How Superman Resolved the Issue of Zod *MEGA SPOILER*

[NewYorkSpider]

I have mixed feelings about this. Not really sure what to think yet.

 

[moviedoors]

heretic is living in the comic book fantasy world clark is perfect and can do no wrong mr boy scout

the modern superman in the comics isn't even like that

I'm truly baffled. Why would anyone want a character that's that much of a boy scout? Where's the arc for the character? What is there to learn? How can he grow? Where's the drama in that?

 

[LostSon88]

It's not my version...it's the definitive, classic version.

My version of the Punisher kills every bad guy he can get his gun barrel pointed at. That character has failed at the movies. I would not support them turning him into a romantic teenager just for the sake of broadening his appeal. The definitive Punisher has been found...no need to destroy it to appeal to Twilight and Hunger Games fans.

So are you suggesting that any iteration of Superman that deviates from the "classic version" is wrong? Because that's ridiculous.

If every writer, collaborator, filmmaker were to use Superman and base him strictly on his original interpretation, the character would've fizzled out decades ago.

One of the greatest things about Superman is how talented artists have been able to adapt and change him for the times while still maintaining what makes the character special. Just because a version of Superman is not the "classic version" doesn't make it wrong.

And frankly, most of the time, the changes actually make the character that much more interesting.

Like this movie.

 

[LostSon88]

I'm truly baffled. Why would anyone want a character that's that much of a boy scout? Where's the arc for the character? What is there to learn? How can he grow? Where's the drama in that?

Well apparently it's what Heretic grew up with so that's what he wants. No matter how boring it may be.

 

[Heretic]

So what is the definitive version of the character because the one you describe doesn't describe any from the Reeve movies, the death of Superman, Returns, Lois and Clark, Smallville, Returns, and most definitely the Injustice version.

Writers began to develop a sense of morality in Superman as the modern age began...they rejected the idea of a Superman who would break a woman's wrist to get a confession. This took, and that more violent take was wiped out in the Crisis. The comics tried to remain true to this for the next few decades. While he DID kill in the Byrne run...it was after they developed his morality...and his mistake (yes, HE viewed it as a mistake) was a life altering decision that set the course for the book for most of my life.

Superman is very simple...he was raised by a kind, moral couple in Smallville and because of their influence, he became the Man of Tomorrow...a man who finds a way to win when there is no way to win...a man so self sacrificing, so good that it isn't out of the question to call him Christ-like. People are in awe of him and inspired by him. They try to be like him, but will stumble...but through his influence, perhaps humanity will one day walk with him. Then...after setting that up...what if a threat was SO BAD that there really wasn't an option? What if Superman WAS forced to kill? Well, the comics say that he would be overwhelmed with guilt and exile himself from earth...or in Alan Moore's non-canon story, he gave up his powers. He believes that while no one has the right to be executioner, that he above all others does not have that right.

None of this is my opinion...it is the definitive character in the comics...not that those things really matter.

I know that time after time after time movies, tv shows etc have to make a morally conflicted Clark that is not really any better than the average person (and more and more the comics are accepting this since it is easier to write)...but I put my money on the comics that defined him.

 

[Heretic]

I'm truly baffled. Why would anyone want a character that's that much of a boy scout? Where's the arc for the character? What is there to learn? How can he grow? Where's the drama in that?

Many people don't want that...which is why the character is being changed.

One could say the same thing about Jesus though...the guy is perfect, so who would be interested in him? Maybe, just maybe, the point of Superman is to be the shining example, while the other characters around him offer different viewpoints.

 

[Heretic]

Well apparently it's what Heretic grew up with so that's what he wants. No matter how boring it may be.

Nope...I do not always accept my own personal era as the definitive take on a character. I disagree with "my era" of Captain America, for instance, since he should not be a moral clone of Superman like he was written to be.

 

[moviedoors]

Many people don't want that...which is why the character is being changed.

One could say the same thing about Jesus though...the guy is perfect, so who would be interested in him? Maybe, just maybe, the point of Superman is to be the shining example, while the other characters around him offer different viewpoints.

Jesus is also for the most part a dramatically inert character. Perfect people make for ****** drama.

 

[moviedoors]

None of this is my opinion

Oh, but it is, and it's rather insulting that you think you can tell people that they're wrong about this.

 

[UchihaItachi]

I've read this forum for 10 years, and started a new account to comment. I was fine with the killing. For the people who believe Superman could have flown up in the air with his arms wrapped around Zod's neck trying to keep him from frying the people, what doe you think would have happened to Zod if Superman had flown up with his arms around his neck? Hmm? You want him to let the people die? Then what? The movie was written such that Zod had to die.

