Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Man of Steel' started by TheFlamingCoco, Jun 15, 2013.
So Superman can avoid his decision.
Superman walks towards Zod
Superman: it's over Zod
Zod: it's not over Kal, I have one more weapon up my sleeve
Superman readies himself
Zod stands tall drops his armour, clicks his fingers
Suddenly from the rubble emerges Prince, he starts to sing Batdance whuch only confuses Superman but then he looks at Zod who entranced us busting out dance move after dance move. Superman knows he's defeated as the one thing neither if his parents taught him was how to dance. He falls to his knees as the film ends with Zod bogging on down
Sorry I couldn't resist
Superman pushes the scout ship into the Black Zero and both ships get caught in the singularity. But that's too easy.
Zod doesn't die and Superman never has a defining moment of realization that he cannot kill. Thus he ends up killing Lex Luthor in the sequel and we never see Lex return.
Maybe do what Justice Lord Superman did to Doomsday?
We know he can cauterize veins with his heat vision so maybe he can focus a beam straight through Zod's skull.
He'd be a vegetable for the rest of his life but hed be alive.
I remember when I had to kill a dude in order to learn killing is wrong. I'm so glad I killed that guy, because having done that I now know I don't want to kill any more people. If I never killed that guy, then I would still think killing is okay and feel like killing someone. How else could i ever have learned that Killing is wrong and i don't want to do it? What an important lessons killing that guy was. A real defining moment in my life.
Oh do you also protect the world from super villains?
That sounds worse than death, TBH.
Change nothing. Killing can be wrong but in Superman's case it's not.
Oh, I see, so regular people don't need to kill someone in order to realize its not for them, but superheroes do. See, I would like to think superheroes would have a higher understanding and standard of morality than regular people, seeing as their occupation is that of a HERO. And I would like to think someone who fancies themselves a hero would be capable enough to live up to that higher moral standard.
It's not a matter of whether or not the killing was right or wrong, it's a matter of whether or not its right or wrong for the superman character.
You must just despise police officers and soldiers who take a life in the line of duty. You probably hate them as much as they hate themselves, right?
"Yeah! You DESERVE your post traumatic stress you piece of ****! Defending our country my ass, you are an evil son of a *****! Commit suicide already, you ugly, ugly human being."
You have to change much of what came before in order to fix that scene.
Yer talking about the real world. I'm talking about upholding the merits and ideals that have come to define a comic book character who is supposed to inspire us to strive to be better than what we are in hope that one day we can have a human race that doesn't need to resort to violence and killing in order to solve our problems.
It's wrong for Superman to be IN that situation in which not killing isn't an option. BUT it's not morally wrong for him to kill one Kryptonian to save the lives of many people.
Those men and women, who grew up in towns similar to Smallville, learned the same American morals Clark Kent did. They took those morals and decided when the time came that they would fire their weapon to protect the innocent. Many, after having done so, regret it fully. They may even choose never to fire a weapon again.
If Clark Kent is truly an ideal humans should strive to be, then shouldnt he overcome our flaws as well? Raised as a human, he would definitely have human flaws.
Keep in mind this is coming from someone who hated that Batman killed Two Face in TDK. But Bruce Wayne experienced death at the hands of misplaced power at a very young age. Before becoming Batman he had a defining moment of realization and decided never to take a life.
Clark Kent became Superman almost in response to Zod's arrival. At the very least a couple days before... He was in the process of becoming a hero. And he will very obviously never kill again.
Superman can inhabit human flaws, but this is a whole new level. The fact is that superman is so empowered he shouldn't have to resort to killing. If superman, with all of his powers, can't save the day without killing, then how can anyone who is less empowered be expected to resolve their situations without killing? See what I mean? there is no example for people to strive towards. Even though, in this very movie, superman is talked up as being an ideal example that people can strive towards. An ideal. Which means his character should be conducted as an ideal. The movie contradicts itself.
It's Goyer's fault. I mean, he writes a whole ****ing story about hope and in the end Superman becomes an assassin haha, great ending!
Movie is good, though
It does contradict itself. How can an "ideal" who is supposedly perfect continue to push himself and explore his physical/mental limits? Is an ideal human supposed to be flawless? Or is the average man perfect because of his flaws/sins and how he chooses to overcome them?
I actually appreciate the bluntness of it all. Superman realized that there really was no way to stop Zod, and he did what he had to.
It beats BB NOT saving someone who could have been taken in and arrested (hypothetically) or giving statements against gunplay before firing missles at a truck.
Superman did nothing wrong, given the circumstances. However, I think the circumstances should allow him to do things differently next time.