All Things Superman: An Open Discussion (Spoilers) - - - - - - - - - - - Part 91

[roach]

New 52 Superman has been utter garbage to read. Would not recommend to anyone.

What I don't understand is the John Byrne controversial issue getting a lot of hate. The story was very melancholic and you get the feel that while Superman had no choice but to kill General Zod, Zaora, and Quex-Ul (they deserved to die...I mean seriously...who kills 5 billion people + Lex + Bruce Wayne and get away with it by being banished to the Phantom Zone? I might cause a ****storm, but if Zod and Co's crimes were measured in reality, Hitler's holocaust would pale in comparison), he's never the same character after his act. And that's what was interesting...you can sense the internal conflict within Superman: he killed and believes that he can no longer take the mantle of Superman. That is how you do a compelling kill, not the New 52 BS.

again I brought this up before...if we know that there is a conspiracy to make the superheroes look bad then couldnt someone control Superman into doing this.....

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

"I still don't get the need of having him to spell it out. Let his actions speak for him in the sequel."

Exactly. I'm okay with Superman not mentioning it, just as long as his sequel, he goes OUT of his way to avoid killing, and never does it again.

If someone brings it UP within the film, Supes should say it was "his worst failure." And he should talk about it to Lois. Maybe it should make him contemplate his own reception as a hero.

But it shouldn't be ignored completely. If the death of Zod is what the sequel is built around, it would make for a dour sequel. But on the other hand, it should be meaningful and referenced from time to time, either through the dialog, or the visuals.

 

[Herolee10]

"I still don't get the need of having him to spell it out. Let his actions speak for him in the sequel."

Exactly. I'm okay with Superman not mentioning it, just as long as his sequel, he goes OUT of his way to avoid killing, and never does it again.

If someone brings it UP within the film, Supes should say it was "his worst failure." And he should talk about it to Lois. Maybe it should make him contemplate his own reception as a hero.

But it shouldn't be ignored completely. If the death of Zod is what the sequel is built around, it would make for a dour sequel. But on the other hand, it should be meaningful and referenced from time to time, either through the dialog, or the visuals.

Indeed; which is why I wouldn't mind at all if they were to recreate the scene that was done in the animated film "Superman vs the Elite", where a crowd of people start demanding at Superman to "carry out justice" by executing a villain that is responsible for having committed several murders.

If done right on the big screen and in live action, it could be one hell of an scene, perhaps just as great as the scene on the Ferries in the Dark Knight where the prisoners and civilians of Gotham were contemplating on blowing each other up in order to save their own lives.

Seeing an angry mob demanding Superman to execute a villain (who probably deserves it) only for Superman to respond with saying that he can't do it, thus him getting further criticized by the public for it would be interesting to watch.

Oh, and then there's how Lex could easily taunt Superman about it even further. Remember how Lex kept taunting Superman to kill him with his heat vision in the Justice League Unlimited cartoons in the same way that his Justice Lord counterpart did? Imagine seeing Lex taunting Superman to kill him by snapping his neck like he did with Zod.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I just don't get the fear of thinking he's gonna turn into Punisher, and needing an extra line just to reassure he's not gonna do it again in a sequel.

I'm not afraid of that. I'm just afraid that within the next few films of the franchise, and similar situation could easily come up where killing is the only option.

Wasn't it confirmed by Snyder though that the reason why he had Superman kill Zod the way he did was to establish Superman's no killing policy within this franchise?

Yeah... I just don't trust what they say anymore.

By why do we need him to say it? It's a vow to himself. Who makes vows to themselves out loud?
Look at the scene in BB where Bruce throws the gun in the harbor. Right there he made his vow not to use guns or kill. Do we need to have him say it out loud to understand that he wont use a gun or kill again?

But it IS mentioned a heck of a lot in TDK (even if they did stupidly negate it at the end).

Hey, if it's made a big thing in the sequel and they talk about it a lot, i'll be a much much happier fan.

