News Next Arrowverse Crossover to Include Batwoman

[Spot261]

Your argument that Superman is a murderer would make a much better source of compost.

Ok, he tricked (the kneel), tortured (see the hand) and caused severe harm to a harmless depowered individual who very likely died as a consequence (throwing him down a sheer crystal face) and showed no remorse (the smirk).

If he did die as a consequence (which he almost certainly did barring there being a convenient truckload of feathered mattresses at the bottom) any sensible court would view throwing him off the cliff as murder.

Happy now?

Would you like some of that compost for your lawn?

And they could have added a throwaway (dubbed, if they couldn't shoot new scenes) line like "I wonder how Zod and his fellows are coping with being imprisoned in a Earth jail without their powers" or something like that, but they deliberately chose not to do that.

Uhuh, the lack of reference afterwards does somewhat suggest the fall down the sheer face onto rock hard crystals might well have been every bit as fatal as one would sensibly expect....you know the fall Superman caused and did nothing to prevent despite having the ability to, y'know, fly and all that jazz

 

[DigificWriter]

It was established in the first Flash/Supergirl crossover that there are no counterparts for Barry or any of his fellow heroes or teammates on Earth-38.

Not really; just because Kara didn't know who any of Barry's friends were and he couldn't find them by doing a cursory search of the Central City and Starling/Star City areas doesn't mean they don't exist, especially given what has since been revealed about the Multivserse.

 

[thribs]

The way they were praising Superman like he was Trump.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

It doesn't matter what their intent was, that was what was screened. Superman coldly murders a depowered and essentially harmless Zod with a smirk.

True. He was quite happy to send Zod to his death, and there was no moralizing about it. Oh, and as you also point out, he retuned to the bar to use his otherworldly powers for some equally otherworldly revenge on his former abuser, then peels off some cash to pay for his property destruction.

So are we drawing up wishlists for multiversal guest-stars in COIE?

I just want to see a classic Earth-2 Robin and Golden Age Superman.

 

[Skipper]

The way they were praising Superman like he was Trump.

Because he's the best superhero. He has accomplished more than other superhero in history. He's the most successful superhero.

 

[Christopher]

How utterly pathetic. This guy is just whining about how a girl was better than his fantasy penis extender. He’s so insecure about his own manhood that he adopted Superman and other heroes. So when Superman isn’t portrayed as his perfect vision of manhood, which includes a sexist superiority to women, he sees it as an attack. Real men don’t feel threatened by women, only little boys do.

Yes. This. It's a constant source of amazement to me that so many "tough guys" these days think that being utterly terrified by the existence of women with agency somehow makes them strong.

 

[The Realist]

Here's Superman committing cold blooded murder:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

And here he is beating the living daylights out of a guy in a bar for revenge:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That's the quintessential "nice guy" Christopher Reeves Supes too, being portrayed to be pretty awful when you actually take a step back and think about it.

*sigh*

For the millionth tedious time, Superman kills nobody in Superman II. Tone matters. Intent matters. The scene is presented as a lighthearted moment of triumph, and essentially played as cartoon slapstick comedy. Zod and company are as impervious to real harm in that moment as Wile E. Coyote or the Three Stooges. Only Snyderman-justifying revisionism, and/or a pathological level of nerd literal-mindedness, could see it any other way.

As for the bully in the diner, Clark was not the first person he had abused and attacked, nor would he be the last. I won't deny Clark took some satisfaction in turning the tables (and no reason he shouldn't), but the guy needed and richly deserved to be taught a lesson -- which might hopefully make him think twice the next time he feels like bullying someone seemingly weaker.

 

[Kirk Prime]

How utterly pathetic. This guy is just whining about how a girl was better than his fantasy penis extender. He’s so insecure about his own manhood that he adopted Superman and other heroes. So when Superman isn’t portrayed as his perfect vision of manhood, which includes a sexist superiority to women, he sees it as an attack. Real men don’t feel threatened by women, only little boys do. This deserves but mockery. Thanks for the laughs.

Oh look! A liberal on a soap box! You're exactly the target audience for these writers. People who get offended when the writers get called out on their misandry.

But your irrelevant personal attacks aside, you couldn't be more wrong. I don't care about a strong woman. No issue there. What I do care about is taking the top male hero of all time and emasculating him into some submissive in order to have some feminist statement which is wholly unnecessary.

If they have to treat Superman like they have to make Kara into something she isn't, then the writers have the insecurity. And apparently you do as well, because you seem to need a man to show inferiority to make your hero look stronger.

It's not sexist when it's true.

The writers are the ones being sexist, with their constant statements of male inferiority. And when called out on it, they can count on people like you for fake outrage.

 

[Mudd]

*sigh*

For the millionth tedious time, Superman kills nobody in Superman II.

Well, unless they're playing by Wiley Coyote physics, he does.

He also killed Zod and two henchmen in a late 80s DC comic. Execution by green kryptonite in the Pocket Universe.

 

[thribs]

Superman isn’t Batman. He will kill if necessary. He isn’t strongly against it.

 

[The Realist]

Well, unless they're playing by Wiley Coyote physics, he does.

