All Things Superman: An Open Discussion (Spoilers) - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 93

[KRYPTON INC.]

Haha the Cafe HISHE vids always make light of this: How come Batman always has some deus ex solution? Because: 'I'm Batman'.

If all the internet did was give us HISE SUPER CAFE bits I would not have a problem with that.

HISHE SUPES TO THE AVENGERS: "Yeah... I guess I'd be jealous... IF I WEREN'T LIKE ALL OF YOU COMBINED!"

 

[The Question]

Firstly, everyone and their Grandma would not have access to Kryptonite, so that sort of negates one of your problems with it. Batman would never share it with anyone. It's known in the comics (JLA Tower of Babel) that Batman has fail safe protocols against every member of the JLA, just in case one of them falls out of line or is somehow compromised by an outside force. He knows how to neutralize all of them. When the other members discover that Batman has withheld those files from them, Superman votes to expel Batman from the JL. This prompts Batman to reveal his secret identity of Bruce Wayne to all of the JLA members, simultaneously showing them they can trust him and also giving away his weakness -- his human identity. Pretty cool, but getting a little off topic there.

Secondly, do you want Superman to just be an unbeatable force? The filmmakers of MOS publicly stated that they held back the Kryptonite from MOS, probably saving it to explore down the line. But instead of Kryptonite, they developed another plot device to weaken Superman. The Kryptonian atmosphere thing basically served the same purpose as Kryptonian, with Zod's scientist even saying, "now you're as weak as a human". I imagine the introduction of the rock will serve the same purpose, leveling the playing field for Batman to use his superior fighting skills to put Superman down. It's only fair, dude. There's no conflict without weakness, IMO. Superhero weaknesses/failures are a crucial part of the DNA of all superhero films. Superman should be no different.

Snyder and Goyer most likely figured that there would no more more Kryptonian ships/atmosphere in the MOS follow-up, paving the way for the Kryptonite discovery (on Earth most likely) that will fill that void.

To address another one of your points, how exactly does Kryptonite turn Superman into an idiot, throw all logic out the window, and put everything in Batman's favor? It's his weakness. He can't help it. Just like Bruce Wayne can't help that if you stab him, he bleeds. There's nothing wrong with a hero having a weakness. To be honest, you sound a little ridiculous.

Judging from your recent posts and your concerns, it's clear you're anti-Batman and are not happy about his introduction into this universe so soon. You don't want to see Batman beat down your favorite hero, and I get that, but you're being a little unfair with your desires. You'd do yourself a great favor by relaxing yourself and realizing exactly what's happening here. It's a "best of both worlds" situation, for sure. We're going to see two of the greatest superheroes ever come together in a spectacular way. Both of them will fail at one point. Both of them will also triumph. We're going to see their strengths and weaknesses on display. I don't think these filmmakers are going to disrespect either character by making one out to be the "loser". At this point, you just need to have a little faith and enjoy the ride.

Kryptonite is just an excuse for writers to be lazy about writing actual conflict and stakes. Take a look at most people's top ten Superman stories and you'll find that Kryptonite isn't a factor in most of them. Kryptonite is a crutch that we need to let go of if we want to learn to walk again.

 

[Smallville13]

^ I'm practically ASKING to be flamed, but I think Batman should feel like ScarJo's Black Widow in TA, especially in World's Finest. Covert, stealthy, manipulative, but does most of her work behind the scenes. Batman should be similar in that respect, while being close with Superman either physically or with some type of Wayne walkie-talkie.

HOWEVER, I'm not fond of when Batman gets amped up just to accommodate assisting Superman. If part of the Caped Crusader's appeal is the lack of physically impossible super-strength, don't have him being thrown against the wall and get up quickly.

The key is too make Batman smart, while still keeping Superman pretty smart. Having Batman have individual operations separate from Superman's but a part of the same mission would do that trick. But they should EVENTUALLY battle some super-villain TOGETHER. Since Snyder's directing, I would want World's Finest (hopefully different from MOS2) to have the famous image of Batman swooping with Superman flying above.

That would make me excited, regardless of the quality of the overall film. Though I hope it's good.

I think the key is Batman is a smarter tactician. He has a ruthless war mind. Superman doesn't. He loves and trusts everyone. Batman doesn't.

 

[The Shape]

What was a general complaint about silver age Superman? Overpowered, impossible to beat, and would come up with new abilities contrived by the writers to ensure his dominance in any given story.

