The Man of Steel.
- Thread starter Espy
- Start date
- Status
I'm doing this all from memory, so I could be wrong, but I think it was Hank Henshaw (Cyborg Superman) that chunked Doomsday into space. Superman had every intention of killing Doomsday, because he had fought him all across the world the united states and realized this was the only option to stop the destruction. I'm also willing to bet it was better done than whatever Zach Snyder does in this movie.
I'm not claiming that Man of Steel is a good movie. I haven't seen it yet, but it sounds like a dumb action movie, which can be enjoyable so long as you view it for what it is. I was responding to the notion that no interpretation of Superman has ever killed before.
I'm not claiming that Man of Steel is a good movie. I haven't seen it yet, but it sounds like a dumb action movie, which can be enjoyable so long as you view it for what it is. I was responding to the notion that no interpretation of Superman has ever killed before.
Correct, I was wrong about the Doomsday vs Superman topic.
That's called neededtimeforanotherdraftosaurus.
Movie had some severe ADHD for sure.
figmentPez
Staff member
That wasn't Superman. That was Hank Henshaw, the Cyborg.
What Superman did to Doomsday is found in the series Superman/Doomsday - Hunter/Prey, in which Superman hunts down Doomsday across the galaxy, enlists Darkseid's help to do so, equips himself with a high tech gun and sword, proceeds to use both, plus his heat vision at full strength, and finally, kills Doomsday by letting a Mother Box decide where to send both of them using a Linear Man time travel device, and leaving Doomsday at the very end of time to be ripped apart by the forces there. (From which Doomsday was rescued by Brainiac after Superboy Prime reset time, or something like that.)
Superman was freaking brutal in his assault on Doomsday in that series. He repeatedly says "one way or another, this has to stop". He kills Doomsday, after learning that Doomsday is capable of speech, saying that he doesn't know how intelligent Doomsday is, and learning that Doomsday was made on Krypton and that's why he fought Superman so fiercely on Earth.
Oh, and let's not forget what Superman did to Hank Henshaw at the end of the Return of Superman story arc. Superman was just repowered after dying, and Hank Henshaw was weakened due to expose to Kryptonite. Superman stuck his fist through Henshaw's chest and vibrated his arm so that he exploded into thousands of pieces. Afterwards Green Lantern scans the room and can't find any signs of Henshaw's consciousness, and Superman says he thinks Henshaw couldn't switch bodies because he was weakened by the green K. (The only reason Henshaw survived is that he had put a copy of himself on Doomsday before sending him off on the aforementioned asteroid.)
Let me repeat that: Superman tried to kill Hank Henshaw, and would have succeeded if Henshaw hadn't made a backup copy of himself. A copy that Superman did not know about. For all intents and purposes, Superman killed an opponent who was weakened to the point that he could no longer fight, and Superman had just been restored to full power. Green Lantern and Steel were both on hand to consult on how to contain Henshaw, and Superman killed him.
You mean the Green Lantern that was just about to go insane and slaughter the Green Lantern corps?
Nobody saw that coming!
I actually loved the Emerald Twilight storyline, and still wish that they had left Kyle Raynor as the Green Lantern.
figmentPez - again, for the third time in this thread, I was wrong about the Doomsday issue.
I want someone to write an Elseworld series where all the deaths and cripplings that DC did in the 90s were't reversed. Batman remains broken and becomes basically the Bruce Wayne from Batman Beyond. Superman stays dead, with Superboy taking up his legacy. Kyle Raynor and Wally West retain their roles as GL and Flash. Speaking of which, I HATED that they brought back Barry Allen to replace Wally West.
I also love that it's cannon in the DCAU that Flash from JLU is, in fact, Wally West.
I also love that it's cannon in the DCAU that Flash from JLU is, in fact, Wally West.
figmentPez
Staff member
I want Wally West back so that he can sing Thrift Shop at Bart Allen. "I wear your grandpa's clothes, I look incredible..."
That would have been great. Seriously.
figmentPez
Staff member
Sigh.
