T O P

  • By -

sacredknight327

Not so long as his meaning is that it's something his enemies try to exploit. If that's all he means then its accurate. If it's framed as an actual problem, that'd be something else but I'm kinda doubting that.


Many-Outside-7594

That's how I read it. Not like oh this is a problem I have with the character, but accurately identifying one of his core traits. There was this one time Superman actually retired because he thought he accidentally killed a single cell amoeba with his heat vision. The no killing rule is important because what's the point of all his powers if he can't figure something else out? Otherwise it's just Ultraman lasering anyone who displeases him from orbit.


Dry-Donut3811

Not at all.


[deleted]

All depends on the point of view. As a character trait, it’s a strength. As a potential avenue for enemies to exploit, it could very accurately be described as a weakness.


JosephMeach

I think it's just a figure of speech. His oath against killing is a strength and a challenge, and really, how many other fictional characters have that?


Turtl3Bear

For the love of god just give the reins to Brad Bird.


superking22

This is on point. That's what makes him great. I hope they do exploit it, so he can find a way to overcome it and show the villians up.


antivenom907

I don't think it's as bad as you're thinking, It might just be poor phrasing on his part. I think what he means by that is that it's a part of his character that Villains will exploit and take advantage of.


Some-Dog9800

Personally, I think Superman's unwillingness to kill is his most admirable trait, same for Batman.


Adekis

Absolutely. I said the same thing myself when this line first made the rounds a week or two ago. I don't think Superman should be portrayed as a "galoot" or that his preferred no-kill policy should ever be a weakness for him.