ratetankmark
Samurai Cop
Equalist Lex Luthor
RIP Rik Mayall, you blimmen genius - Ria Vandervis on Rik Mayall
Posts: 2,426
|
Post by ratetankmark on Nov 9, 2013 15:46:45 GMT -5
"You Can't Murder People And Call Yourselves Heroes" -Superman vs. The Elite This is one of the many reasons why I think Superman is one of the worst heroes ever, because other people have murdered people and called themselves heroes and I can't fathom why Superman wants to keep people like Atomic Skull alive, if they come back and kill innocents, people like Atomic Skull and The Joker (who I think is f***ing amazing) should realistically be killed and yet Superman and Batman have a problem with that.
Outdated or what?
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 9, 2013 15:52:57 GMT -5
His issue wasn't so much with the death as it was the Elite acting as executioners and setting themselves up as the authority (no pun intended) for the world.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,395
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Nov 9, 2013 15:54:16 GMT -5
Batman's a slightly different case, with all his issues, it's more if he killed one, he thinks he'd go on a rampage and become a killing machine. Considering how dark he can get, and how good he is at planning.... That's a very real possibility.
|
|
|
Post by Instant Classic on Nov 9, 2013 15:54:54 GMT -5
That's how Goku and Gohan are, but then the villain pushes them too far.
|
|
ratetankmark
Samurai Cop
Equalist Lex Luthor
RIP Rik Mayall, you blimmen genius - Ria Vandervis on Rik Mayall
Posts: 2,426
|
Post by ratetankmark on Nov 9, 2013 15:56:42 GMT -5
His issue wasn't so much with the death as it was the Elite acting as executioners and setting themselves up as the authority (no pun intended) for the world. I understand that viewpoint, but in my opinion The Elite never killed anyone without a reason, Atomic Skull was killing innocents, they offed Atomic Skull to stop him killing civilians, this is how I personally saw it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 9, 2013 15:59:35 GMT -5
The Skull yeah, but they were setting themselves up as the ultimate arbiters of morality and justice. That's a scary prospect.
|
|
|
Post by Kayfabe FAN don't want none on Nov 9, 2013 16:03:31 GMT -5
|
|
Yami Daimao
Patti Mayonnaise
Really, really wants to zigazig ah!
Posts: 31,784
|
Post by Yami Daimao on Nov 9, 2013 16:06:02 GMT -5
That's how Goku and Gohan are, but then the villain pushes them too far. And that's why I've always preferred Goku over Superman. They both have the same moral code, but at least Goku was sensible enough to know that there are some people you just can't get through to, and you have to take their life in order to protect others. Of course, that was always the very last resort. Although despite both Superman and Batman's "I shall never kill" code, it was always cool to see their alternatives. Taking Superman vs. The Elite as an example {Spoiler}{Spoiler}Superman straight up lobotomizes Manchester Black.
|
|
Lupin the Third
Patti Mayonnaise
I'm sorry.....I love you. *boot to the head*--3rd most culpable in the jixing of NXT, D'oh!
Join the Dark Order....
Posts: 36,393
|
Post by Lupin the Third on Nov 9, 2013 16:16:25 GMT -5
That's just him being a dick.
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 9, 2013 16:23:58 GMT -5
No, nope. Couldn't disagree more. Superman has the power to subdue some of the most powerful villains out there without having to take their lives, so if he prefers that method, who is anyone to disparage him for that?
And I'm not knocking superheroes that kill or are willing to kill, that can also work if they're written well enough. But how can anyone not admire Superman striving to set the best example he sees fit? Even if he falls short of it, he'll at least regret it and try to do better next time (which is one of the reasons why I didn't mind Man Of Steel, but that's another topic).
Besides, the superhero genre's been overridden by grim and grit for so long that I'd say Superman deserves a lot more appreciation than he gets for bucking trends.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2013 16:24:55 GMT -5
That's just him being a dick. You do realize that Superdick has caused lots of tragedies over the decades and has provided a healthy balance to the patriotic, honest, moral Superman.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2013 16:26:22 GMT -5
No, nope. Couldn't disagree more. Superman has the power to subdue some of the most powerful villains out there without having to take their lives, so if he prefers that method, who is anyone to disparage him for that? And I'm not knocking superheroes that kill or are willing to kill, that can also work if they're written well enough. But how can anyone not admire Superman striving to set the best example he sees fit? Even if he falls short of it, he'll at least regret it and try to do better next time (which is one of the reasons why I didn't mind Man Of Steel, but that's another topic). Besides, the superhero genre's been overridden by grim and grit for so long that I'd say Superman deserves a lot more appreciation than he gets for bucking trends. I actually like the idea of people who decide against killing their opponents, especially those that are "nuisance-threat" at worst. You only should take drastic measures against the truly wicked. We still have to deal with the backlash of the late 1980s-mid 1990s, where it seemed like bloodbaths and angsty anti-heroes were the vogue.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Nov 9, 2013 17:04:30 GMT -5
That's actually what I like most about the character.