I wanted to use the "world of cardboard" speech to counterpoint this movie, but then...
Superman proceeds to punch Darkseid through half the skyscrapers in downtown Metropolis.
I think they mentioned that the city had been mostly evacuated. I think. Could be wrong.
Just got back from watching it with the fiancé. Both of us thought it was fantastic, with the exception that there seemed to be very little romantic (though plenty of platonic/buddy) chemistry between Superman and Lois.
In particular, I really enjoyed the opening being the final day of Krypton. While I felt there wasn't a very heavy emphasis on the relationship with his mother, and that they could have done a bit more with the "two parents, two worlds" thing, I thought they did the relationship between Clark and Pa Kent phenomenally. Both of us were in tears when Pa allowed himself to die so that Clark wouldn't have to show his abilities.
Neither of us had any problem with Superman killing Zod. Him holding himself to a higher standard and being vehemently opposed to killing is one thing, but even more people were going to die if he didn't do anything. Zod explicitly said he wasn't going to stop until one of them was dead, and the only thing that seemed to nullify their powers was the Kryptonian atmosphere (the ability to recreate it was lost in the explosions). He seemed to be in genuine pain when he did that, so I thought it was in keeping with the spirit of the character.
Neither of us had any problem with Superman killing Zod. Him holding himself to a higher standard and being vehemently opposed to killing is one thing, but even more people were going to die if he didn't do anything. Zod explicitly said he wasn't going to stop until one of them was dead, and the only thing that seemed to nullify their powers was the Kryptonian atmosphere (the ability to recreate it was lost in the explosions). He seemed to be in genuine pain when he did that, so I thought it was in keeping with the spirit of the character.
Regarding Superman's anguish after killing Zod, I thought they also could've handled that better.
Throughout the movie, it's made clear that Pa Kent's overall message to Clark isn't "Do good and preserve the sanctity of life above all else," it's "Don't reveal your powers too soon, because you'll be feared and hated." It doesn't look like Clark's ever really taught to preserve life. For example, that scene where young Clark's surrounded by bullies after they knock him down. Afterwards, Clark admits he wanted to hit them, and Jonathan said, "Yes, and part of me wanted you to too, but think of what would happen afterwards." Shouldn't Pa Kent be saying something more like, "Dude, you'd be able to knock the guy's head into the next state, and that's a VERY BAD THING."
Additionally, there's Superman's willingness to risk or outright kill bystanders during a fight. Overall, the movie does not really show Superman respecting the sanctity of life.
So, when Superman kills Zod and falls to his knees screaming in anguish, it seems like a non sequitur out of left field. I actually felt more like he was upset that he'd lost the last remaining Kryptonian other than him, rather than him being devastated that he took a life.
Throughout the movie, it's made clear that Pa Kent's overall message to Clark isn't "Do good and preserve the sanctity of life above all else," it's "Don't reveal your powers too soon, because you'll be feared and hated." It doesn't look like Clark's ever really taught to preserve life. For example, that scene where young Clark's surrounded by bullies after they knock him down. Afterwards, Clark admits he wanted to hit them, and Jonathan said, "Yes, and part of me wanted you to too, but think of what would happen afterwards." Shouldn't Pa Kent be saying something more like, "Dude, you'd be able to knock the guy's head into the next state, and that's a VERY BAD THING."
Additionally, there's Superman's willingness to risk or outright kill bystanders during a fight. Overall, the movie does not really show Superman respecting the sanctity of life.
So, when Superman kills Zod and falls to his knees screaming in anguish, it seems like a non sequitur out of left field. I actually felt more like he was upset that he'd lost the last remaining Kryptonian other than him, rather than him being devastated that he took a life.
