TMOS Review & Speculation Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
So Nolan and Goyer made sure Batman did not directly kill a villain throughout the batman trilogy, and you guys are worried about this?
I doubt the snapped neck thing is true....

Even though they presented a Batman that said that he doesn't kill, with it being his one rule, he has at least "killed" someone 2 times.lol

1. Unless the driver is very lucky, the person that he rammed into the concrete wall with his tumbler in TDK while chasing after the Joker (who was going after Dent) is likely to have died.

2. He pretty much killed the driver with bullets employed from "The Bat" in TDKR when he was chasing after Talia.
 
Whatever they do, I hope it is not a cop out like the end of BB. If Cavill's Supes is a killer, let him be proud of it like Keaton's Batman.
 
Even though they presented a Batman that said that he doesn't kill, with it being his one rule, he has at least "killed" someone 2 times.lol

1. Unless the driver is very lucky, the person that he rammed into the concrete wall with his tumbler in TDK while chasing after the Joker (who was going after Dent) is likely to have died.

2. He pretty much killed the driver with bullets employed from "The Bat" in TDKR when he was chasing after Talia.

-who also dies in the wreck as well.
That's not counting the accident with a certain someone at the very end of TDK, or the exploding deathtrap in begins (accidental), or the DELIBERATE deathtrap in begins.

For someone who talks a lot about not killing, he sure does everything BUT use his hands for the job ;)
 
If this is true... I don't think he'll do it Darth Vader-style. Maybe he has Zod in a headlock and applies more pressure than intended.
 
Even though they presented a Batman that said that he doesn't kill, with it being his one rule, he has at least "killed" someone 2 times.lol

1. Unless the driver is very lucky, the person that he rammed into the concrete wall with his tumbler in TDK while chasing after the Joker (who was going after Dent) is likely to have died.

2. He pretty much killed the driver with bullets employed from "The Bat" in TDKR when he was chasing after Talia.

Oh Batman :doh::funny:

I did say "directly" :D
 
If Superman does kill, I'd want it to be a reluctant mercy-killing. Ie, Zod's injured and killing would be the only HUMANE thing to do. But not a neck-snap. I'm thinking more in line with head trauma. And THEN Superman should feel terrible at what he had to do.
 
If Superman does kill, I'd want it to be a reluctant mercy-killing. Ie, Zod's injured and killing would be the only HUMANE thing to do. But not a neck-snap. I'm thinking more in line with head trauma. And THEN Superman should feel terrible at what he had to do.

He'd be a crappy soldier :oldrazz:
 
Superman shouldn't kill period. It's one thing if the Villain does something that ends up getting themselves killed, but Superman shouldn't directly kill any sentient villains.
 
Superman shouldn't kill period. It's one thing if the Villain does something that ends up getting themselves killed, but Superman shouldn't directly kill any sentient villains.

Not even Doomsday?? :wow:
 
It doesn't matter if it's his only option. I'm just saying killing someone would have an immense impact on him and such an action should not be treated lightly considering Superman's character. In the comics, he was seriously upset after he was forced to kill the pocket dimension Zod because he started to question his powers and how he should deal with his villains.

That's actually a pretty cool way of showing the psyche of Superman after he kills a villain. I wouldn't mind something like this at all. Let's not forget, TDKT showed that Bruce Wayne doesn't kill because he doesn't want people to witness the pain of loss that he felt as a child (as extremely idealistic as it sounds). And even then, he had to make exceptions (especially in the animated series).

Superman doesn't have that luxury of experience, it'd be nice if he kills Zod out of rage and realizes that he shouldn't have done that. It's a nice break from the whole "Superman is a boy scout" stereotype.

Also, To play the Devil's Advocate, the reason this doesn't make sense is because Zod is already blessed with superstrength. How do you kill someone that has superstrength? (and by this I mean someone that is basically unkillable).
 
Last edited:
Jor-El: You will give them an ideal to strive towards. They will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun. In time you will help them become the killing machines they were born to be.
 
It might be uncomfortable to see Supes kill. But it won't be so bad. Try to relax, close your eyes and think of England. :word:
 
Whats the big deal if Superman kills Zod?

This is almost as ridiculous as people that think Hulk doesn't kill when he rages through the city (Its been explained in the comics that he has a savant-like ability that allows him to destroy things in a fashion that prevents deaths every.single.time.....even when he is abolishing a building or tossing an 18 wheeler into traffic. Yeah, and pigs can fly). The point I'm making is that comic book morality is a bit over the top.
If Superman has to kill Zod (after repeatedly trying to stop him before) to prevent him from killing millions of people then so be it. How exactly is that a problem and how does that make superman less of a hero?
 
In another forum someone brought up the Lester version of Superman II with its pertinent climax.

Some guy says he always assumed Zod and co. survived and were taken away because that was a given in the comics in those days.

I have to giggle at that. That's denial, it's right there on the screen.
 
I'm usually above such extremes, but: anyone who is okay with superman killing, or is willing to accept excuses as to why, how, or when superman can kill, does not understand the character.
 
In another forum someone brought up the Lester version of Superman II with its pertinent climax.

Some guy says he always assumed Zod and co. survived and were taken away because that was a given in the comics in those days.

I have to giggle at that. That's denial, it's right there on the screen.
I believe there's a deleted scene of Zod and crew in handcuffs being led away.

As for those asking why it's a big deal for Superman to kill, I direct your attention here: http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=374989&highlight=should+superman+kill

Where did this rumor even start?
 
I'm usually above such extremes, but: anyone who is okay with superman killing, or is willing to accept excuses as to why, how, or when superman can kill, does not understand the character.

It's not like it's NEVER happened in the comics. Ergo, that doesn't mean the character is misunderstood by the masses who support his killing.

15-killer-superheroes01.jpg
 
Yes it was a deleted scene. So how else will audiences interpret what's in front of them?
 
In another forum someone brought up the Lester version of Superman II with its pertinent climax.

Some guy says he always assumed Zod and co. survived and were taken away because that was a given in the comics in those days.

I have to giggle at that. That's denial, it's right there on the screen.
There is a version of Superman II that aired somewhere overseas where the de-powered Kryptonians were arrested by the Arctic Police.
ric21.jpg
 
It's not like it's NEVER happened in the comics. Ergo, that doesn't mean the character is misunderstood by the masses who support his killing.

15-killer-superheroes01.jpg

Yes, it happened once in the comics (and was retconned). The writer was wrong for writing it, and DC was wrong for printing it. In the 75 years of superman being published, mistakes will be made, it's unavoidable. And with the superman character, this was one of their biggest mistakes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,265
Messages
22,075,957
Members
45,876
Latest member
Pducklila
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"