermore, now that we know Mandrakk was interacting with the plot to create a bad ending to the story and that Superman had to overwrite Mandrakks manipulation by wishing for a happy ending, makes this 100% grounds for plot manipulation.First, it is not sufficient evidence of that. Second, it is not enough that he merely "interact" with the plot. He must be able to willfully dictate what occurs. He should be able to literally decide what characters do, say, and think.
Read above ^That remains completely unsubstantiated.
I didn’t repeat myself.You've just repeated yourself, so I'll do the same.
I get your analogy but it’s not what I’m saying. Mandrakk didn’t eat the narrative. What Mandrakk did was comparable to taking a narrative and set its progression to end how he wanted it to. That’s why Mandrakk existed where the story ends to devour the last traces of the story. By devouring the last traces of story, he’s effectively closing the book on the narrative/plot on his own record. The only reason this didn’t work was because Superman had reactivated the miracle machine which he used previously to wish for a happy ending, overwriting the bad ending Mandrakk was creating. Meaning it has to be plot manipulation since if it wasn’t, Superman wouldn’t have needed to reactivate the miracle machine.I have doubts that literally eating the energy of the concept of story to make a bad ending counts as manipulating the plot.
I ate an entire reality, therefore I get Reality Manipulation?
This has nothing to do with him altering the plot. He was just trying to kill everyone and consume the multiverse.What Mandrakk did was comparable to taking a narrative and set its progression to end how he wanted it to.
Earth-33 is the Cubetime, it is the real world and it dictates the realities of all universes in the multiverse.Do we have any example of someone using the Bleed to change an existing narrative?
By literally consuming story out of the MultiverseHow was mandrakk planning to end all story?
Through the use of bleed, again, it is described as the life of stories, it gives them characters and narrativesthrough use of the Bleed?
What should we classify it as? Some variation of higher dimensional energy Absorption?I agree with Deagonx. This does not seem to qualify as plot manipulation.
If Mandrakk was only trying to kill everyone, he would just talk about how he’s going to kill everyone. Which he doesn’t. Instead Mandrakk references how he’s interacting with the plot. Suggesting there’s more happening at play.This has nothing to do with him altering the plot. He was just trying to kill everyone and consume the multiverse.
It does qualify as plot manipulation. He’s literally altering the plot of Final Crisis. That’s the most basic example of plot manipulation. It doesn’t make any sense for Superman to reactivate the Miracle Machine which he previously used to wish for a happy ending, unless Mandrakk was messing with the plot.I agree with Deagonx. This does not seem to qualify as plot manipulation.
There's no evidence Mandrakk did that nor that Superman did with the Miracle Machine.If Mandrakk didn’t alter the plot, Superman wouldn’t have needed to reactivate the Miracle Machine.
Symbolism combined with consumption of the fabric of reality perhaps?What should we classify it as? Some variation of higher dimensional energy Absorption?
Yes, it seems like some form of reality warping, not plot manipulation as we define it.There's no evidence Mandrakk did that nor that Superman did with the Miracle Machine.
He used the Miracle Machine to prevent Mandrakk from winning, not to alter the plot.
The crucial part is in bold. What seems to be misunderstood here is that we are not trying to determine if Mandrakk has an ability which -- in any possible context -- could plausibly be referred to as "manipulating the plot." It is whether or not he has the specific ability listed in the wiki as "plot manipulation" which he clearly doesn't have, and that absolutely none of the evidence thus far has even hinted at.Yes, it seems like some form of reality warping, not plot manipulation as we define it.
This was far more controversial then what i thought it would be.It is whether or not he has the specific ability listed in the wiki as "plot manipulation" which he clearly doesn't have, and that absolutely none of the evidence thus far has even hinted at.
Buddy, you can't say "we know" in front of a bunch of things simply because it was vaguely alluded to in an author statement with unclear implications.And i am honestly just repeating myself here, in Grant Morrisons cosmology, we know that these universes are narratives, we know non of it metaphorical or allegorical, we know the Bleed is the substance that makes up life, characters, the story and the meaning of a narrative, we also know Earth-33 can edit Narratives (using the Bleed, considering we have already established its importance to these narratives)
Because he's never been shown to do that and there is explicit evidence against it, since he lost multiple times and never once used this mysterious power to try and win.How is the assumption that Mandrakk can simply alter the plot to his will that contraversial?
You acknowledged that Mandrakk hasn't changed the events of an existing narrative.This is just seems like downplaying in my opinion.
Yes. Mandrakk very clearly doesn't meet the requirements for having this ability.I agree with Firestorm808. Should we close this thread?
I dont think its that important to the point of telling people not to bring it up like its Voldemort or somethingOkay. Since this topic pops up quite frequently, should we make an addition to our Discussion Rules page, or is this subject not sufficiently important for that?
Not objective? We are using the definitions to classify his ability. It's straight forward.And yet, he owns the plot itself, where entities that are nowhere near that context can literally edit narratives
Anyways, it seems like people reject this, which honestly, in my opinion, doesn't make sense, as well as the disagreements arent really objective in the slightest, and moreso seem like different opinions getting more support
Mandrakk can eat plots, use plots and own plots, literally owning the ink of these narratives, there isnt any reason why he shouldn't at the very least have a “possibly Plot Manipulation".
These guys exist outside of the story itself, and use the ink of the story in many different ways, and at the end of the day, its a single hax, not really important for a whole rule