Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide
I'm all for them showing him as the logical threat that he is, a little more of an 'unknown' quantity to criminals (at least for the first film when they don't know he's a good guy yet), and incredibly passionate/outraged by scenarios he encounters.
However, there is such a delicate line there between doing that in a way that is Superman, and doing it in a way that is Batman, Daredevil etc.
I think the most important thing to remove is the 'polite' exterior towards criminals. Don't have him saying cheesy lines or being 'by the book' about things.
Like you said, don't knock on the door, break through it. Don't pick an attacker up by their belt and say 'That's not a very nice thing to do' like it's a 50's comedy show - have him burst through the door and hold the guy up against
But where Batman would be more focused on putting the fear into the criminal, Superman would turn his attention to the victim.
Easily holding the attacker at bay, he'd see that they were okay. He'd tell them they don't have to be afraid anymore.
I think that's the biggest difference.
Exactly I think that's the biggest problem with making superman more aggressive, even though he was like that before batman.....but I can just see it now from people who don't know supermans history, their gonna say oh now he's tryna be like batman.....it's a very slippery slope IMO