Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Should Superman Kill?

Back in the Golden Age or in the Silver Age this might sound like blasphemy, because there is this general idea that "Superman does not kill"

Where did We got this idea from?

Superman DOES KILL and He has done it in the mainstream media as well as in the comics.

Superman killed (or it seem so he did) General Zod on the second Donner movie

He surely did not saved Non or Ursa from falling into the fortress of soltitude pits

So apparently He did executed 3 Kryptonians right in front of our face and He got away with it.

He did kill again 3 kryptonians in the pocket universe saga and this was what it actually strengthen his moral code against killing, He will not try to kill again until He faced Doomsday.

I don't want Superman to become the Punisher and kill characters left and right, but given the level of threat He might be facing, I think He should do what He must.

What do you think?

No more or less than he does right now.

Zod was like a Kryptonian Terminator: he never would've stopped. I think Kal did the right thing in this instance (good thing Kryptonians don't have excessive healing factors ... ).

It may well be that MOS Kal was so repulsed by his own action, that this may be the basis for a No-Kill philosophy for future conflicts.

His policy should be just like Captain America's - not the first club out of the bag, show respect for the law and setting an example, but if you're out of options, don't risk the lives of others and do what's necessary.

Interestingly, Cap keeps to this stance even though he's sanctioned in some form by the U.S. Government; they would back him up. And when he's not working with the Avengers he's working with SHIELD agents, who all have licenses to kill. But he doesn't judge them. Just as Superman shouldn't judge or freeze out any friend of his, who uses lethal force to save his life and the lives of others (Cough *Wonder Woman* Cough.)

Of course he should. This movie got some Superman readers upset as if he doesn't kill. Superman HAS killed before and still Is doing so. People are overacting about Man of Steel.

it became evident that Zod was not going to stop, it was predetermined because of his genes. They destroyed nearly the entire city with no end in sight. It was justified and it was whati expected Superman to do. His reaction over doing so was also superb

I think Superman should do whatever he feels is right in his own heart so long as he is ready for whatever may come afterwards.

Originally posted by -Pr-
No more or less than he does right now.



Honestly, the more and more I watch Man of Steel and think upon it, the more I appreciate the ending and Synder's reasoning behind it.

I do not agree with death penalty. i think he should not kill.

Having said that I have no problem with him killing if no other option is available to him. I don't like him or Batman being hypocrites who will put people in jail only for them to break free and keep killing and torturing innocent civilians.

Mark Waid makes some valid arguments about this, regarding the movie.

http://collider.com/man-of-steel-ending-christopher-nolan-mark-waid/

You could make a case about there not being enough of a buildup to that moment, perhaps. But I don't disagree with the end result. It's extra significant because Zod represented the last link to his people. So to me it is understandable. Doesn't mean I want to see this all the time from Superman, in future movies.

I chose Yes, only at the last resort. I don't mind, really.

I like Mark Waid a lot, too, but yeah, he has a very specific idea of who and what Superman is. Which isn't a bad thing, but writers, a lot more so than fans, should know that the characters (especially Superman) thrive on differing portrayals and origin stories. Heck, this Superman was visibly far more shaken after killing the last connection he had to his race and home world than Reeve was, who actually seemed pretty pleasant by comparison.

The anguish from Superman was evident through the whole movie. He wanted Krypton and Earth to co-exist, but Zod refused. Even though he exclaimed that "Krypton had its chance!" earlier, it was obvious that the whole fight troubled Superman, let alone its conclusion. I personally have no doubt that we'll see Superman still at odds with his actions in the sequel, especially if we see any other elements of Krypton brought in.

Waid was let the fanboy in him take over.

I like Waid, but I think he's going overboard.

I'm not saying Man of Steel was a masterpiece, or the perfect Superman movie. It wasn't. It was, however, a good Superman movie, and actually laid the groundwork for us seeing a more familiar incarnation in the sequels.

Originally posted by Rao Kal El
Should Superman Kill?

Back in the Golden Age or in the Silver Age this might sound like blasphemy, because there is this general idea that "Superman does not kill"

Where did We got this idea from?

