Originally Posted by
BatmanJones
Situations can bring out flaws. Keep in mind the impossibly difficult situation he was in. I know most Superman fans believe the killing of Zod was incredibly out of character. I hated that movie but not at all for that reason because he had to make an impossible choice to save thousands of lives, then millions or hold to his no killing rule.
I did find his failure to even try to save his adoptive father as he blew away into the sky to be infuriating but in that case it was either it was a choice to follow his fathers edict not to expose his powers or save his father’s life and I found his choice be really offensive, but not the Zod thing. In one case it was to break his father’s rules for his own benefit (that’s not Superman) or to break his own rule to save innumerable lives (to me, that was an impossible choice so either way he was Superman).
It’s just a difference of opinion. Some want their heroes to always make the heroic choice, even at the risk of their own family dying. But to me, making the more selfish choice doesn’t mean he’s no longer a hero, only that he’s human.
Heroes In Crisis is a different matter. I didn’t find the reason for the deaths to be irredeemable, but the coverup meant he absolutely wasn’t a hero anymore. So it’s funny to me that he was ‘fixed’ by the fact that he wasn’t actually responsible for the deaths when he was still responsible for the coverup and by trying to frame others. I don’t think that’s been fixed at all.
But Strange’s choice was made to save others while Wally’s was made to save himself.
Again, difference of opinion, but I want my heroes to be imperfect. Without that, the characters never change and are never ethically challenged and that just makes me feel like I’m still reading comics for children.