Never been into superman, but the reasoning, justification and desire to do what was done to the character shows they don't understand, him, the archetype or even the nature of superheroes who do kill.
Futher, they don't even understand the act of killing itself.
Idiots with mean shriveled little spirits!
Still, nice that sooner or later the man who makes such vile passing of gas will admit to it by claiming it smelt of roses.
The good guy is never supposed to be on the same level as the bad guy. That's why we have "cheats" like being kicked into the phantom zone. That way Superman doesn't have to get his hands dirty. If he starts snapping necks "if he has to," he becomes an entirely different character. Imagine the Doctor from Doctor Who getting a gun from some compartment in the console room before he leaves the Tardis. That doesn't expand his character; it shrinks it, because he's no longer relying on his intellect to get him out of trouble. He just points and shoots.
I feel like Hollywood struggles anymore with a genuinely good character and only know how to deconstruct those characters. They fundamentally misunderstand that Superman is supposed to be an icon, an ideal to strive for. Superman is who he is thanks to his adopted parents.
One of my favorite Superman stories came from Justice League Unlimited where Superman gets sent to the future and loses his powers under a red sun. The best thing about it is that it doesn’t change him one bit. Unfortunately, people have a tendency to want to tear down characters like that rather than face their own flaws.
Never been into superman, but the reasoning, justification and desire to do what was done to the character shows they don't understand, him, the archetype or even the nature of superheroes who do kill.
Futher, they don't even understand the act of killing itself.
Idiots with mean shriveled little spirits!
Still, nice that sooner or later the man who makes such vile passing of gas will admit to it by claiming it smelt of roses.
"the entire purpose of the scene was to redefine Superman" Why?
I know I'm fairly alone among our circles in overall greatly liking Man of Steel and Batman v Superman, but yeah...
At that moment...
he could've just clapped his hand over Zod's eyes.
The good guy is never supposed to be on the same level as the bad guy. That's why we have "cheats" like being kicked into the phantom zone. That way Superman doesn't have to get his hands dirty. If he starts snapping necks "if he has to," he becomes an entirely different character. Imagine the Doctor from Doctor Who getting a gun from some compartment in the console room before he leaves the Tardis. That doesn't expand his character; it shrinks it, because he's no longer relying on his intellect to get him out of trouble. He just points and shoots.
I feel like Hollywood struggles anymore with a genuinely good character and only know how to deconstruct those characters. They fundamentally misunderstand that Superman is supposed to be an icon, an ideal to strive for. Superman is who he is thanks to his adopted parents.
One of my favorite Superman stories came from Justice League Unlimited where Superman gets sent to the future and loses his powers under a red sun. The best thing about it is that it doesn’t change him one bit. Unfortunately, people have a tendency to want to tear down characters like that rather than face their own flaws.