What is the Bat-God ideal if not that as well? Is Bat-God presented as impossible to beat? Does he seem to almost magically always have to ability and skill needed at the exact moment the plot calls for it? Is his improbable wisdom nigh on infallible?

I consider myself a Batman fan. And I think Batman should be presented as AMAZING in skill and character. But if as fans say his appeal is rooted in his "vulnerability, humanity and realness" then he should have limits. I love Batman. He is without a doubt my #2. But the Bat-God take it too much for me and leaves a bad taste in my mouth when it comes to his interaction with other heroes. Like I said, my head cannon Batman is the very mortal "Bat-Master".

Eh, your comparison isn't as spot-on as you'd like it to be, and again, it seems a little unfair.

There's a stark difference between Superman developing new physical abilities out of the blue during the Silver Age than Batman using his extensive knowledge of the world to prepare for most situations. Also, since his creation, Batman has relied on high-tech gadgetry to aid him in his missions. Isn't it logical that as time goes on, after countless missions, his arsenal of technology has evolved and advanced in great measures?


But, to be honest, the reason your comparison is unfair is because we could sit here and make the case for most (if not all) major superheroes, who have all survived through decades of comics and who have all overcome insane, seemingly impossible obstacles through sometimes ridiculous means. The Bat-God nickname is just a lame, semi-derogatory designation used by fans of other heroes who seem pissed at the idea that Batman might be able to defeat them, or be better than them in some way.

 

[The Shape]

Kryptonite is just an excuse for writers to be lazy about writing actual conflict and stakes. Take a look at most people's top ten Superman stories and you'll find that Kryptonite isn't a factor in most of them. Kryptonite is a crutch that we need to let go of if we want to learn to walk again.

I should have said "physical conflict" or something along those lines. Obviously, it goes without saying that Kryptonite should not necessarily be a factor in actual conflict and stakes. It's not a reflection on his emotions or anything along those lines. But seriously, would you just prefer that Superman dominates in every physical confrontation from this point forward? Or when he fights super-powered beings like Zod, they just bounce back and forth for 30 mins of a totally even-keeled beat-down until one of them decides to kill the other, as was the case in MOS?

Kryptonite can be a clutch, and it has been used as such many times in the history of Superman. That's for sure. However, if used correctly and sparingly, it can also be used as a tool. It can serve as a gut-check to Superman, in that despite all of his perfection, all of his greatness, a little rock can bring him down to our level...and he might have to find another way out of that trap that doesn't involve flying or smashing his way out. You get the idea.

The same kind of tropes exist for every superhero. Why should Superman be no different?

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Eh, your comparison isn't as spot-on as you'd like it to be, and again, it seems a little unfair.

There's a stark difference between Superman developing new physical abilities out of the blue during the Silver Age than Batman using his extensive knowledge of the world to prepare for most situations. Also, since his creation, Batman has relied on high-tech gadgetry to aid him in his missions. Isn't it logical that as time goes on, after countless missions, his arsenal of technology has evolved and advanced in great measures?


But, to be honest, the reason your comparison is unfair is because we could sit here and make the case for most (if not all) major superheroes, who have all survived through decades of comics and who have all overcome insane, seemingly impossible obstacles through sometimes ridiculous means. The Bat-God nickname is just a lame, semi-derogatory designation used by fans of other heroes who seem pissed at the idea that Batman might be able to defeat them, or be better than them in some way.

Hey, it's all impossible BS when it comes to these superheroes. They are presented as larger than life in morality, skill, power and ability. But... With Batman there has been a tendency in the last 20 years or so to just take things to the extreme. Much like Silver age Superman I have the same complaint. There is no real struggle or drama with that kind of presentation of the character. And yes, when interacting with other characters it just makes them seem besides the point, much as pre crisis Superman did. I have no prob with presenting Batman as one of the baddest mofos on his fictional planet. But when that starts to slide into "I thought of every single permutation of this situation" or "luckily I studied how to deactivate imploding neutron bombs just for such an occasion" it drains the drama and starts my eye rolling. Add to it ultra contrived reasons to make him the focal point of a given scene when he is with other superheroes and I want to pull my hair out. An example of that is the ep of JL where Jon Stewart has a nuclear device that's about to go off. He is the possessor of THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPON IN THE UNIVERSE. We all know what a GL ring is capable of in the comics, and even a less powerful form as was in the DCAU is still quite formidable. So does Jon use the ring to toss the nuclear device in to space? Nope. He just stands there slack jawed, seeming to forget all the things the ring can do. Instead Batman comes around and is like "Shield ME with the ring and I'll go inside and disarm it". That's contrivance of the highest order.

