Civilian Casulties: Man of Steal, The Avengers

[Havok]

Given what we see and know of the cities (New York* and Metropolis which I assume rivals the 30 million number given for Gotham in the Nolan-Verse) and the fact that there was just no way everyone could have gotten out, what do you think the casualty rates would have been due to the incidental damage? Also, thoughts on repair costs.

I suppose you could throw in some other movies like Transformers and Chicago, but not something like Independence Day where city destruction is the point.


*I was watching The Avengers and realized for the first time that sky scrappers were actually collapsing.

[tezunegari]

Given what we see and know of the cities (New York* and Metropolis which I assume rivals the 30 million number given for Gotham in the Nolan-Verse) and the fact that there was just no way everyone could have gotten out, what do you think the casualty rates would have been due to the incidental damage? Also, thoughts on repair costs.

I suppose you could throw in some other movies like Transformers and Chicago, but not something like Independence Day where city destruction is the point.


*I was watching The Avengers and realized for the first time that sky scrappers were actually collapsing.

Watson Technical Consulting made some estimates about the Man of Steel damage.

Buzzfeed

A summary:

• 129,000 known killed
• over 250,000 missing (most of whom would have also died)
• nearly a million injured.

In terms of the strictly physical damage done to the city, the initial estimate is $700 billion.

To put that in context, 9/11’s physical damage cost $55 billion, with a further economic impact of $123 billion.

Overall, WTC estimates that the damage would be $2 trillion.

I think Avengers New York would be somewhere between 9/11 and Metropolis damage, though at the lower end.

I'd put Transformers Chicago somewhere at the upper end of that scale.

[Broomstick]

In other words, casualty levels similar to that of a nuke.

[tezunegari]

20 kt air burst, without the radiation damage. According to the buzzfeed article.

[Purple]

Remind me again why Spiderman is the one hated by the press in this universe?

[Havok]

J.J. Jameson. But he really isn't hated.

[Batman]

Well he is by triple J but yeah, more or less nobody else outside the designated antagonist community has a problem with him. Of course if we assume 'this' universe to be the movie one, Spider-Man has yet to make an appearance

[Ted C]

Well he is by triple J but yeah, more or less nobody else outside the designated antagonist community has a problem with him. Of course if we assume 'this' universe to be the movie one, Spider-Man has yet to make an appearance

Spiderman can't appear in the MCU unless Sony gives up the movie rights.

[Batman]

I know, and they can't use the X-Men either because Fox has the rights to those. Makes for an interesting situation, doesn't it?

[Jub]

Disney has the muscle to lean on Sony and Fox if they really want to get the rights back, but I suspect that it's not worth the cost right now with how hot their current line up is. If the Avengers and Guardians go flat in the next few years, then we could see them push to get these properties back. Of course if Marvels big two and tie in movies are flopping it likely means we've fallen off the superhero train and those rights will be less in demand anyway.

[Elheru Aran]

There is some scuttlebutt that some of the X-Men may have appeared in a deleted scene of the latest Spider-Man film, but I haven't seen much evidence to prove it apart from a few posts from fansites on Facebook.

Disney *could* lean on Sony and Fox-- and it kinda looks like they may be if you take some theories at face value. Action figures, for example. Avengers figures all over the place, Guardians, etc. Where are the X-men figs, even though they just had a very successful film? Wolverine figs? For that matter, there are only a few Amazing Spider-Man figures IIRC as well. That suggests that Marvel Entertainment may be putting pressure on merchandising rights, which can be a very lucrative source of profits, in order to manipulate the post-release popularity of these brands.

[FSTargetDrone]

There is some scuttlebutt that some of the X-Men may have appeared in a deleted scene of the latest Spider-Man film, but I haven't seen much evidence to prove it apart from a few posts from fansites on Facebook.

Disney *could* lean on Sony and Fox-- and it kinda looks like they may be if you take some theories at face value. Action figures, for example. Avengers figures all over the place, Guardians, etc. Where are the X-men figs, even though they just had a very successful film? Wolverine figs? For that matter, there are only a few Amazing Spider-Man figures IIRC as well. That suggests that Marvel Entertainment may be putting pressure on merchandising rights, which can be a very lucrative source of profits, in order to manipulate the post-release popularity of these brands.