Superman DOES KILL and He has done it in the mainstream media as well as in the comics.

Superman killed (or it seem so he did) General Zod on the second Donner movie

He surely did not saved Non or Ursa from falling into the fortress of soltitude pits

So apparently He did executed 3 Kryptonians right in front of our face and He got away with it.

He did kill again 3 kryptonians in the pocket universe saga and this was what it actually strengthen his moral code against killing, He will not try to kill again until He faced Doomsday.

I don't want Superman to become the Punisher and kill characters left and right, but given the level of threat He might be facing, I think He should do what He must.

What do you think?

well, superman killed quite a bit back in the golden age. they never showed gore or explicitly stated it, but you have to assume he did kill when golden age supes flung a gangster into the horizon that he (gangster) was probably dead.

silver age supes didn't kill but sometimes left folks in situations where they were better off dead.

i don't understand what the big deal is, supes has killed at least 2 times post crisis.

Originally posted by roughrider
Mark Waid makes some valid arguments about this, regarding the movie.

http://collider.com/man-of-steel-ending-christopher-nolan-mark-waid/

You could make a case about there not being enough of a buildup to that moment, perhaps. But I don't disagree with the end result. It's extra significant because Zod represented the last link to his people. So to me it is understandable. Doesn't mean I want to see this all the time from Superman, in future movies.

The problem is is that Waid didn't make a valid argument. I mean really, what else was supes going to do with zod within the context of that movie? the movie demonstrated the level of destruction and death that would occur if they just kept fighting.

Mark Waid was one of my favorite writers.

Still is.



He's wrong on this particular point, though.


Zod had gone murderously insane; in the scenario the movie writers gave us, there WAS no viable alternative for Clark. He did what he had to.

I don't think he should. I think you don't put Superman in that situation. Was too cold for Superman.

Actually in the Golden Age he killed people like every issue. He was practically the Punisher with superpowers.

I don't think he should but in the situation in MoS he had no other real option imo

Originally posted by Endless Mike
Actually in the Golden Age he killed people like every issue. He was practically the Punisher with superpowers. Do you believe that's the essential spirit of what you view as Superman's character ?

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/28/superman-stone-cold-killa


The article covers this topic.

Too many people haven't paid attention to Superman since Chris Reeve was around, it seems.

**** sake.

Originally posted by roughrider
His policy should be just like Captain America's - not the first club out of the bag, show respect for the law and setting an example, but if you're out of options, don't risk the lives of others and do what's necessary.

Interestingly, Cap keeps to this stance even though he's sanctioned in some form by the U.S. Government; they would back him up. And when he's not working with the Avengers he's working with SHIELD agents, who all have licenses to kill. But he doesn't judge them. Just as Superman shouldn't judge or freeze out any friend of his, who uses lethal force to save his life and the lives of others (Cough *Wonder Woman* Cough.)

You just reminded me Cap in his own movie was going around shooting people. I don't remember a big outcry over that, unless I completely missed it.

There was none. Cap was a soldier in WW2. Him not shooting anyone would have been out of place, tbh.

Superman or any MAN for that matter should kill and completely justified if it is in order to protect his family and loved ones.

This is what WE DO and I won't hold him on a higher standard than myself as I will do the same if in the same situation.

And kudos to those guys mentioning the golden era and silver age situations in which He killed.

If Superman does not kill then I will boycott

seriously though Kal had no choice but to kill Zod, not saying he will kill again in Man of Steel 2 or in Justice League but I have to believe that if given similar circumstances he will kill...


also Superman killing is the antithesis of Batman not killing

zod had it coming, really.. he was blood-lusted and bat-sh!t crazy at that point.. what was kal-el supposed to do? cover his eyes? fly him off to space? bring him to a desert? then what? zod was never gonna stop anyway.. superman's hand was pushed, he did what he had to and it was justified.. JUSTIFIED..

Can Superman Kill yeah but I do agree due to the nature of the character it should always be a last choice and high impact moment.

Something I think MoS portrayed quite well myself.