 

[Herolee10]

Are you suggesting Superman is mostly disrespected in Batman/Superman cross-overs?

In the animated features and cartoons to portray them both in the same time? Pretty much.

 

[Smallville13]

The latest on my evolving opinion on MOS.

Superman is adventure, life, and love. He is a primary colored character that shines as a beacon of hope and spirit to everyone on Earth. What makes Superman the best superhero and perhaps the best character creation of all time, is he loves life and everyone in it, and he wants for everyone to see life the way he does. The cover of All-Star Superman where he's up in the clouds looking back at us, to join him on his adventure.

I actually like the muted color palette giving the film a more earthly feel and making Superman look more palpable inside this world. Where the film gets everything wrong is there just should never be mass death and destruction around him. He doesn't fight to the death with his enemies, he tries to help them too, to rehabilitate them. I understand that to make Superman cool for the new kids these days including alot of people here you have to have him edgy and a fighter and even a killer, but all it's done is place Superman with Batman and Wolverine and all the other heroes. The film did not show that Superman is the best of all of them. And don't argue 'he had no choice, he had to kill Zod'. Yes, in that instance I'd agree, but Goyer/Snyder wrote that instance. They specifically wrote it so that he would kill. That is what's wrong. This doesn't hurt it for me half as much as the millions of innocent people in Metropolis dying though.

To get the Superman film I want. And I really want it with Henry and Amy. I think it would have to be a standalone film and a spiritual reboot in a sense. A warmer, brighter palette with a more optimistic tone. A film that really gets right to the heart of Superman.

However I have no control over this, and I just have to look forward to whatever Snyder/Goyer want to do. And that's Batman. They both have said Batman is their favorite character, and Snyder has said many times that his dream project would be a Batman or a Star Wars film.

 

[Herolee10]

The latest on my evolving opinion on MOS.

Superman is adventure, life, and love. He is a primary colored character that shines as a beacon of hope and spirit to everyone on Earth. What makes Superman the best superhero and perhaps the best character creation of all time, is he loves life and everyone in it, and he wants for everyone to see life the way he does. The cover of All-Star Superman where he's up in the clouds looking back at us, to join him on his adventure.

I actually like the muted color palette giving the film a more earthly feel and making Superman look more palpable inside this world. Where the film gets everything wrong is there just should never be mass death and destruction around him. He doesn't fight to the death with his enemies, he tries to help them too, to rehabilitate them. I understand that to make Superman cool for the new kids these days including alot of people here you have to have him edgy and a fighter and even a killer, but all it's done is place Superman with Batman and Wolverine and all the other heroes. The film did not show that Superman is the best of all of them. And don't argue 'he had no choice, he had to kill Zod'. Yes, in that instance I'd agree, but Goyer/Snyder wrote that instance. They specifically wrote it so that he would kill. That is what's wrong. This doesn't hurt it for me half as much as the millions of innocent people in Metropolis dying though.

To get the Superman film I want. And I really want it with Henry and Amy. I think it would have to be a standalone film and a spiritual reboot in a sense. A warmer, brighter palette with a more optimistic tone. A film that really gets right to the heart of Superman.

However I have no control over this, and I just have to look forward to whatever Snyder/Goyer want to do. And that's Batman. They both have said Batman is their favorite character, and Snyder has said many times that his dream project would be a Batman or a Star Wars film.

lol; but yeah, I understand how you feel. I just see no reason why people should be excited to see this unless you're a fan of batman or care more about appearance over substance because Batman being in a Superman film only looks good on paper, but that's about it so far.

I mean a part of me even wishes that if Batman was ever rebooted again some decades later, that after a first great film, we get a second one only for Superman to appear in it. I'd just respond by saying to everyone then.."Payback's a ***** huh?".lol

Unless they get some fan favorite actor for the role, who's going to give a crap about some new batman appearing on film when we just had one kickass batman give his final curtain call just last year?

 

[mace1]

Anybody remember DC UNIVERSE online?there was no city left.
The whole city was destroyed,but i guest it was not live action movie so nobody complained.

 

[Smallville13]

lol; but yeah, I understand how you feel. I just see no reason why people should be excited to see this unless you're a fan of batman or care more about appearance over substance because Batman being in a Superman film only looks good on paper, but that's about it so far.

