View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Francesco Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 Posts: 1307
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:04 am Post subject: What was Leapfrog's plan? |
|
|
So he hid in the pond with the mechanical suit, waiting for the chance of Matt Murdock and his friend to pass by, then seize Matt's friend, trap it in the obviously expensive for him mechanical suit, and then have it blow up?
Why didn't he just shoot him? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
admiralpetty Flying Blind
Joined: 22 Jun 2014 Posts: 48 Location: Kalispell, MT
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To be honest, I think it all goes back to Leapfrog being a silly villain. Just shooting the hero would be the most logical thing to do in most cases, however villains like their theatricality, even if its dumb as in the case of Leapfrog.
Also, I don't have the most recent issue with me at the moment to double check, but is this supposed to be the original leapfrog? I seem to remember him being killed off in the first story Bendis did on DD. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
james castle Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 Posts: 1999 Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:33 pm Post subject: Re: What was Leapfrog's plan? |
|
|
Francesco wrote: | So he hid in the pond with the mechanical suit, waiting for the chance of Matt Murdock and his friend to pass by, then seize Matt's friend, trap it in the obviously expensive for him mechanical suit, and then have it blow up?
Why didn't he just shoot him? |
I haven't read the issue in question but I made a frowny face when I read this. That sounds like some brutal plotting. _________________ JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Francesco Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 Posts: 1307
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
oh, so it's a "haha, look, villain X of Daredevil is a silly c-lister? again?"
I think I'll file it under "bad plotting", and let's not start with the "Waid wants to tone down the grim and gritty", because this has nothing to do with it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
humanaccident Flying Blind
Joined: 10 Jul 2014 Posts: 26
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I thought it was all just a DD set up, no? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dragonbat Playing to the Camera
Joined: 15 Jan 2014 Posts: 144 Location: Toronto
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No. The attack was real. Matt just realized that he had a chance to give Foggy that opportunity to go out a hero. (I thought the same thing and actually tweeted Chris Samnee about it myself, which is why I'm that sure)
http://i.imgur.com/o2wcHs4.png |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Francesco Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 Posts: 1307
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yeah but what sort of attack was that? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Darkdevil Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 04 Apr 2009 Posts: 331 Location: The Bright, Sunny South
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
admiralpetty wrote: | To be honest, I think it all goes back to Leapfrog being a silly villain. Just shooting the hero would be the most logical thing to do in most cases, however villains like their theatricality, even if its dumb as in the case of Leapfrog.
Also, I don't have the most recent issue with me at the moment to double check, but is this supposed to be the original leapfrog? I seem to remember him being killed off in the first story Bendis did on DD. |
When the guy gets out of the armor, Matt specifically mentions that he's not the original Leapfrog.
As for the reasoning/plan behind this attack, none was given. As Dragonbat says, Matt just turns the attack to his advantage in faking Foggy's death.
Was it part of some revenge ploy by the Sons of Serpent for what Matt did? Or something else entirely? It's not clear so hopefully Waid will tie back into this mystery at some later point. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Overlord Paradiso
Joined: 22 Aug 2004 Posts: 1095
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
admiralpetty wrote: | To be honest, I think it all goes back to Leapfrog being a silly villain. Just shooting the hero would be the most logical thing to do in most cases, however villains like their theatricality, even if its dumb as in the case of Leapfrog.
Also, I don't have the most recent issue with me at the moment to double check, but is this supposed to be the original leapfrog? I seem to remember him being killed off in the first story Bendis did on DD. |
I'm going to sound like a huge nerd, but the guy who died in the Bendis story not the original Leap-Frog, The original was a guy named Vincent Patilio and he eventually retired from crime and spent time trying to raise his son, Eugene (who attempted to be a D-list super hero named "Frog Man). Patilio still seems retired, having no real interest in crime.
The guy who died during the Bendis run was named Buford Lange, a thug who found one of Patilio's old Leap-Frog suits and tried to use it for his own gain. He died after his first apperance.
So in all likelihood, the Leap-Frog who appeared recently is some new guy who just uses the Leap-Frog name, though with a giant mech he would easily be more dangerous then the previous Leap-Frogs.
As for why Leap-Frog didn't just kill Matt, aren't most super villains guilty of that same sin, not killing the hero when they have the chance, because they want to toy them or something? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Francesco Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 Posts: 1307
|
Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
the question was "why didn't he just shoot foggy". and buying an expensive mecha, hide with it in a pond of a park where matt and foggy may/may not pass by, trap foggy within said mecha and then blow it all up with the risk of being caught in the explosion seems a weird way to toy with the good guy, if you ask me. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|