Should this Superman kill?

[hopefuldreamer]

I feel the same.

I mean, it's not even like he's never killed before. He's killed in the comics, Zod and co where killed in Superman 2...

It's just a consistent factor in all of the stories and interpretations that I consider the best, and it's THOSE that I would hope the creators of MOS most take their characterisation from.

Not the odd old stories where he does kill or the weird examples that people think prove something.

[Thundercrack85]

Considering the character has appeared in comics, radio plays, movies, cartoons, with hundreds of writers, I think there is quite a range of characterization. Some of which he has killed in.

Batman, or Bruce Wayne at least kills several people in Batman Begins when he destroys the League of Shadows headquarters. Batman also killed Two-Face in the Dark Knight. In a plausible, live-action adaption, those things happen.

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by Thundercrack85

Batman, or Bruce Wayne at least kills several people in Batman Begins when he destroys the League of Shadows headquarters. Batman also killed Two-Face in the Dark Knight. In a plausible, live-action adaption, those things happen.

I'd say those 'kills' he is responsible for in those movies are a FLAW. So it's not really a good arguement for why we should have them in MOS.

[Thundercrack85]

So, what happens to villains? He just locks them up or lets them go? Hope they all fall to their own death Disney style?

[hopefuldreamer]

And why is locking up criminals ridiculous again?

[Thundercrack85]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

And why is locking up criminals ridiculous again?

Lex Luthor, sure. But Darkseid? Doomsday? Zod? Guessing that's why they had him kill Zod in the comics, be rather anti-climatic and pointless to throw him into the Phantom Zone. Having a reoccurring villain who constantly breaks out of prison may work in the comics, but it doesn't in live action movies.

[hopefuldreamer]

Why is that anti climactic or pointless?

Human prison for humans. Alien prison for aliens.

Doesn't seem ridiculous at all to me.

[Godzilla2014]

Originally Posted by Thundercrack85

Lex Luthor, sure. But Darkseid? Doomsday? Zod? Guessing that's why they had him kill Zod in the comics, be rather anti-climatic and pointless to throw him into the Phantom Zone.

If the Phantom Zone is used, I hope that it's established beforehand as an effective means of imprisoning these villain prior to its employment, so it doesn't come off as a deus ex machina to prevent Superman from having to consider killing villains.

[Thundercrack85]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

Why is that anti climactic or pointless?

Human prison for humans. Alien prison for aliens.

Doesn't seem ridiculous at all to me.

Because it doesn't accomplish anything. It doesn't eliminate the threat. Especially if the character was already imprisoned and escaped when the story began (which is usually Zod's backstory). If the villain keeps escaping, that makes the hero look incompetent.

Unless they want to make it a plot point so that Zod can come back in a later movie (à la Magneto in X-Men). But even then, he can only be imprisoned so many times before it becomes a dead horse trope.

I don't think Superman has to kill, but he shouldn't be obsessed with it to the point of it crippling his ability to fight powerful enemies.

[hopefuldreamer]

It accomlishes the EXACT same thing as imprisoning Lex Luthor.

Or for that matter, in the real world, imprisoning any criminal.

Lex often escapes jail too... so by your logic, Superman appears incompetant for not killing him too, right?

[Thundercrack85]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

It accomlishes the EXACT same thing as imprisoning Lex Luthor.

Or for that matter, in the real world, imprisoning any criminal.

Lex often escapes jail too... so by your logic, Superman appears incompetant for not killing him too, right?

Depends, most criminals in real life can't destroy / conquer entire worlds. But yes, it does get tired and silly very quickly if Lex Luthor keeps escaping from prison. Unless its played for laughs, then maybe. But I assume it's not supposed to be a comedy. He's not Sideshow Bob.

Does the not killing under any condition clause extend to machines like Brainiac? Assuming he's not an alien.

[hopefuldreamer]

No, most human criminals are not as dangerous.

But that's precisely why there are alien prisons like the phantom zone, which are MUCH more suited to containing that level of threat.

And personally, I don't think it's tired and silly to show a criminal repeat offending, especially one like Lex.

That's just realistic IMO.

As far as brainiac is concerned, I think it depends on how he is characterised.

[Lead Cenobite]

While I feel Superman should be allowed to kill in desperate situations where there are no other options available, I don't think he should just take his enemies out because he's sick of them breaking out of prison over and over again. That's what Superman did with pocket universe Zod and company. There was no guarantee that they would get their powers back, gold k is supposed to be permanent.

[Doomed_hero]

There are worse things then death and Superman has found ways to do them in the comics much like others. Killing comes off as lazy writing. There is always another way.

[Lead Cenobite]

Worse? You're arguing against killing now because it's not bad enough?

[hopefuldreamer]

This thread...

[Thundercrack85]

I'm going to laugh if Superman just causally throws a mook off a building to his death in the first few minutes of the movie.

[hopefuldreamer]

Yeah, that'd be well funny

[KalMart]

Originally Posted by Thundercrack85

I'm going to laugh if Superman just causally throws a mook off a building to his death in the first few minutes of the movie.

...and he hits a shmuck on the ground....accompanied by a punter....

[Fudgie]

No, just like Batman shouldn't kill.

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

No, most human criminals are not as dangerous.

But that's precisely why there are alien prisons like the phantom zone, which are MUCH more suited to containing that level of threat.

And personally, I don't think it's tired and silly to show a criminal repeat offending, especially one like Lex.

That's just realistic IMO.

As far as brainiac is concerned, I think it depends on how he is characterised.

Brainiac is an android and therefore not alive-Superman has never killed him but he has reprogrammed him before.

[Lead Cenobite]

Well, he was alive.. atleast in his first appearance, and of course in the Byrne reboot. When it comes to things like androids, it's kinda hard to define what's ethical. It's sortof an uncomfortable area for people, whether something built can be considered life.

[ripse]

I said no, the man of steel just try trail from TDK movie....try to success with new style from fans wanted (no pants at least)..

[Kurosawa]

Originally Posted by Lead Cenobite

Well, he was alive.. atleast in his first appearance, and of course in the Byrne reboot. When it comes to things like androids, it's kinda hard to define what's ethical. It's sortof an uncomfortable area for people, whether something built can be considered life.

The original version was an android, there's nothing in his first appearance that contradicts that. The Byrne version was an okay character, he just shouldn't have been called Brainiac.

I don't like the idea of Superman destroying sentient androids. I personally would not have him do that, nor would I have him destroy non-living creatures like Bizarro. It's also part of why I can see Waid's point about him being a vegetarian, especially considering that he doesn't need to eat or breathe anyway.

[Lead Cenobite]

From what I understand, the original Brainiac was more or less an archetypical evil green alien and there wasn't anything in particular to point to him being a machine, but considering they never went into the details of his biology or lack thereof, it was easy to retcon.