He's not just some dude running around trying to solve all the world's problems, he's a symbol for what humanity should aspire to be, someone for people to look up to and set an example by. He's supposed to be an avatar of hope, in the good of people and in the capacity of man to be better. If he was to murder villains ala Punisher, then you really lose that ability to be a symbol. He's not meant to be judge, jury, and executioner. He's meant to take people in and let humanity decide it's own path, hoping that he has inspired them to be better. If anything, the criticism should be on the Metropolis legal system (and DC writing, because they're afraid of change and don't ever want to balance out the badguys by having villains reform long-term).
And it's not like he's never found himself willing to cross that line. Look at Doomsday, he wasn't exactly holding back in that fight. But they've written multiple times what would happen if superheroes (including Superman on some occasions) did cross that line more often, and every time it basically proves the old adage that absolute power corrupts. You simply can't give all that power to the people that, well, have all that power.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Nov 9, 2013 17:35:58 GMT -5
Superheroes that won't kill make life more difficult for the citizens of their cities. By now, I doubt anyone would have a problem with Batman killing the Joker. He's a major threat constantly and the longer he's kept alive, the more people will die. Better to end it all once and for all.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Nov 9, 2013 17:37:43 GMT -5
Superheroes that won't kill make life more difficult for the citizens of their cities. By now, I doubt anyone would have a problem with Batman killing the Joker. He's a major threat constantly and the longer he's kept alive, the more people will die. Better to end it all once and for all. Maybe the citizens of the city should step up and do it then? They have the power to elect people in and write laws in favor of harsher punishments, it shouldn't all fall on one person to find, subdue, judge, and execute that person.
|
|
Phosphor Glow
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Is a real girl!
Posts: 19,883
|
Post by Phosphor Glow on Nov 9, 2013 17:44:36 GMT -5
That's actually what I like most about the character. He's not just some dude running around trying to solve all the world's problems, he's a symbol for what humanity should aspire to be, someone for people to look up to and set an example by. He's supposed to be an avatar of hope, in the good of people and in the capacity of man to be better. If he was to murder villains ala Punisher, then you really lose that ability to be a symbol. He's not meant to be judge, jury, and executioner. He's meant to take people in and let humanity decide it's own path, hoping that he has inspired them to be better. If anything, the criticism should be on the Metropolis legal system (and DC writing, because they're afraid of change and don't ever want to balance out the badguys by having villains reform long-term). And it's not like he's never found himself willing to cross that line. Look at Doomsday, he wasn't exactly holding back in that fight. But they've written multiple times what would happen if superheroes (including Superman on some occasions) did cross that line more often, and every time it basically proves the old adage that absolute power corrupts. You simply can't give all that power to the people that, well, have all that power. Thank you. You explained that far more eloquently than I could've hoped to. This is one of the many reasons Supes is awesome.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Nov 9, 2013 17:48:42 GMT -5
That's actually what I like most about the character. He's not just some dude running around trying to solve all the world's problems, he's a symbol for what humanity should aspire to be, someone for people to look up to and set an example by. He's supposed to be an avatar of hope, in the good of people and in the capacity of man to be better. If he was to murder villains ala Punisher, then you really lose that ability to be a symbol. He's not meant to be judge, jury, and executioner. He's meant to take people in and let humanity decide it's own path, hoping that he has inspired them to be better. If anything, the criticism should be on the Metropolis legal system (and DC writing, because they're afraid of change and don't ever want to balance out the badguys by having villains reform long-term). And it's not like he's never found himself willing to cross that line. Look at Doomsday, he wasn't exactly holding back in that fight. But they've written multiple times what would happen if superheroes (including Superman on some occasions) did cross that line more often, and every time it basically proves the old adage that absolute power corrupts. You simply can't give all that power to the people that, well, have all that power. A hundred percent correct. Again, it's not that Superman won't kill; he has, it's that he only does so as a last resort, AND is primarily against anyone, himself included, setting themselves above the humanity they're supposed to be serving.
