fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #6098 ]

[ SECRET POST #6098 ]

⌈ Secret Post #6098 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

[Fandom: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles]

__________________________________________________

06.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 36 secrets from Secret Submission Post #872.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

04. https://i.imgur.com/dAWwySr.png

This is one of the reasons I love Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse and Spider-Man: Homecoming as much as I do.

I like "Blue Beetle" but there were a few times where I felt like they failed on the "I'm not a killer" theme for Jaime. Still really like the movie and I appreciate that there are more superheroes who choose not to resort to murder as a means of defeating a villain.

However, I do hope we continue to call into question the effectiveness of the justice system. Batman lore seems to be pretty good at this.

Same with Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse.

Are you kidding? There was so much murder in that movie.

As an American, I’d rather kill someone than subject them to a supermax prison.

Death is worse. There is a reason death row inmates fight so hard not to be put to death.

YMMV. As someone with various mental illnesses that would mix very poorly with a setting like prison, as well as someone who believes that dying is basically going to sleep forever without any dreams, I would kill myself before spending even one year in prison.

Most of them fight so hard because US 'justice' is rarely actually just, and a huge number of death row inmates are, in fact, innocent.

The hero murdering their way through henchmen only to NOT kill the bad guy is a huge trope. It's everywhere.

????

Yes, I absolutely hate this. I'm fine with a hero who kills, I'm fine with a hero who doesn't, but I'm not fine with a hero who sees some people as disposable and others as real people.

Aside from that being a very different thing than what the OP is asking for anyway, tropes exist and rules are different in fiction. Get over it.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 03:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 06:08 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 08:26 (UTC) - Expand

NA - This! I enjoy all kinds of heroes exhibiting varying degrees and flavors of morality, but "we didn't actually SEE their heart stop beating and anyway they don't actually matter to the plot so let's not think about these as deaths" is such a lazy and facile narrative device, IMO.

And that's... a hero who kills?? Which is what the OP doesn't want??? OP didn't say "I want a hero who kills lots of people except for the main villain," they said they want a hero who doesn't kill, so what is your point here

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 03:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 08:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 14:30 (UTC) - Expand

Yeeeees. Either you kill or you don't. This shit makes 'hero' even more callous because they don't have a decency to see henchmen as people

historically speaking, there have been centuries full of "hero must kill nemesis/rival/antagonist" tales, in various cultures, where killing the villain was just expected. sparing the big bad is a relatively recent trope. that said, I feel like there's room for both in our world, especially given as above anon said the plethora of stories where the hero just fucking mows down all the henchmen but somehow the big bad is the one that must be spared for Reasons. I'd rather an all or nothing, a John Wick or a...idk Luffy I guess. Luffy is the only protagonist I can think of who hasn't killed anyone yet as far as we know. As long as there's overall balance where you can get more than enough of either end depending on what you're hankerin' for.

Vash the Stampede?

(I’m a Wolfwood fan myself.)

Speaking of anime, it’s been a while since I watched DBZ, but I like that while Goku will kill, it’s an absolute last resort for him.

Does Luffy really never kill anyone? Does it count if his crew kills people? I've only ever watched the live action, but while Luffy himself might not, his crew definitely does while Luffy is fighting alongside them, which makes him pretty culpable in the deaths of those random henchmen, too. (Also the way he "defeats" the big bad boss guys could also be reasonably expected to kill someone, it just happens not to because cartoon!logic.)

Not dunking on Luffy, I'm really enjoying the show so far, but he doesn't seem to me to be an intentional pacifist, he just doesn't go out of his way to kill people if he doesn't have to.

Blegh. I disagree. That said, your tastes are valid and I hope you find plenty of media you can enjoy.

Wonder Woman is my ideal on this one - the quote is “Don’t kill if you can wound, don’t wound if you can subdue, don’t subdue if you can pacify, and don’t raise your hand at all until you’ve first extended it.”

She will and has killed, but it's a last resort and she tries everything else first.

I don't read comics much so I didn't know about this but yeah, this is a good one: escalating Rules of Engagement hero who actually sticks to them? Is pretty admirable. As opposed to a hero whose Strict Moral Code seems more self-serving (to their own conscience, to their own ego) than anything.

Yeah, but as soon as you say the edgelord writers and directors start planning the story to railroad the character down murder street. It is tunnel vision, all they can think of is constructing the story so that they get to the "necessary" murder as fast as possible.

The older I get the more and more disillusioned I am with non-lethal violence heroes. At least, in shows for any demographic older than for kids. It feels like trying to have your cake and eat it too in the most childish possible way: to get your Cool Action Scenes but not have to Feel Bad about them, when in fact any injury that is disabling for any length of time (i.e., so the heroes can "leave the battle" safely and move on to the next, with a room full of groaning/unconscious opponents) could be permanent or fatal. Head trauma that results in unconsciousness for more than a second or two is likely to cause brain damage. Falls of only a few feet can and have killed people: "knocked them off the building" to put them out of the fight = a bunch of people killed or paralyzed at the bottom of the building. Even subduals can kill if someone puts pressure on an airway; a hero who refuses to use guns and insists on using fists out of some kind of code in any remotely realistic setting is leaving a path of killed and severely maimed henchmen in their path all the same.

It's even worse when it's pretty obvious that the henchmen do die, as there's no way they could have possibly survived (e.g., Aang knocking enemy soldiers in full armour into an arctic ocean) then having some kind of "crisis of conscience" about doing the same to a named character lmao. And the previous is framed as "it doesn't count if he didn't mean it" (even though his actions were the cause and death the foreseeable result by any reasonable person) or just, forgotten about entirely.

This is self-soothing cartoon logic for people who want to see violence without the consequences of violence. I'd much rather see a hero who tries to avoid violence if possible, engages in it only as a last resort, then uses force proportionate to the threat when it is, unfortunately, necessary, knowing that any and all of it could be lethal even if that is not the intent, where the rules of engagement apply to henchmen and bosses alike.

They do say people get more intolerant and right wing as they get older.

(no subject)

ariakas - 2023-09-17 13:42 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-09-17 16:50 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

ariakas - 2023-09-17 21:04 (UTC) - Expand

I too, tend to land more towards the "I like my heroes to be heroic" trope and generally have contempt for the edgelord BS of deconstructions, but at the same time, if the hero actually killed the villain and they really showed the consequences--show them being shaken and haunted by what they've done, maybe they start to pull their punches in a fight and hesitate because they fear doing it again, etc.--that would be really interesting.

And by consequences, I mean lasting beyond a scene or two. So the part where Superman cries out in anguish after killing Zod in Man of Steel does not count, given that he's more or less back to normal afterwards. This is especially galling because with Superman, the theme of power, how it should and shouldn't be used, what constitutes as acceptable or going too far, has long been an interesting plot thread with the character.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only