Indeed; which is why I wouldn't mind at all if they were to recreate the scene that was done in the animated film "Superman vs the Elite", where a crowd of people start demanding at Superman to "carry out justice" by executing a villain that is responsible for having committed several murders.

If done right on the big screen and in live action, it could be one hell of an scene, perhaps just as great as the scene on the Ferries in the Dark Knight where the prisoners and civilians of Gotham were contemplating on blowing each other up in order to save their own lives.

Seeing an angry mob demanding Superman to execute a villain (who probably deserves it) only for Superman to respond with saying that he can't do it, thus him getting further criticized by the public for it would be interesting to watch.

Oh, and then there's how Lex could easily taunt Superman about it even further. Remember how Lex kept taunting Superman to kill him with his heat vision in the Justice League Unlimited cartoons in the same way that his Justice Lord counterpart did? Imagine seeing Lex taunting Superman to kill him by snapping his neck like he did with Zod.

All of that would be incredible to see. I'm just not convinced that's something they are going to do. I don't think Snyder/Goyer see it that way.

 

[Loki882]

The new 52 was bad. In MOS, Superman killed Zod after making a split second decision to prevent Zod from incinerating an innocent family. This is after Zod made it clear that he would never stop unless he died and there was no way to contain him (he was getting stronger by the second). JL #22.....wasn't that.

 

[HighFivingMF]

The new 52 was bad. In MOS, Superman killed Zod after making a split second decision to prevent Zod from incinerating an innocent family. This is after Zod made it clear that he would never stop unless he died and there was no way to contain him (he was getting stronger by the second). JL #22.....wasn't that.

It was him being controlled.

 

[Loki882]

I still don't like it. It just came across as too goofy for me. The dialogue didn't help.

 

[Herolee10]

Yeah... I just don't trust what they say anymore.



All of that would be incredible to see. I'm just not convinced that's something they are going to do. I don't think Snyder/Goyer see it that way.

Well, we won't know what the future will bring exactly until it arrives.lol But I like to believe that there was a purpose behind the controversial decision in MOS and that it'll be carried out towards establishing what people are more comfortable and familiar with since while it was gutsy to have Superman kill in this film in the manner that was forced to, I don't think Snyder and Goyer would risk making Superman into the type of hero that kills so easily, let alone at all, like Marvel Characters do.

 

[HighFivingMF]

I still don't like it. It just came across as too goofy for me. The dialogue didn't help.

If you don't like it for that reason, fine. But your original post made it sound like you liked Man of Steel because he didn't have a choice and disliked Justice League because he did. When he had no choice either way.

 

[Loki882]

I apologize, that's not what I meant at all. I just like how it was executed in MOS and not in JL.

 

[The Sage]

Random idea, feel free to throw it back at me.

Anyone think that Man of Steel in a way is maybe a throwback to Golden Age Superman? He couldn't fly in the beginning, didn't have all of his abilities. He was a bit crude--someone can feel free to correct me on this, I'm only going off of some stuff I've seen on the net--and he did kill. Then the sequel could see him start to change into more of a Silver Age/Modern type Superman?

 

[Herolee10]

Random idea, feel free to throw it back at me.

Anyone think that Man of Steel in a way is maybe a throwback to Golden Age Superman? He couldn't fly in the beginning, didn't have all of his abilities. He was a bit crude--someone can feel free to correct me on this, I'm only going off of some stuff I've seen on the net--and he did kill. Then the sequel could see him start to change into more of a Silver Age/Modern type Superman?

If that were the case, then let's hope the third film doesn't find him changing into the New 52 Superman

 

[Mad Love]

I still don't like it. It just came across as too goofy for me. The dialogue didn't help.

What was goofy about it? Which dialogue didn't help? BS filter activated.

 

[X Knight]

By why do we need him to say it? It's a vow to himself. Who makes vows to themselves out loud?
Look at the scene in BB where Bruce throws the gun in the harbor. Right there he made his vow not to use guns or kill. Do we need to have him say it out loud to understand that he wont use a gun or kill again?

