Should Superman kill?

[Agent Z]

I'll go with 4 seminal superhero films which were origins

Superman 1978: While portrayed as the ultimate Boy Scout where even Lois said he was too good to be true they never established it simply because that version of Superman in that film never faced anyone where killing was needed he was vastly more powerful than everyone and never needed to kill.

Batman 1989: Established that Batman would kill from thugs to Joker.

Spider-Man (2002): Established Peter wouldn't kill not even Norman.

Batman Begins: Established that Batman didn't believe in lethal measures even thought the I don't have to save you was a cop out IMO.

Now a film can be ambivalent on this subject I mean plenty of heroes films are but not if they're having a major ending where the hero kills and it's suppose to be a big deal.

Whether or not Peter would kill Norman is never brought up in Spider-Man. In fact, some dialogue between MJ and Peter in Spider-Man 3 suggests Peter did indeed kill the robber who shot Ben.

Also, Bruce's vow not to kill is followed immediately by him burninig down a temple with numerous people inside it, including the guy he said he didn't want to kill.

MoS isn't ambivalent about it unless you think this Superman was a killer before he met Zod for some reason. Hell, it's shown that he avoided violence against other sentient beings prior to the invasion.

[Ascended]

I thought Clark killed that terrorist that held Lois hostage at the beginning.

I don't see how he would survive being flown through a wall at that speed.

That was in BvS, not MoS.

Haven't watched the movie in ages, but I dont think it says whether Clark killed him or not. As for the going through the wall thing, it'd be simple enough for Clark to go through the wall first and just pull the guy along behind him, but the real danger would be that sudden snap of inertia when Clark first grabbed the guy at super speed; that kind of thing could kill a person if Clark wasn't very, very careful.

[Ascended]

If you want me to feel that this was something out of the norm for the character it needs to be established or else it's just "Another Day at the Office".

First, thats not really how analysis like this works (according to my English Lit professors). The evidence is what we see on the screen, not what we can imagine happened off of it, and what we see on screen is Clark avoiding conflict, not killing people everywhere you turn. So yes, it was established in the narrative very firmly that this was out of Clark's norm.

Secondly, there's a gulf of different between "Spider-Man" who doesnt ever kill at all, and "Punisher" who kills everyone. Most heroes, including Clark himself (as well as Diana, Hal, Arthur, Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Carol Danvers, etc etc etc) lie between those extremes and will take a life when they feel they have to.

[Username taken]

That was in BvS, not MoS.

Haven't watched the movie in ages, but I dont think it says whether Clark killed him or not. As for the going through the wall thing, it'd be simple enough for Clark to go through the wall first and just pull the guy along behind him, but the real danger would be that sudden snap of inertia when Clark first grabbed the guy at super speed; that kind of thing could kill a person if Clark wasn't very, very careful.

Yea, I didn't complete my original sentence.

[JackDaw]

I think it’s got to point where some really good thought provoking stories could be told about consequences of one of the major heroes (not necessarily Superman) having a firm “no kill” policy.

How would it affect what actions they could or could not take in certain situations? For example...in an all out war situation...would they lose or gain respect by effectively restricting themselves to helping out medical teams, etc? Would any of public regard them as cowards? And so on..and so forth.

I’ve got to point where I’d like to see some diversity in mindset of DC’s main heroes.

[Agent Z]

I think it’s got to point where some really good thought provoking stories could be told about consequences of one of the major heroes (not necessarily Superman) having a firm “no kill” policy.

How would it affect what actions they could or could not take in certain situations? For example...in an all out war situation...would they lose or gain respect by effectively restricting themselves to helping out medical teams, etc? Would any of public regard them as cowards? And so on..and so forth.

I’ve got to point where I’d like to see some diversity in mindset of DC’s main heroes.

I mean, if you want diversity in mindset, you'd get that with more not less DC main heroes being okay with lethal force.

[DochaDocha]

"I don't have to save you" and Catwoman blowing Bane away seemed liked writers stuck in a corner. Can't say I get why people roll with those and balk at the deliberately written death of Zod.

Because it's Superman is my guess.

[stargazer01]

I'll go with 4 seminal superhero films which were origins

Superman 1978: While portrayed as the ultimate Boy Scout where even Lois said he was too good to be true they never established it simply because that version of Superman in that film never faced anyone where killing was needed he was vastly more powerful than everyone and never needed to kill.

Batman 1989: Established that Batman would kill from thugs to Joker.

Spider-Man (2002): Established Peter wouldn't kill not even Norman.

Batman Begins: Established that Batman didn't believe in lethal measures even thought the I don't have to save you was a cop out IMO.

Now a film can be ambivalent on this subject I mean plenty of heroes films are but not if they're having a major ending where the hero kills and it's suppose to be a big deal.

sorry but we are talking about Superman here. The other heroes have nothing to do with it. It seems you are implying that the Reeve Superman was no killer but Cavill Superman was just because you don't like his portrayal. I think his films really show he doesn't want to kill or hurt people, no matter how mean they can be to him. The only time he crossed the line was to save Lois Lane in Africa, but he said he didn't kill anyone. He didn't even kill Lex Luthor after he kidnapped Martha. He even saved Lex from Doomsday. He also tried his best to NOT fight Batman even when he thought he had no other choice to save his mom. It seems to me Cavill's Superman does his very best to not kill no matter how evil others can be. He only did it when he felt he had no choice.