Which they are, as I specifically referenced, in exactly those terms? Perhaps you were confused by the correct spelling of Wile E. Coyote.

He also killed Zod and two henchmen in a late 80s DC comic. Execution by green kryptonite in the Pocket Universe.

That he did. Comics yes, Superman II no.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Which they are, as I specifically referenced, in exactly those terms? Perhaps you were confused by the correct spelling of Wile E. Coyote.

That he did. Comics yes, Superman II no.

So what was Zod's fate in Superman II? Last anyone checked, he was killed as a conscious decision/action of Superman. Some would call that murder, particularly with the fact Zod was reduced to human, non-powered status and was utterly defenseless against a fully powered Kryptonian....a Kryptonian who (at that point) could not even claim he was acting in self defense...

 

[The Realist]

So what was Zod's fate in Superman II? Last anyone checked, he was killed as a conscious decision/action of Superman.

Since he was. Not. Killed (as I've already explained, to apparent incomprehension), I'm prepared to assume he was arrested, tried, and imprisoned offscreen.

 

[Kirk Prime]

Since he was. Not. Killed (as I've already explained, to apparent incomprehension), I'm prepared to assume he was arrested, tried, and imprisoned offscreen.

Like this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Spot261]

*sigh*

For the millionth tedious time, Superman kills nobody in Superman II. Tone matters. Intent matters. The scene is presented as a lighthearted moment of triumph, and essentially played as cartoon slapstick comedy. Zod and company are as impervious to real harm in that moment as Wile E. Coyote or the Three Stooges. Only Snyderman-justifying revisionism, and/or a pathological level of nerd literal-mindedness, could see it any other way.

As for the bully in the diner, Clark was not the first person he had abused and attacked, nor would he be the last. I won't deny Clark took some satisfaction in turning the tables (and no reason he shouldn't), but the guy needed and richly deserved to be taught a lesson -- which might hopefully make him think twice the next time he feels like bullying someone seemingly weaker.

Nope, he was mortal and every bit as vulnerable as anyone else. That was explicitly stated and made a plot point through the film. A good quarter of the run time consists of Clark coming to terms with that.

@Kirk Prime we've already seen that clip, but as with thousands of other such scenes in thousands of other movies it wasn't screened. What matters is what the audience is shown, which is quite clearly Superman killing Zod. It doesn't matter if there's a deleted scene where all everyone in the crystal palace turns into strawberry ice cream, unless it was aired it's just material on the cutting room floor.

Otherwise I am Legend actually ends with with Will Smith returning the female zombie and apologising whilst condemning the human race to extinction, John Rambo committed suicide in First Blood, Aragorn had a sword fight with Sauron and WWZ actually ended with a massive battle which Brad Pitt survived only to rediscover his wife working in a brothel.

 

[Kirk Prime]

Well, if the clip has been inserted into the film, and it has in some versions, it's clear that the director did not intend Superman to kill Zod.

Question--if a scene is shown and inserted back in a movie, and released either on TV or back in theaters, why wouldn't it count?

Is Peter Preston Scotty's nephew? Is Saavik half Romulan?

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Since he was. Not. Killed (as I've already explained, to apparent incomprehension), I'm prepared to assume he was arrested, tried, and imprisoned offscreen.

You're assuming something that did not happen and was not implied at all. Further, if Superman intended to have Zod arrested, there would be no sense in dropping him down some sort of chasm to parts unknown, where to anyone watching, was a death sentence.

Nope, he was mortal and every bit as vulnerable as anyone else. That was explicitly stated and made a plot point through the film. A good quarter of the run time consists of Clark coming to terms with that.

Exactly; the entire scene was set up for a reverse payoff was that the villains would suffer Superman's problem, and also turn the tables on overconfidant Luthor. With Zod being mortal, that drop was intended to kill him, not spare him for arrest and/or facing the legal music.

 

[Spot261]

Well, if the clip has been inserted into the film, and it has in some versions, it's clear that the director did not intend Superman to kill Zod.

Question--if a scene is shown and inserted back in a movie, and released either on TV or back in theaters, why wouldn't it count?

Is Peter Preston Scotty's nephew? Is Saavik half Romulan?

It wasn't re inserted. The film aired without it and ends with Superman killing Zod, much like Return of the King ends with the hobbits destroying the ring whilst Aragorn and co are a side show to distract Sauron rather than killing him in battle.

 

[Skipper]

Well, if the clip has been inserted into the film, and it has in some versions, it's clear that the director did not intend Superman to kill Zod.

It was never inserted. It's just a deleted scene.

Question--if a scene is shown and inserted back in a movie, and released either on TV or back in theaters, why wouldn't it count?

Often deleted scenes are contradicted by the sequels. For example, in a Rocky V's deleted scene, the titular character meets Marie (a character from the first movie) who was shown to have ended up as a prostitute. This is contradicted by her appearance in Rocky Balboa.

 

[The Realist]

So, I've already addressed and dismissed "pathological nerd literal-mindedness" as a justification to fundamentally misread the clear tone and intent of the scene. Anybody got anything else?