I agree with this.

not everything needs to be spoken aloud in dialogue. heck, critics would probably harp on that saying the dialogue is superfluous, with characters speaking their thoughts aloud and telling us instead of showing us.........

 

[Mad Love]

If that were the case, then let's hope the third film doesn't find him changing into the New 52 Superman

:P but New 52 Superman is basically MOS Superman in terms of experience.

 

[Loki882]

Fanboiii, feel free to disagree with me, but making snide comments only makes you look petty.

 

[Jim-El]

Fanboiii, feel free to disagree with me, but making snide comments only makes you look petty.

 

[Darius]

Random idea, feel free to throw it back at me.

Anyone think that Man of Steel in a way is maybe a throwback to Golden Age Superman? He couldn't fly in the beginning, didn't have all of his abilities. He was a bit crude--someone can feel free to correct me on this, I'm only going off of some stuff I've seen on the net--and he did kill. Then the sequel could see him start to change into more of a Silver Age/Modern type Superman?

Yes, that's exactly how i feel, and a very good one by the way!

 

[Lencho01]

Source

Maybe that's why DC was cool with MOS. Corporate synergy!

 

[Loki882]

Are we sure Superman really killed? It seems like someone (secret society) is pulling the strings. Could this all have been a fake out designed to humiliate Superman and the JL?

 

[Lencho01]

I prefer the former. If Superman just symbolized the most realistic good attainable, that symbol could be embodied by anybody. Superman should create a special standard—both because of being the first real superhero and because he pretty much encapsulates the stereotypical superhero.

He can be that ultimate good that nobody else can be and set that standard for other people to strive toward, even if they can never actually get there.

Yep.

http://neitherbirdnorplane.tumblr.com/post/54916721838

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Indeed; which is why I wouldn't mind at all if they were to recreate the scene that was done in the animated film "Superman vs the Elite", where a crowd of people start demanding at Superman to "carry out justice" by executing a villain that is responsible for having committed several murders.

If done right on the big screen and in live action, it could be one hell of an scene, perhaps just as great as the scene on the Ferries in the Dark Knight where the prisoners and civilians of Gotham were contemplating on blowing each other up in order to save their own lives.

Seeing an angry mob demanding Superman to execute a villain (who probably deserves it) only for Superman to respond with saying that he can't do it, thus him getting further criticized by the public for it would be interesting to watch.

Oh, and then there's how Lex could easily taunt Superman about it even further. Remember how Lex kept taunting Superman to kill him with his heat vision in the Justice League Unlimited cartoons in the same way that his Justice Lord counterpart did? Imagine seeing Lex taunting Superman to kill him by snapping his neck like he did with Zod.

I'd love it if Luthor says something to the effect "You cannot stop me. You have no evidence, no frame of reference. The only way you can stop my war against you.. is to kill me. You've done it before. What's stopping you now? You can break my neck, and slip out of here quietly. With your speed, no one will see you leave."

And then Lex saying something like "I knew you wouldn't. You act tough, but inside you're just another boyscout." And then Superman threatens him vaguely, but awesomely.

Lex responds, "I don't have to intimidate people to get what I want. Give them what they desire, and they'll do anything to protect me."

"What have you given them? False hope? A city in ruins?"

Etc

 

[Mysteryman]

I'm not afraid of that. I'm just afraid that within the next few films of the franchise, and similar situation could easily come up where killing is the only option.



Yeah... I just don't trust what they say anymore.



But it IS mentioned a heck of a lot in TDK (even if they did stupidly negate it at the end).

Hey, if it's made a big thing in the sequel and they talk about it a lot, i'll be a much much happier fan.



All of that would be incredible to see. I'm just not convinced that's something they are going to do. I don't think Snyder/Goyer see it that way.

Why would Snyder and Goyer Lie?

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

To protect a plot twist?

 

[Mysteryman]

I would need a heck of a lot of evidence before I believe Superman was going to kill anybody else .