Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clark Kent: Killing's just dandy!

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by superspider02
    yea i didnt like that he didnt really seem to mind that he killed(thought he killed) knox.
    What are you to expect, when someones life is in danger from someone, you can only feel bad to a certain extent. If he had really killed Zod, do you think he wouldve felt bad about it?

    Comment


    • #17
      Still laughing at the title of this thread.

      Comment


      • #18
        TPTB assumed having Dean Cain as a guest star would make us forget all the plot points. They don't give us enough credit.

        Comment


        • #19
          Clarks emotional attachment to certain "humans"(his friends) is greater than that of all humans. He just hasn't relized that all life is precious.

          In "Combat", when he killed Titan that was just sexual frustration from Lana marrying Lex after saying she wasn't.

          He does need to control his emotions though.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by thedean123
            Maybe this superman should kill lol. He's killed and let so many people die at this point lets just roll with it, when this Clark is superman it sure could be a lot more interesting.
            Yeah, and I think that people have to remember that the main reason that Superman "didn't kill" was because he was so powerful compared to his enemies in post-crisis eras. Originally, he was just fighting natural disasters and petty criminals. Eventually, he moved onto "big bads," but they typically didn't have any powers that could really match him.

            However, now his enemies are almost, or even as powerful as he is. So therefore, he needs to abide by the idea of "do not wound what you can't kill" kind of mentality.

            Part of the challenge that Superman faced before was putting away his enemies while protecting their lives. But I think that he has enough of a challenge just putting them away that he can't be concerned with protecting them simultaneously.


            Just a thought, I could be wrong.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by myankskent
              Still laughing at the title of this thread.
              LOL Same here, I pictured him and Jonathan bundled up together in the checkered shirts, sitting on the porch.

              Comment


              • #22
                I was also bothered by Clark "killing" Knox.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Yeah, that bothered me as well, especially after reading Gough's interview where he said one of DC's restrictions was to NEVER allow Clark to kill someone, but somehow "meteor freaks" or whatever are ok.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Zach
                    Yeah, and I think that people have to remember that the main reason that Superman "didn't kill" was because he was so powerful compared to his enemies in post-crisis eras. Originally, he was just fighting natural disasters and petty criminals. Eventually, he moved onto "big bads," but they typically didn't have any powers that could really match him.

                    However, now his enemies are almost, or even as powerful as he is. So therefore, he needs to abide by the idea of "do not wound what you can't kill" kind of mentality.

                    Part of the challenge that Superman faced before was putting away his enemies while protecting their lives. But I think that he has enough of a challenge just putting them away that he can't be concerned with protecting them simultaneously.


                    Just a thought, I could be wrong.

                    I agree with your logic completely, but it doesn't apply in this situation. When Clark zipped onto the scene, he had no reason to believe Knox was not just an average mortal (frankly, I even pulled a 'what the hell?' when I saw Knox get shot and then start pulling out bullets!).

                    Clark should have just given Knox a pat on the head to knock him out, like he did with Pete in Nicodemus as well as a couple other times I believe.

                    Originally posted by curiosity
                    Umm....Clark arrived just in time to keep Knox from killing Lex. He kocked him out of the way, and accidently into power lines which he thought killed knox, a guy who was killing all of his patients.

                    Clark did not intentionally try to kill Knox
                    I don't mean this offensively, but I think you're missing the point. Look at it like this:

                    Lets say you (as a normal human) see your friend (who happens to be made of aluminum foil) being attacked by a mugger (who is made out of spaghetti) using a nerf gun as a weapon. You COULD rush in there and tackle spaghetti man to the ground, but that would be complete overkill.

                    It was even more overkill for Clark. Clark is physically more durable than titanium and he was moving at superspeed... he wasn't a guy moving really fast, he was a missile. Had Knox been mortal, Clark would have killed him in any of several different ways. The blunt force trauma, the whiplash that would have broken his neck, the impact upon landing which would have smashed him, or the electrocuting. Probably others.

                    Superman is renowned for being so CAREFUL with his powers. I'm not saying there's necessarily a legal case against Clark. There's probably not. My point is that the writers need to seriously start considering how much they want to diverge from comics Clark.
                    Last edited by TampaVille; 10-18-2007, 09:46 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Ummm... Bizarro sent Lex flying in Episode 1 with the same force, and it didn't kill him. Evidently in Smallville physics don't apply. Since he's never killed anyone else with that kind of force it's reasonable for him to expect it wouldn't happen this time. The thing he thought did it was the electrocution.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by migo
                        Ummm... Bizarro sent Lex flying in Episode 1 with the same force, and it didn't kill him. Evidently in Smallville physics don't apply. Since he's never killed anyone else with that kind of force it's reasonable for him to expect it wouldn't happen this time. The thing he thought did it was the electrocution.
                        I'm not going to pursue this issue any further. I'm not saying you're wrong. You arguments are perfectly valid. The problem is that so are mine, and neither of us is wrong. It's simply really difficult, perhaps impossible, to have any sort of meaningful discussion when we can say things like "we have to assume physics work differently in SV."

