Superman
- Thread starter urbandefault
- Start date
Almost like whether Batman kills or not has no affect on the quality of the movie itself.And one of the lightest and least brutal ones is also one where he doesn't kill. (Batman & Robin)
A few members have and continue to aggressively argue why Superman "never" kills (a long debunked notion that killing is not a part of the character's solutions in any way) and should not in any adaptation, despite the necessity of carrying out the act in specific situations. You are among their number, as you seem to think Superman must have his character cemented to a version the comics purposely jettisoned over five decades ago, which ignores the desires of both comic book creators and readers to have Superman react as a more believable version to an evolving genre not only in print, but in film.
Too late to correct your sweeping claim about Batman.
As noted time and again--which you conveniently skip over--Superman kills when necessary, contrary to the wildly erroneous claims that Superman killing means its some imagined slippery slope for writers to have the character turn into The Punisher, or the act is contrary to the rejected Daddy/Santa image they cling to.
Those people are overreacting, but at least they're still just talking about what they personally will accept and not trying to speak for the general audience. You insist your position is the only one the general audience could accept, despite films like The Batman showing otherwise.
That must be it. Clearly, I was cemented to one version of Superman when I said:
I made a blunder and when told I was wrong, I acknowledged it and picked a different, better example. I don't know what's "too late" about that, but okay.
BS. They habitually sell the false notion that their Daddy/Santa idea of Superman was and is the "right" one as the defining creation in the culture (another way of speaking for all), while spitting hatred at any comic or portrayal that did not align with said Daddy/Santa. Let us not forget the connected, near-endless pages of hatred toward Snyder for allegedly "destroying" or making some "grimdark" (their words) Superman in disturbingly personal ways, constantly referring to the Salkinds' version as the "right" one.
The pages and posts are all over this board.
I disagree they're saying the general audience agrees with them. In any case, even if they do say that, it would just mean you're both wrong, from opposite directions. The audience can buy into a Superman who doesn't kill AND one who does -- as long as it's well-executed.
Dean Cain is a hard line republican Trumper.
What would happen if Dean today got to write and produce his own redstate Superman Show?
Superman builds the wall.
Superman uses his speed and vision powers to recount all the elections where the Republicans had been told that they had lost.
Superman uses heat vision to put holes in all the condoms planned parenting is trying to give away.
Superman blows up all the Needle exchange depots.
Superman blows up the VA... Wait a minute?
What would happen if Dean today got to write and produce his own redstate Superman Show?
Superman builds the wall.
Superman uses his speed and vision powers to recount all the elections where the Republicans had been told that they had lost.
Superman uses heat vision to put holes in all the condoms planned parenting is trying to give away.
Superman blows up all the Needle exchange depots.
Superman blows up the VA... Wait a minute?
It's a pity that Dean Cain is a hard-line Republican who cannot appreciate a more multi-dimensional Superman. Because I thought he did a good job in portraying Clark Kent/Superman as an individual with emotional needs and one capable of making the occasional mistake.
To be fair, we don't know that Dean wants Superman to be an asshole.
Dean may think think that Superman is an irredeemable loser liberal, and that Lex Luthor raised a few good points now and then.
I rewatched Dean's series a month ago, and Luthor was a decent boyfriend when nothing was on the line, and then for no reason, even though Lois is in love with him and is going to marry the billionaire playboy, Luthor blew up the daily planet, framed a friend of Lois', and scattered her friends across the city/world.
Just ridiculous.
Is it as bad as Lex faking Lana's pregnancy to stay with him, after she said yes she would marry him?
Dude has some serious abandonment issues for some one who killed his parents.
Last edited:
I don't recall Lois ever being in love with Lex in "Lois & Clark". I do recall her finding him attractive and that's about it. She was in love with only Superman at the time. But when the latter had made it clear they would never be together (lying, of course), Lois caved in and accepted Lex's marriage proposal.
So she agreed to marry a dude she didn't love because her first choice was unavailable? That paints her in a much worse light than Guy's description.
Anyone so doggedly railing against one movie with one scene--constantly referring to what they feel is the "right"/"accepted" version is assuming that is what the entire culture desires.
Incorrect again. My position is that the character has a foundational history of killing on occasion and when necessary. Those who rail against that point from history have jumped to the erroneous conclusion that it means Superman will kill as a default reaction / position, when no one ever entered the neighborhood of that kind of thought to any degree, but that is the fist-shaking conclusion one reaches when the argument is launched from any thought other than rationality.
The only reason Lex went cartoon evil is because John Shea was leaving the series.
They dated for almost half a season, and it was magical, until the end, which was stupid.
Last edited:
Nah.. Someone who, for example, goes on about how the paleo diet's the one proper way to live might be incredibly obnoxious in their own way, but they're not claiming everyone else agrees.
So do you agree that modern audiences can buy into and accept a Superman who doesn't have to kill? I would genuinely be delighted to know I'm wrong here and that you do indeed agree with that.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoBestFri...it_seems_like_metropolis_has_a_death_penalty/
If Superman had not murdered Zod, then the local government would have, after a very short trial.
Are Kryptonians immortal? Life imprisonment seems costly.
Although, stick Zod on a treadmill, and you got free power for everyone, till the end of time.
If Superman had not murdered Zod, then the local government would have, after a very short trial.
Are Kryptonians immortal? Life imprisonment seems costly.
Although, stick Zod on a treadmill, and you got free power for everyone, till the end of time.
Sure because "the audience", outside of fanboys, doesn't give a shit. The reverse is also true. Literally every non-comic fan I've shown MOS to had the exact same reaction when he finally kills Zod:
"It's about time"
The only people raising a stink about this, a decade later, are fanboys. Fanboys who live in an echo chamber and think that everyone in the general population feels exactly like they do and the reality is.....they don't, As you said before, just tell a good story, or be entertaining and it really doesn't matter if he occasionally kills or doesn't.
But then the exact same thing holds true for literally every character ever.