Superman V.S The Elite

[FaxModem1]

One of the key things to Superman's characterization is that unlike Batman, Superman isn't his identity, it's his way of solving his conscience, because he was raised to believe that if you're in power to help fix something or help someone, you should do it. So he does so, then goes back to his life. And that's the thing, writing as a reporter is his life. Clark, which is who he really is, enjoys writing, enjoys flirting with Lois, competing with her on scoops, hanging out with Jimmy, etc. Superman is just who he is so that he can live with himself, and he wonders if he's doing too much or too little. He doesn't want to be king, he just wants to do his part, which is a bit more than others, but he still does his part.

The big crux that a lot of these kinds of stories are asking is, "Can you just take care of us, and give up any sort of life of your own? Because we don't want to make decisions for ourselves. We want you to do it for us."

The one thing he could do, that this story doesn't go into, is bring Kryptonian technology into our life to improve the quality of life of everyone. Though people will still be people. And we do see him doing that, trying to use it to cure cancer and other things, with him either not being able to do it, or the tech bringing out worse problems as a cure. But it does show that he IS trying.

[iwfan53]

The constitution with that very much allows executions and has the second amendment

Executions that are preformed by the government, not by some random citizen regardless of if they have superpowers or not, which was an entire point that Chuck brought up in the review for why if supervillians keep escaping and wrecking havoc/killing people it is a problem of the society that refuses to execute them or find a way to keep them securely in prison rather than the heroes who keep catching them...

[Madner Kami]

Great review. Strangely topical, considering a certain thread where a certain someone advocates for vigilantism and mob rule. Too bad, that he seems occupied otherwise.

I am wondering though, who is worse? D'Vorah or Menagerie?

[clearspira]

Thing about Superman that everyone who argues how he should kill tends to ignore is that that he is supposed to bring hope and inspire people to be better, not be judge, jury and executioner. When you want Superman who kills and rules over humanity you get one from Injustice video games were he brutally murders people over things like not agreeing with him like he did to Shazam who let me remind everyone is actually just a kid in adult body when he transforms.

In this though, there's a conundrum in that the people he's trying to inspire are unilaterally deciding that they want him to be more effective as they see from The Elite.. I think it comes more down to Superman's own code as far as how he's trying to handle the situation.

Truth, justice and the American way. The Anerican way being the idealised America that embodies democracy, liberation, free speech etc rather than the America you may otherwise wish it to be.

Superman written well is essentially the US constitution in humanoid form.

The constitution with that very much allows executions and has the second amendment

First off, I'm British, I come from the country with some of the strictest gun laws pretty much in human history. Gun laws that I wholeheartedly back. I point this out because if I can sit here and say that there is nothing wrong with the 2nd amendment, and that its not guns that kill people its human fingers, and that Superman himself recognises that he cannot be everywhere at once and thus its reasonable for some people to carry a gun for protection, then I feel as if that carries some weight. (And if you are wondering how I can back my gun laws and the 2nd at the same time, I am a human being. Only the simple-minded see in black and white, good and bad. This is a multi-layered discussion).

And as for executions, even Superman has executed people. Rarely, and it depends on the version of Superman, but sometimes even he recognises that some people are just too dangerous to let live. And again, depending on the version, he has been in starships that have blown up other ships with people on board, he has destroyed robots that displayed thought and feeling, he often has no real concern for collateral damage (and that was very true of Cavil Superman). How many has have died due to his indirect actions? I bet Superman has a pretty damn large body count.
Point is, its not as simple as ''DEATH PENALTY BAD'', once this is a multi-layered discussion and even [[insert version here]] Superman knows it.

[CrypticMirror]

I'm not even that keen on the idea of the Atomic Thingie being used as a giant battery for Metropolis, if I'm honest. I look at that and think that at his parole hearing (and I am firmly in favour of parole hearings regularly, and abolishing automatic life sentences) someone will say that they cannot set him free because Metropolis cannot afford to lose the power generation. We see lesser forms of that with prisoner labour even today, sadly. And that it would cost money to release a prisoner, that the state would lose the value generated by their labour, should never be a factor in a parole (or worse, sentencing) hearing.

By all means, refuse him freedom if he is still an unrepentant monster; but never refuse someone parole because it means society will have to pay to replicate their labour.