I mean a part of me even wishes that if Batman was ever rebooted again some decades later, that after a first great film, we get a second one only for Superman to appear in it. I'd just respond by saying to everyone then.."Payback's a ***** huh?".lol

Unless they get some fan favorite actor for the role, who's going to give a crap about some new batman appearing on film when we just had one kickass batman give his final curtain call just last year?

This is so true. I never thought about it like that. Everyone will love Batman being in the next Superman film. But they would absolutely revolt if it was the other way round.

 

[Herolee10]

This is so true. I never thought about it like that. Everyone will love Batman being in the next Superman film. But they would absolutely revolt if it was the other way round.

Yep yep. Double Standards my friend..double standards.

Reason why fans of Batman can be happy about this is that they know Batman won't be portrayed wrong in this film. It's Warner Bros' golden Boy, they aren't going to even let Superman do any harm to him.

And considering on how Goyer and Snyder are practically just saying whatever the studio tells them or whatever is good for business..they may say that Superman is the granddaddy of them all when promoting MOS, but they can easily undo that in order to make Batman a badass for the second film.

 

[Smallville13]

Yep yep. Double Standards my friend..double standards.

Reason why fans of Batman can be happy about this is that they know Batman won't be portrayed wrong in this film. It's Warner Bros' golden Boy, they aren't going to even let Superman do any harm to him.

And considering on how Goyer and Snyder are practically just saying whatever the studio tells them or whatever is good for business..they may say that Superman is the granddaddy of them all when promoting MOS, but they can easily undo that in order to make Batman a badass for the second film.

If we get Batman beating Superman to a pulp with Kryptonite Frank Miller style I think I'll be sick. I may even walk out.

 

[Herolee10]

If we get Batman beating Superman to a pulp with Kryptonite Frank Miller style I think I'll be sick. I may even walk out.

Ditto; hell, I think they may actually spoil or give a glimpse of that in the trailers, assuming if there is a scene like that.

Well, at least I have "The Avengers" that I can look forward to for 2015 if this ends up tanking.

Should this film tarnish Superman for what he stands for then I'm going to give up on the franchise and never watch another DC film until the thing is rebooted again by credible people and hell I'd hope for the franchise to even fail at that point since there wouldn't be a reason to make another superman film if they've practically destroyed him by giving him to batman.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

The latest on my evolving opinion on MOS.

Superman is adventure, life, and love. He is a primary colored character that shines as a beacon of hope and spirit to everyone on Earth. What makes Superman the best superhero and perhaps the best character creation of all time, is he loves life and everyone in it, and he wants for everyone to see life the way he does. The cover of All-Star Superman where he's up in the clouds looking back at us, to join him on his adventure.

I actually like the muted color palette giving the film a more earthly feel and making Superman look more palpable inside this world. Where the film gets everything wrong is there just should never be mass death and destruction around him. He doesn't fight to the death with his enemies, he tries to help them too, to rehabilitate them. I understand that to make Superman cool for the new kids these days including alot of people here you have to have him edgy and a fighter and even a killer, but all it's done is place Superman with Batman and Wolverine and all the other heroes. The film did not show that Superman is the best of all of them. And don't argue 'he had no choice, he had to kill Zod'. Yes, in that instance I'd agree, but Goyer/Snyder wrote that instance. They specifically wrote it so that he would kill. That is what's wrong. This doesn't hurt it for me half as much as the millions of innocent people in Metropolis dying though.

To get the Superman film I want. And I really want it with Henry and Amy. I think it would have to be a standalone film and a spiritual reboot in a sense. A warmer, brighter palette with a more optimistic tone. A film that really gets right to the heart of Superman.

However I have no control over this, and I just have to look forward to whatever Snyder/Goyer want to do. And that's Batman. They both have said Batman is their favorite character, and Snyder has said many times that his dream project would be a Batman or a Star Wars film.

I think that as I have gotten older my opinion on things has become more nuanced and less binary on a host of issues. When it comes to Superman on film I, for years (Even after SR) wanted nothing more than a film with the tone of the Donner film with cutting edge SFX, a physical threat for Supes to handle and an integration into a larger DCCU if possible.

I would like to think of myself as a someone that does prefer the adaptations be as close to source material as it can be. More over, I was raised Catholic and the absolute morality of superhero characters from back in the day was appealing and comforting. I feel I was lucky to be born and grow up in a time when you could read comics and see an era come to a close (the tail end of the silver age, or the bronze age if you will) and the beginning of a more modern sensibilities in writing and other content. So there should be a ton in MOS that on paper should make me puke.
But I walked out of the theatre having to pick my jaw off the floor. I think in the times we live in, they succeeded in threading the needle of a movie that could bring Superman to life on the screen and not turn off the masses. When something from the superhero comics medium is adapted to live action certain things have to either be altered or the audience must be made aware of the absurdity of everything with a judicious use of wink wink, nudge nudge. To my surprise they went into "serious film" mode whole hog, and for me it worked, even when they did things that I never ever would have done if I were some how in charge.