 

[Supa]

Superman killing Zod should make him go "Never again" and create his no killing code.
In my opinion, that's probably the best way to go from that. I don't think he should've killed him in the first place, but if it serves as a red flag for him, then I'd be fine with it.

 

[Nicko-Ray]

My views on killing Zod are this:

I don't know too much about how or if Supes kills in comics. I look to the comics because that's where Supes comes from.
I didn't mind him killing Zod, and it didn't bother me at all, not one bit. I feel like Supes killing kind of made the universe its own if that makes sense. Its own kind of Superman.

And about SUperman and Clark's character, it was already made clear to me that Clark is an extremely well-raised man that was taught very well by his parents to always do the right thing. It's not like he smiled with laughter after killing Zod.

 

[Heretic]

Okay...I admit it all...

1. There is no such thing as a definitive take on a comic book character.
2. Superman can steal, needlessly destroy public and personal property to satisfy his own whims and kill when he can't think of a better way out of a situation.

I guess all of those comics I read calling him the Big Blue Boy Scout and the Man of Tomorrow were wrong. All of the comic writers who THOUGHT they knew who he was were wrong. I'm glad that we finally got some real forward thinking guys like Goyer and Snyder came to finally make sense of such a crappy character.

 

[LostSon88]

Stop being so dramatic.

 

[CB Fan]

Supes had no choice I wish the writers wouldn't have put him in that scenario but guess what they did and I actually found it to be a very brave choice and not lazy at all because it goes against what everyone thinks when they think of the boyscout that is Superman. The writers put him in a very difficult scenario that is all too often avoided just so that Supes can keep his "perfect" image what else was he gonna do fly off into Space with zod for the rest of his life?

 

[moviedoors]

Okay...I admit it all...

1. There is no such thing as a definitive take on a comic book character.

You should have stopped right there, before you got to the passive aggressive part.

 

[John Locke]

I guess all of those comics I read calling him the Big Blue Boy Scout and the Man of Tomorrow were wrong. All of the comic writers who THOUGHT they knew who he was were wrong. I'm glad that we finally got some real forward thinking guys like Goyer and Snyder came to finally make sense of such a crappy character.

Well compared to all the other superheroes he still is those things.

 

[Warhammer]

Heretic is trolling all of you. Just stop giving him bait, ladies and gentlemen.

 

[Heretic]

Well compared to all the other superheroes he still is those things.

Not really. He did nothing in this movie that makes him any more a boyscout than most other superheroes.

 

[Anubis]

You people are aware that Supes has killed before right? He's killed Zod Before. It's always been something that he does only if he has to. In the film, he was in that exact situation. I don't really see what the big deal is. Now Batman killing people, that's something to get your panties in an uproar over.

 

[Marvin]

You people are aware that Supes has killed before right? He's killed Zod Before. It's always been something that he does only if he has to. In the film, he was in that exact situation. I don't really see what the big deal is. Now Batman killing people, that's something to get your panties in an uproar over.

Batman's done it in damn near every live action contemporary film he's been in. Not that much uproar

 

[Anubis]

That's right. He did. And yet, nobody gave a s**t....what does that say?

 

[C. Lee]

You people are aware that Supes has killed before right?

Some of us are.

 

[Anubis]

Ah, the enlightened few.

 

[gdw]

I was genuinely shocked by this moment, and LOVED the way it was done. I did not see it coming, and I really think he pretty much had no choice, which was exactly what Zod was trying to do.

Zod was a man with absolutely nothing to loose at that point, and also, nothing to live for. Nothing driving him except the loss of, not just his race's hopes of survival (in his view of it,) but a complete loss of purpose.

The reaction of Superman was perfect. It was a defining moment for him, in my eyes. I believe, in that world, that moment defines him, and his views on killing. Or should I say it cements them for him.

He will NEVER do it again, you can see that from his reaction.

I actually turned to my wife after my initial shock and said "that's the difference between him and Batman; though both have a no killing policy, batman would have found already had another way."

I've said before, Superman may be the boyscout, but Batman is the one who's always prepared.

Though I haven't read the comic arc where Superman killed Zod, from what I've heard about it, it sounds almost like he did what Batman never will with the Joker.
With Man of Steel, it was a direct, in the moment, forcing him to have no other choice, and I actually think I like it better.

I am, in my personal ethics view, 100% ok with killing in direct self defense. Self defense (or directly defending someone in immediate threat) is completely moral, though also a last resort, in my view.

Conversely, I also completely am against the notion that the ends justify the means. The means must be consistent with the ends. I see this as the difference between what we saw in MOS, compared to what we, as I remember hearing it (how's that for reliable accuracy, lol) saw in the comics, where it was more of a, 'because you'll never stop/you killed so many already, this is "justice"' kind of thing.