This is why I used to like Batman and Superman comics when I was a kid, neither of them ever saw anyone as unredeemable. Batman hauls the Joker to Arkham (or jail, depending on the writer) because he believes, sincerely believes, that the Joker and all the other rogues are redeemable if they can just find the right way to help them, to treat them. The worst that he can say is that they just have not found that key, yet. And we should feel that way too about real world criminals. I grew up during the IRA bombings, in a place that was not only a target but had actual IRA (and Loyalist) members walking around. I didn't let fear get the best of me then, and I won't now.

I'm not so keen on the American Way, but I'm all for Truth and Justice. That is what Superman and Batman (and all the rest, including Aquaman) represents, and I'm saddened to see how the more recent comics and movies have fallen far from that ideal. With modern Superman, we truly lack the light to show us the way.

[Madner Kami]

I'm not even that keen on the idea of the Atomic Thingie being used as a giant battery for Metropolis, if I'm honest. I look at that and think that at his parole hearing (and I am firmly in favour of parole hearings regularly, and abolishing automatic life sentences) someone will say that they cannot set him free because Metropolis cannot afford to lose the power generation. We see lesser forms of that with prisoner labour even today, sadly. And that it would cost money to release a prisoner, that the state would lose the value generated by their labour, should never be a factor in a parole (or worse, sentencing) hearing.

By all means, refuse him freedom if he is still an unrepentant monster; but never refuse someone parole because it means society will have to pay to replicate their labour.

This is why I used to like Batman and Superman comics when I was a kid, neither of them ever saw anyone as unredeemable. Batman hauls the Joker to Arkham (or jail, depending on the writer) because he believes, sincerely believes, that the Joker and all the other rogues are redeemable if they can just find the right way to help them, to treat them. The worst that he can say is that they just have not found that key, yet. And we should feel that way too about real world criminals. I grew up during the IRA bombings, in a place that was not only a target but had actual IRA (and Loyalist) members walking around. I didn't let fear get the best of me then, and I won't now.

I'm not so keen on the American Way, but I'm all for Truth and Justice. That is what Superman and Batman (and all the rest, including Aquaman) represents, and I'm saddened to see how the more recent comics and movies have fallen far from that ideal. With modern Superman, we truly lack the light to show us the way.

Our arts are mirrors of our minds.

[MyUserName]

I'm not American, but in a country where a film like "the hunt" can get made, where the makers of the film refer to it as "taking the twitter fantasy to the next level" and media outlets can talk about those with white skin the same way Hitler spoke about the jews, its clear that the country exists in a state of civil cold war, or is that cold civil war, at the moment.

I think thats what makes a film and character like Superman So important for people to look up to and understand. That progress, decency, a better world, it doesn't come from policing others and declaring social justice or micro-agressions, it comes from policing the self and making yourself a better person that can stand as an example of what a better world looks like. That those raised in fear should take great care they do not dispel their fears by instilling it in others. Thats what this movie represents and stands for, and I think it remains a very topical and human movie for those of any nationality.

[Lizuka]

Not watched the review yet, probably turn it on in a minute, but I absolutely love this movie. Think it does an excellent job of showing just how the Superman character ticks and how you give him a challenge despite how powerful he is. Manchester Black should be a lot more mainstream of a villain than he is.

[phantom000]

The problem with The Elites is that they are trying to fight the forest through the trees. They think if they can cut down the right tree at the right time the rest of the forest will collapse.

What Manchester Black does not realize is that they are fighting society as a whole, not just a few individuals who happen to be in power. Political leaders, especially ones who are elected, tend to just follow social trends in their own populace. He might even have campaigned as a War-Hawk promising to settle some old score his country had, similar to Hitler and the Nazis who vowed justice for they, and probably a lot of Germans, saw as crimes against their people. So once you kill the leaders who started the war, how long before picks up where he left off? How long before someone with a more extreme agenda takes over?

It would have been interesting for Manchester to meet his mirror image. Like when he confronts the head of state the men just sits there perfectly calm and asks why Manchester is not helping him. "Afterall, we both want the same thing, don't we?" the point being that he is starting the war because he honestly believes he is making the world a better.

[CrypticMirror]

The problem with The Elites is that they are trying to fight the forest through the trees. They think if they can cut down the right tree at the right time the rest of the forest will collapse.

On the subject of cutting down trees to get what you desire, my favourite quote from "A Man For All Seasons":
Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man's laws, not God's– and if you cut them down—and you're just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety's sake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBiLT3LASk