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I'd like to point out a few things. Clark didn't kill, comics wise, because he simply doesn't kill. In less than a year post crisis he had already fought Darkseid, Bizarro, and any of a number of other supervillains. He still didn't kill them.

                          The one time he did kill, with Zod and his crew in the pocket universe, he felt so bad afterward, and was so wracked with guilt, he had a psychotic breakdown, and had to exile himself, because he was afraid of what he would do.

                          Despite Al Gough's insistence Smallville Clark has never killed anyone, realistically he would have. You just can't administer lethal blows to people every week, smash into them at a thousand miles an hour, or electrcute them, melt them with heat vision, or anything else, and just be like, well, they lived. There is no logical reason that person is alive. No plausible deniability. Heck, I'm sure if Clark decapitated someone, they'd have a scene at the end where the guy walks in wearing a bandage around his neck, and says, thank god for LuthorCorp's experimental medical procedures, otherwise i'd be dead.

                          Clark is supposed to have an absolute moral stance against killing, and use of extreme force. That's one of the character's downfalls fight wise, is that he coddles his opponents, and doens't just take them out. I could easily see Smallville's Clark lining his enemies up, and just vaporizing everyone with full bore, no holds barred heat vision barrages.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Well like i always say they are mixing a lot of the things from the comics together. Clark acted like Golden Age Superman, if you read any of the old comic books you'll notice that there were ways that he dealt with criminals that would possibly result in death though it wasn't shown. They've toned it down afterwards but even in certain cases Superman has done things to people that they shouldn't be able to survive normally.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Mischael12
                              Well like i always say they are mixing a lot of the things from the comics together. Clark acted like Golden Age Superman, if you read any of the old comic books you'll notice that there were ways that he dealt with criminals that would possibly result in death though it wasn't shown. They've toned it down afterwards but even in certain cases Superman has done things to people that they shouldn't be able to survive normally.
                              You're technically correct, but I think you're missing HalJordan's point (excellently said, by the way, Hal). The whole "Superman doesn't kill" thing doesn't mean that he uses his powers willy nilly but the baddies always end up surviving. It means that he goes way out of his way to use less than what would be lethal force to neutralize his enemies without killing them.

                              You are correct in pointing out examples where Superman DID use excessive force, and just happened not to kill the villain. Those instances fall into one of two categories though:

                              1) Bad writing (such as the Al/Miles variety of "Supes doesn't kill)
                              2) Antiquated writing

                              Golden Age Superman is not the basis of SV. Superman's personality and ethics have evolved a lot over the last 68 years!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by TampaVille
                                I agree with your logic completely, but it doesn't apply in this situation. When Clark zipped onto the scene, he had no reason to believe Knox was not just an average mortal (frankly, I even pulled a 'what the hell?' when I saw Knox get shot and then start pulling out bullets!).

                                Clark should have just given Knox a pat on the head to knock him out, like he did with Pete in Nicodemus as well as a couple other times I believe.

                                It was even more overkill for Clark. Clark is physically more durable than titanium and he was moving at superspeed... he wasn't a guy moving really fast, he was a missile. Had Knox been mortal, Clark would have killed him in any of several different ways. The blunt force trauma, the whiplash that would have broken his neck, the impact upon landing which would have smashed him, or the electrocuting. Probably others.
                                Clark didn’t know Knox was killing his patients when he first “killed” him. Lex informed him of that later in the hospital. And even if Clark did not intend to kill Knox, did he just assume he was dead without even checking? Why didn’t he pick up both Lex AND Knox and rush them both to the hospital and sort things out later. It’s not like it would be too much of a burden; the man tosses tractors, for crying out loud.

                                That’s always a problem I have had with Clark from the beginning. There have been many times when he’s tossed people aside or they were somehow “done in” and he just let it happen or left them. As far as I am concerned, standing by and letting someone die when you know you could do something to prevent it is just as bad as killing by your own hand.

                                I agree with the notion that Clark is King of Overkill. He should be able to knock someone out without sending them flying across the room. Even a dog with (I’m generously assuming) a lesser intelligence than Clark, has enough control that it can harmlessly carry it’s pups in the same mouth with which it could crush a man’s leg.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X
                                😀
                                🥰
                                🤢
                                😎
                                😡
                                👍
                                👎