[Jokerz79]

One Superman in MoS never faced anyone who was threat that would warrant killing them until Zod and the other Kryptonians so unless he states he has an issue with killing bad people it's not established all that was established was Clark wanted to help people.

Two nothing in BvS matters because it comes after MoS and I was talking about the events of MoS.

Three other heroes like Iron Man, Wonder Woman, and Captain America killing isn't an issue because they never try to have a "Oh my God I took a life moment" like MoS did.

[stargazer01]

One Superman in MoS never faced anyone who was threat that would warrant killing them until Zod and the other Kryptonians so unless he states he has an issue with killing bad people it's not established all that was established was Clark wanted to help people.

Two nothing in BvS matters because it comes after MoS and I was talking about the events of MoS.

Three other heroes like Iron Man, Wonder Woman, and Captain America killing isn't an issue because they never try to have a "Oh my God I took a life moment" like MoS did.

and I totally disagree with your opinion on MOS Superman. If he was remotely a killer, he would have pulverized the bully/sexual harasser at the restaurant, but he didn't. He was able to control himself because it was the right thing to do. MOS Superman seemed like a nice guy just a bit more confused about his place in the world.

[Jokerz79]

and I totally disagree with your opinion on MOS Superman. If he was remotely a killer, he would have pulverized the bully/sexual harasser at the restaurant, but he didn't. He was able to control himself because it was the right thing to do. MOS Superman seemed like a nice guy just a bit more confused about his place in the world.

If he pulverized and killed the bully/sexual harasser than he would be a monster because the guy was a creep but didn't warrant a death sentence and was no threat to him. This isn't about him being a nice guy or not again it's about a film wanting the "Oh God I killed Someone" moment without establishing he'd have an issue with killing a threat. If he walked away I'd have no issue with the scene I have no issue with him killing Zod in the film except the film trying to claim it bothered Superman.

[stargazer01]

If he pulverized and killed the bully/sexual harasser than he would be a monster because the guy was a creep but didn't warrant a death sentence and was no threat to him. This isn't about him being a nice guy or not again it's about a film wanting the "Oh God I killed Someone" moment without establishing he'd have an issue with killing a threat. If he walked away I'd have no issue with the scene I have no issue with him killing Zod in the film except the film trying to claim it bothered Superman.

I think it was firmly established that Clark cared about human life. It's why he kept saving people even when Pa Kent told him how dangerous it would be if the world found out. But Clark couldn't let those people die. It isn't necessary to say that he doesn't kill because it never even crossed his mind the possibility. He knew he had to come out when Zod threated the whole world when he first communicated. If Clark was a coward, he would have hid or something.

[Ascended]

One Superman in MoS never faced anyone who was threat that would warrant killing them until Zod and the other Kryptonians so unless he states he has an issue with killing bad people it's not established all that was established was Clark wanted to help people.

Three other heroes like Iron Man, Wonder Woman, and Captain America killing isn't an issue because they never try to have a "Oh my God I took a life moment" like MoS did.

This is a contradiction.

Clark does indeed have a "OMG I just killed someone!" reaction. That establishes that this is unusual behavior and he's not accustomed to taking a life.

[dancj]

Batman Begins: Established that Batman didn't believe in lethal measures even thought the I don't have to save you was a cop out IMO.

Agreed - Big time cop out. So much so that, choosing to not save a villain was the reason Bruce had to take the cowl back from Jean Pall in Knightsend.

The whole non-killing thing in Batman Begins was bungled from beginning to end with him burning down a building full of people and then later recklessly driving the Tumbler through sheds which may well have had innocent people in.

[Jokerz79]

I think it was firmly established that Clark cared about human life. It's why he kept saving people even when Pa Kent told him how dangerous it would be if the world found out. But Clark couldn't let those people die. It isn't necessary to say that he doesn't kill because it never even crossed his mind the possibility. He knew he had to come out when Zod threated the whole world when he first communicated. If Clark was a coward, he would have hid or something.

This isn't about him being a coward he wasn't but not wanting innocents to die is not the same as being against killing especially when the character is a vigilante which superheroes are the film.

In the episode of My Silicon Soul of Batman TAS as Hardac Android Duplicate of Batman "killed" itself when it thought it had killed the real Batman. Why? Because it was programmed to have Bruce's code of ethics which for that version of Batman was a strict no kill policy. It earned its oh my god I killed a man moment because it clearly established Bruce Wayne of that show would never kill anyone. MoS never established that version of Clark was against killing to protect others so trying to have the OMG I killed a man doesn't work. I mean they could had simply done a throw away line where Clark mentions being Vegan or something to establish he was against killing living beings even for food and I'd bought his anguish over Zod.