I think that being taught to preserve life, though, is fairly implicit in his upbringing (just like most peoples'). I'm not arguing that there was a heavy emphasis on the sanctity of life in Pa Kent's teachings, just that the main rub a lot of people seem to be crying foul on--Superman killing Zod--is in line with the general interpretation of the character. I don't think an explicit emphasis on "not hurting people" was necessary because it's fairly obvious that he could seriously harm anybody he chose to. Both he and Clark know that (and it's fairly obvious to the viewers), so I think instead the emphasis was placed on the father protecting his son by having him restrain his powers. I do agree with the lack of concern for civilian life in Smallville. In Metropolis, though, I don't think there was much of a choice (although I feel another nitpick was the action sequences went on for a little too long. I felt like they had to have destroyed every building in the city by the end of it.
I'll see it when it goes to budget theaters, just because I do love Superman... I'm not expecting a whole lot, but it is a Snyder movie, so at least it'll be exciting.
I'll have to see it alone, though... The wife hates Superman with a passion And I don't have any movie buddies out here yet.
I'll have to see it alone, though... The wife hates Superman with a passion
And I don't have any movie buddies out here yet.About Superman killing Zod... I'll wait to see how it's played before I make any more judgments. My idea of Superman is that he will do everything in his power to avoid the situation; but in the end, no matter how much it breaks his heart, he'll do what's best for the people of Earth. If there's an enemy that he can't restrain, that he can't reason with, that has made it their mission to hurt him by killing as many people as possible... He would do what's necessary to keep the people safe, despite the stain on his soul. That being said, he'll never stop trying to uphold the ideal of peace, no matter how much the world tries to break him.
I have to say that, despite the smattering of vitriol, I love these threads. I love to see how fans and those unfamiliar with the source material respond to these things.
Also, I'll look up some of those stories. For the most part I really don't get into most superhero stuff, but you guys have directed me to some things I've enjoyed before.
Also, I'll look up some of those stories. For the most part I really don't get into most superhero stuff, but you guys have directed me to some things I've enjoyed before.
For some reason, all this talk reminded me of this...
They are everything that was wrong with comics in the '90s.
So keep in mind, I probably own more Superman comics than most people here. I'm sure Nick has me beat but I'm a giant DC nerd (although in the last 5-6 years I've grown weary of the great cycle of comics and kind of moved on from collecting most of them).
I loved it. I have no problem with anything that happened in this movie. A) It's a veryrealistic real-ish or "good film" take on Superman and I don't think it's overly gritty. It was hopeful. It showed the anguish of having only bad choices in front of you. I feel like it absolutely kept with the basic idea of Superman while creating a good palette to work from in future movies.
Now you can argue I'm not so attached to the character as some might be, and thats probably true. I really don't mind even my childhood heroes being changed/updated/modified to fit a good story as long as the fundamentals are there and I fell Snyder and Nolan did that. I do understand why some don't care for it. I didn't care for the Hellboy/Liz angle of Del Toro's Hellboy movies. But, eh, thats life. Del Toro didn't ask my opinion nor did he care. It was his story to tell and he did a great job so I can overlook something that wasn't my preference, but I get that some cannot.
Anyway, it was pretty fantastic, maybe 15-20 minutes to long and the couple jokes towards the end were kind of flat. Thats my biggest issues. Cavill was fantastic and so was, well, everyone. Bravo guys. This is the Superman film I've been waiting for since Superman 2.
I loved it. I have no problem with anything that happened in this movie. A) It's a very
Now you can argue I'm not so attached to the character as some might be, and thats probably true. I really don't mind even my childhood heroes being changed/updated/modified to fit a good story as long as the fundamentals are there and I fell Snyder and Nolan did that. I do understand why some don't care for it. I didn't care for the Hellboy/Liz angle of Del Toro's Hellboy movies. But, eh, thats life. Del Toro didn't ask my opinion nor did he care. It was his story to tell and he did a great job so I can overlook something that wasn't my preference, but I get that some cannot.
Anyway, it was pretty fantastic, maybe 15-20 minutes to long and the couple jokes towards the end were kind of flat. Thats my biggest issues. Cavill was fantastic and so was, well, everyone. Bravo guys. This is the Superman film I've been waiting for since Superman 2.
- Status