I understand how MOS can be divisive. I just found that the rewards were worth the things omitted/changed from the source. In emotion and spectacle I got a Superman movie I did not even know that I wanted.

 

[Smallville13]

I think that as I have gotten older my opinion on things has become more nuanced and less binary on a host of issues. When it comes to Superman on film I, for years (Even after SR) wanted nothing more than a film with the tone of the Donner film with cutting edge SFX, a physical threat for Supes to handle and an integration into a larger DCCU if possible.

I would like to think of myself as a someone that does prefer the adaptations be as close to source material as it can be. More over, I was raised Catholic and the absolute morality of superhero characters from back in the day was appealing and comforting. I feel I was lucky to be born and grow up in a time when you could read comics and see an era come to a close (the tail end of the silver age, or the bronze age if you will) and the beginning of a more modern sensibilities in writing and other content. So there should be a ton in MOS that on paper should make me puke.
But I walked out of the theatre having to pick my jaw off the floor. I think in the times we live in, they succeeded in threading the needle of a movie that could bring Superman to life on the screen and not turn off the masses. When something from the superhero comics medium is adapted to live action certain things have to either be altered or the audience must be made aware of the absurdity of everything with a judicious use of wink wink, nudge nudge. To my surprise they went into "serious film" mode whole hog, and for me it worked, even when they did things that I never ever would have done if I were some how in charge.

I understand how MOS can be divisive. I just found that the rewards were worth the things omitted/changed from the source. In emotion and spectacle I got a Superman movie I did not even know that I wanted.

I enjoyed it too. After the hellish wait 2 weeks after the US release with the 'rotten' consensus and mixed reaction here, I was just thankful that it was actually good. I loved the serious tone as well. I love that that's the differentiating aspect from the Disney/Marvel films, is the more earthly feel and humanity to the characters. Thrill is also a big part of Superman, he can do our ultimate dream: fly. I'd love to have seen more thrills in new visual ways (which Snyder is absolutely capable of) that didn't involve punching and death.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I enjoyed it too. After the hellish wait 2 weeks after the US release with the 'rotten' consensus and mixed reaction here, I was just thankful that it was actually good. I loved the serious tone as well. I love that that's the differentiating aspect from the Disney/Marvel films, is the more earthly feel and humanity to the characters. Thrill is also a big part of Superman, he can do our ultimate dream: fly. I'd love to have seen more thrills in new visual ways (which Snyder is absolutely capable of) that didn't involve punching and death.

I really want to see what the opinion of MOS will be in a year, once the Blu Ray is out and people will have watched it multiple times in the comfort of where they live. I am really hoping that the emotional core and characters shine through more for people. On the big screen I can see how the spectacle could be seen as overwhelming, even assaultive. Perhaps a more intimate viewing at home will change some peoples perspective.

 

[The Question]

I should have said "physical conflict" or something along those lines. Obviously, it goes without saying that Kryptonite should not necessarily be a factor in actual conflict and stakes. It's not a reflection on his emotions or anything along those lines. But seriously, would you just prefer that Superman dominates in every physical confrontation from this point forward? Or when he fights super-powered beings like Zod, they just bounce back and forth for 30 mins of a totally even-keeled beat-down until one of them decides to kill the other, as was the case in MOS?

No. But Kryptonite isn't the only possible answer. Kryptonite isn't even an answer at all. Kryptonite is an excuse for not thinking of an answer.

You bring up the fight with Zod. The fight with Zod was terribly written. The fight with Zod was an indulgent slugfest with no point, no arc, and no tension. You know thw answer? Don't write it like that. Write it smart. Don't have them bounce back and forth for 30 minutes in a totally even keeled beat down, have things actually happen. The Avengers didn't need Kryptonite to make any of the fights involving Thor and The Hulk good, neither do Superman movies.

Kryptonite can be a clutch, and it has been used as such many times in the history of Superman. That's for sure. However, if used correctly and sparingly, it can also be used as a tool. It can serve as a gut-check to Superman, in that despite all of his perfection, all of his greatness, a little rock can bring him down to our level...and he might have to find another way out of that trap that doesn't involve flying or smashing his way out. You get the idea.