Originally posted by Rao Kal El
Superman or any MAN for that matter should kill and completely justified if it is in order to protect his family and loved ones.

This is what WE DO and I won't hold him on a higher standard than myself as I will do the same if in the same situation.

And kudos to those guys mentioning the golden era and silver age situations in which He killed. Superman shouldn't be placed in this situation IMO.

He shouldn't kill unless he has to and there's no other choice.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Superman shouldn't be placed in this situation IMO.

And that's why he's so bland and a hypocrite most of the times. Most writers takes the safe route with Kal instead of pushing his limits.

Don't get me wrong now, Superman is my all time favorite superhero, but most writers can't write him for shit, and 90% of the time he comes off as an hypocrite.

Best example, Superman killed Doomsday because there was no other way to stop him, trapped Darkseid in the Source Wall because there was no other way, yet he has the balls to question Diana and be mad at her after what Lord did to him and Sacrifice.

Most writers ***** and say Kal shouldn't kill, it's like they never picked an original or Golden Age book Superman.

Superman killing should be a last line of defense after he's exhausted all other possibilities. So no i don't Superman killing would be a bad thing. Now if he goes Punisher on out ass in every book, then there's a problem.

To be fair, I don't think those situations are necessarily the same thing.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Do you believe that's the essential spirit of what you view as Superman's character ?

No but that's the way he used to be.

It's hilarious how so many people are hung up on Supes killing a megalomaniacal genocidal warlord who was pretty much dedicated to wiping the entire population of Earth from existence from a perceived slight against him.

But are also mad about the death toll, when there wouldn't have been anyone left to even make a death toll if he'd lost.

It was an unwinnable situation, but he made the right choice.

Haters be damned.

Originally posted by KingD19
It's hilarious how so many people are hung up on Supes killing a megalomaniacal genocidal warlord who was pretty much dedicated to wiping the entire population of Earth from existence from a perceived slight against him.

But are also mad about the death toll, when there wouldn't have been anyone left to even make a death toll if he'd lost.

It was an unwinnable situation, but he made the right choice.

Haters be damned.

second best post in here ..

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
If Superman does not kill then I will boycott

seriously though Kal had no choice but to kill Zod, not saying he will kill again in Man of Steel 2 or in Justice League but I have to believe that if given similar circumstances he will kill...


also Superman killing is the antithesis of Batman not killing

best post in here..

Originally posted by Zack Fair
I do not agree with death penalty. i think he should not kill.

Having said that I have no problem with him killing if no other option is available to him. I don't like him or Batman being hypocrites who will put people in jail only for them to break free and keep killing and torturing innocent civilians.

Ok let me get this straight:

You don't agree with death penalty...
No problem killing if no other option...
Bats and Sups are hypocrites for having criminals thrown in jail...

so instead of death penalty, well let them sit in jail at tax payers expense forever or let them out to kill again?

Kill if no other option....but you just stated that you were against death penalty (oxymoron).

Bats and Sups are Hypocrits for throwing killers in jail.....well you dont want them dead so what else are you going to do with them Sir? let them run a daycare center? you must be a Republican.

Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
Ok let me get this straight:

You don't agree with death penalty...
No problem killing if no other option...
Bats and Sups are hypocrites for having criminals thrown in jail...

so instead of death penalty, well let them sit in jail at tax payers expense forever or let them out to kill again?

Kill if no other option....but you just stated that you were against death penalty (oxymoron).

Bats and Sups are Hypocrits for throwing killers in jail.....well you dont want them dead so what else are you going to do with them Sir? let them run a daycare center? you must be a Republican.

I'm going to take a guess that him not agreeing with the death penalty is separate from having to kill in self-defense or the defense of others if you're in that type of situation.

And republicans tend to be for the death penalty. But looking at who posted this, I'm not surprised.

This thread is (good way/bad way) hilarious.
For all intents Supes is in law enforcement. Would you expect to read a story where a policeman has a moral code code against killing? A believable one anyway?
Supes' powers dont give him an automatic no kill clause. He has to decide whats best in each situation.