The only recent X-Men toys I have seen are in some of the Lego Marvel sets. They have an X-Jet, a few variants of Magneto, Storm, Wolverine, Cyclops and a Sentinel off the top of my head. But they are not exactly the versions seen in the recent movies.

[Simon_Jester]

Remind me again why Spiderman is the one hated by the press in this universe?

Well, most of the superheroes in Marvel don't cause the collateral damage. In Avengers, the damage of the attack would correctly be blamed on the giant alien invasion; I'm sure the aliens are even more unpopular than Spiderman.*

About the only 'heroic' character who causes serious destruction on purpose is the Incredible Hulk, who has been actively hunted by the US military (and arguably SHIELD) for the threat he poses.

But a character like Iron Man, while involved in events that cause mass destruction, is so obviously fighting to contain and reduce that destruction that nobody's going to come away saying "you bastard you're evil!"
_____________

*I'm assuming for the sake of argument that movie Spiderman lives in the same universe as movie Avengers, even without proof.

[Purple]

Remind me again why Spiderman is the one hated by the press in this universe?

Well, most of the superheroes in Marvel don't cause the collateral damage. In Avengers, the damage of the attack would correctly be blamed on the giant alien invasion; I'm sure the aliens are even more unpopular than Spiderman.*

About the only 'heroic' character who causes serious destruction on purpose is the Incredible Hulk, who has been actively hunted by the US military (and arguably SHIELD) for the threat he poses.

But a character like Iron Man, while involved in events that cause mass destruction, is so obviously fighting to contain and reduce that destruction that nobody's going to come away saying "you bastard you're evil!"
_____________

*I'm assuming for the sake of argument that movie Spiderman lives in the same universe as movie Avengers, even without proof.

On the other hand you'd think that by the time the 1023 supervillain comes to town with the explicit goal to take down the hero and proclaims so loudly before initiating a city destroying fight people would start wondering why they are allowing the hero to stay in town. (I have not watched any of the movies, so just going by the various cartoons and my limited knowledge of the comic universe.)

[AniThyng]

Remind me again why Spiderman is the one hated by the press in this universe?

Well, most of the superheroes in Marvel don't cause the collateral damage. In Avengers, the damage of the attack would correctly be blamed on the giant alien invasion; I'm sure the aliens are even more unpopular than Spiderman.*

About the only 'heroic' character who causes serious destruction on purpose is the Incredible Hulk, who has been actively hunted by the US military (and arguably SHIELD) for the threat he poses.

But a character like Iron Man, while involved in events that cause mass destruction, is so obviously fighting to contain and reduce that destruction that nobody's going to come away saying "you bastard you're evil!"
_____________

*I'm assuming for the sake of argument that movie Spiderman lives in the same universe as movie Avengers, even without proof.

On the other hand you'd think that by the time the 1023 supervillain comes to town with the explicit goal to take down the hero and proclaims so loudly before initiating a city destroying fight people would start wondering why they are allowing the hero to stay in town. (I have not watched any of the movies, so just going by the various cartoons and my limited knowledge of the comic universe.)

Well if you force the hero out, the terrorists win. Do you want the terrorists to win?

[Purple]

Well if you force the hero out, the terrorists win. Do you want the terrorists to win?

Well he can just build a fortress of solitude and spend days there waiting for a call. Or you know, a suburban home a few hours drive from millions of civilians. Or maybe some sort of space station...

[LaCroix]

Well if you force the hero out, the terrorists win. Do you want the terrorists to win?

Well he can just build a fortress of solitude and spend days there waiting for a call. Or you know, a suburban home a few hours drive from millions of civilians. Or maybe some sort of space station...

People seem to ignore the fact that the villain chose to attack the million people metropole because

a) he's evil
b) it's a way to force the hero to show up for the fight

You think Spiderman would show up if Green Goblin sent him a letter to please meet him at mile 34 of the highway to bumfuckistan to permanently settle the question who is going to stay alive?