There are other ways of doing that that involve putting actual thought into the story. We really do not need Kryptonite, I don't understand why people think we do.

The same kind of tropes exist for every superhero. Why should Superman be no different?

No it doesn't. Doesn't exist for The Hulk. Doesn't exist for Thor. Doesn't exist for Wonder Woman. Doesn't exist for most super heroes. With most super heroes, the writers actually just write. It's pretty much just Superman.




Again, man, I have to stress, Consider what are widely thought to be the best Superman stories:

All Star Superman
For All Seasons
Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow
For The Man Who Has Everything
What's So Funny About Truth, Justice, and the American Way?
Kingdom Come
Secret Identity
DC Comics Presents: Superman and Swamp Thing
Lex Luthor: Man of Steel
Birthright

Out of those ten stories, widely considered to be the ten best Superman stories ever, Kryptonite plays a significant role in the way you describe in exactly one of them, Birthright. And it only plays any role at all in two others, Lex Luthor: Man of Steel and Whatever Happened to the man of Tomorrow. In Lex Luthor: Man of Steel that role is incredibly small and could have been cut out entirely, and in Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow Green Kryptonite, which was used to [blackout]kill Krypto[/blackout] could have easily been replaced with a sufficient amount of force, and it's only Gold Kryptonite [blackout]which Superman uses to remove his powers when he decides to retire[/blackout] that plays a role in the plot, and that role is very different from what you're describing.

Basically, we don't need Kryptonite to create a physical conflict. Nine of the ten best Superman stories ever didn't need it for that purpose.

 

[BlueLantern]

The issue with Superman is that the DC writers are always looking for an achilles heel. They don't just go all out and write a story. They find ways to limit him, to bring him down or make him relatable. Nope. He's Superman.

If he was created as an image of human idealism, keep him that way. No weaknesses and all. Sure, Kryptonite's part of the lore, so go with it, but don't bring it out as an 'aha!' moment.

 

[ConnorKon-El]

Speaking at SDCC to promote his CBS show "Person of Interest", screenwriter Jonathan Nolan made it clear that he won't be joining his brother (producer) or David S. Goyer (screenwriter) on the "Man of Steel' sequel. Said the younger Nolan sibling, "The fun thing about working with such an iconic character is you know when you're doing it that at some point you're going to wrap up your story and see what the next fella down the line has to say about it, so I'm very excited to see what they do with him."

Well there's that

 

[Smallville13]

Well there's that

Yeah. David and Zack are writing. No point in holding out hope for anyone else.

 

[Nathan]

Basically, we don't need Kryptonite to create a physical conflict. Nine of the ten best Superman stories ever didn't need it for that purpose.

And I'm not even against exploiting his weakness that much. Otherwise I wouldn't even have provided a scenario like a Krypton Chamber, that replicates Krypton's atmosphere. But Kryptonite is simply the laziest solution. Which requires no prep time, and requires other factors like Superman still holding back, even when under mind control, and not having the brain to try and gain some distance.

And let's say Kryptonite actually exists and Superman would one day go rogue. If Batman used that Kryptonite in an earlier encounter before, his trump card and whole element of surprise would be gone. Because the first thing I'd do as evil Superman, is to nuke Wayne Manor from orbit.

And once we establish the Justice League, Kryptonite wouldn't even need to be a factor anymore anyway. Because you'd have a whole bunch of people that could take down Superman in their own special way. Heck, damn Aquaman alone could immobilize Superman by giving him seizures.

I'm just glad that I'm not the only one around here that thinks Kryptonite needs to go.

 

[BlueLantern]

Yeah. David and Zack are writing. No point in holding out hope for anyone else.

It's going to be amazing, I can tell.

Clark : Once you've killed, you'll never do it again.

Bruce : I just considered killing once, looked at the gun and threw it away.

Clark : Really?

Bruce : Yup. Though there was a few technicalities involving some of my foes.

Clark : Did you snap anyone's neck?

Bruce : Hell no.

Clark : I need a reboot.

Bruce : *****, please. I'm gatecrashing your film for my own reboot so what are the chances of yours happening?

Clark : But you're Batman.

Bruce : I am Batman.

 

[JOE]

This^.

 

[Smallville13]

Snyder being Snyder, there's no way we're not going to get a Superman vs Batman sequence somewhere (most likely when they first meet). If Kryptonite isn't an option, I expect Batman to utilize alot of weaponry on Supes: hypersonics, bombs, etc.