You know something? The level of storytelling logic extant in almost all comic books and most media based upon them makes the standard of "sitcom logic" look like Raymond Chandler by contrast. Nitpicking a particular instance that happens to stick in your craw this week is not elevated by pronouncing it to be especially egregious when it's nothing of the kind.
How does this fit with "oh, just clonk someone on the head, and he'll change his character"?
Both can co-exist.
Can they, though? Not, from what I did read in the other thread.
They can. Fiction is funny that way.
That is true, though. I mean, I just think, that one should pick one version, one celebrates and run with it.
No. It can contain multitudes. Monsters who "see the light" and people strugging with cancer.
But not via Hammer to the head. If you want to have "people struggling with cancer", you need to have a believable explanation, why Doomsday suddenly changed motive. "Hammer to the head" doesn't cut it there.
No you don't. "The Hammer to the head" is just a guess. Not sure the writers have supported it. This is a show about heart. So Doomsday finding a change of heart after having the memories of his life flood back to him for what ever reason, work with the themes of the show. Especially since he's a Superman and the memories were about his Lois.
Worked for me.
Yes, that was all so clear in the Doomsday arc; Lois had some impact on the creature when she confronted him several episodes back, so its painfully obvious prime Lois triggered memories of his former life with his Lois. He needed a moment to look at his prime version, coupled with his own memories to understand that he lost his reason to exist, hence his allowing SM to push him into the sun.
No.