|
|
Goldenbane
Hank Scorpio
THE G.D. Goldenbane
Posts: 7,331
|
Post by Goldenbane on Nov 9, 2013 19:23:57 GMT -5
That's actually what I like most about the character. He's not just some dude running around trying to solve all the world's problems, he's a symbol for what humanity should aspire to be, someone for people to look up to and set an example by. He's supposed to be an avatar of hope, in the good of people and in the capacity of man to be better. If he was to murder villains ala Punisher, then you really lose that ability to be a symbol. He's not meant to be judge, jury, and executioner. He's meant to take people in and let humanity decide it's own path, hoping that he has inspired them to be better. If anything, the criticism should be on the Metropolis legal system (and DC writing, because they're afraid of change and don't ever want to balance out the badguys by having villains reform long-term). And it's not like he's never found himself willing to cross that line. Look at Doomsday, he wasn't exactly holding back in that fight. But they've written multiple times what would happen if superheroes (including Superman on some occasions) did cross that line more often, and every time it basically proves the old adage that absolute power corrupts. You simply can't give all that power to the people that, well, have all that power. You bring up a point that I've been thinking about for a long time. How come DC never does any good stories with places like Arkham Asylum? We have hundreds, if not thousands of stories showing how Arkham fails time and time again to rehabilitate anyone. So much so, that Arkham is pretty much a joke to comic books fans, often referred to as a "revolving door" and all sorts of other stuff. Just once, I'd like to see a Batman story done from the point of view of a serial killer in Arkham Asylum. The twist being, the serial killer has actually responded to the various doctors' treatments and sees how ugly, evil, and horrible he'd been in his life. The story could of course have an uprising of the various crazies in the asylum, and Batman and Robin coming to stop it...and we see the former killer trying to keep the doctors safe (because he honestly likes them), hide his "cured condition" from monsters like the Joker who can seem to sense that sort of thing when it comes to people being sane or insane, and trying to help Batman and Robin without getting his own face kicked in by them. I'd love to see such a story end on a high note. The bad guys are put back down, the former killer earns the respect of Batman, Robin, and the doctors of Arkham, as well as a new sense of hope and redemption for himself. As for Superman, I have to say that I like that he doesn't kill. I like guys like the Punisher too, don't get me wrong, but Superman is so powerful, intelligent, and good that he doesn't have to kill to defeat the bad guys. If there's any problems with Superman, it's that there's too much money in recurring bad guys, and DC (and Marvel as well) keep bringing evil characters back to try and draw in more dollars...especially if the villain connected with the fans. Because of dollars, villains aren't given a chance to redeem or rot in their cells forever. Common criminals, like the guy I spoke of above, aren't really given a chance by writers to be interesting and inevitably they fall back into the tired old cliche of going back to their evil ways. Personally I think villains should be reduced in their pure evilness. A lot of these guys just want money and are happy to take it from the weak and keep it for themselves. That DOES NOT mean they should automatically have a desire to kill and rape people. One of the problems I had with the Elite, as others have said, is that they were setting themselves up as world tyrants, where anything the common man does is bad and punishment is coming their way...while the Elite could do anything and no one would punish them (not counting Superman).
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Nov 9, 2013 19:40:07 GMT -5
You bring up a point that I've been thinking about for a long time. How come DC never does any good stories with places like Arkham Asylum? We have hundreds, if not thousands of stories showing how Arkham fails time and time again to rehabilitate anyone. So much so, that Arkham is pretty much a joke to comic books fans, often referred to as a "revolving door" and all sorts of other stuff. Just once, I'd like to see a Batman story done from the point of view of a serial killer in Arkham Asylum. The twist being, the serial killer has actually responded to the various doctors' treatments and sees how ugly, evil, and horrible he'd been in his life. The story could of course have an uprising of the various crazies in the asylum, and Batman and Robin coming to stop it...and we see the former killer trying to keep the doctors safe (because he honestly likes them), hide his "cured condition" from monsters like the Joker who can seem to sense that sort of thing when it comes to people being sane or insane, and trying to help Batman and Robin without getting his own face kicked in by them. I'd love to see such a story end on a high note. The bad guys are put back down, the former killer earns the respect of Batman, Robin, and the doctors of Arkham, as well as a new sense of hope and redemption for himself. I think DC just hates changing the status quo for any length of time. I mean, you're right, they could do stories of reformed villains, but they hate taking villains away, even minor ones, for any meaningful length of time.
|
|
|
Post by EP 54 is banned from Collision on Nov 9, 2013 19:52:12 GMT -5
The inherent tragedy of Superman is that as powerful as he is, he can't save them all. Every time he has a long drawn out fight with a super villain, people are dying somewhere in the world, that he could have saved. He must be tempted to go for the quickest win possible, not matter whether the opponent dies... I think if they touched on that side of him more, and kept his powers dialed back to 'awesome, but not omnipotent' then he'd be a much more interesting character.
Batman has killed in the past, his old stories often ended with the villain dead.
|
|