this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
879 points (98.2% liked)

tumblr

3445 readers
25 users here now

Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.

  4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

  5. No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.


Sister Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's not exactly what it's trying to say... It's a detante of a subtler version of the aphorism "An eye for an eye leaves the world blind." Regardless of if the person deserves it or not, "If I kill you in cold blood while I have you at my mercy, it will change me for the worse."

Once the wretch is powerless and begging you for their survival, would you really just end them? You're the one that has to live with that.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Once the wretch is powerless and begging you for their survival, would you really just end them?

Yes, if the "wretch" is responsible for a huge amount of murder. And, as Stamets says, also if the hero has killed a bunch of people to get there anyway.

If the hero lets the guy who is going to destroy the world with his special neutronium bomb live because it will change him for the worse if he kills him, I think that's a ridiculous resolution for a movie.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Usually the situation isn't so black and white. It's not Jack Bauer killing a terrorist that will otherwise go on to blow up a maternity ward. The villain is defeated and they probably already have to deal with the normal societal punishment for what they did wrong, or otherwise live in some equivalent purgatory.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Come on. We're talking about a movie, not reality. Kill the bad guy. I mean I like Batman, but the Joker escapes from Arkham every single time he gets put in there. Just kill the guy already.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe the movie was trying to tell you something...

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That if the hero doesn't kill a psychopathic criminal, he keeps coming back to kill more people?

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe it's trying to say something about preponderance, killing for just belief, and human fallibility.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe it's a movie with lots of punches and kicks.

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Maybe we're talking about different movies.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is there any indication they've actually changed? Usually not. They just don't like that consequences are happening to them, personally, and so they're crying about it. Most of the time they had no problem killing innocent people or sending their own goons to die trying to stop the hero from getting to them, the tears and emotional manipulation are just the last ditch effort.

And if you spare them they'll probably do it all over again.

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Think of all the lives Batman would have saved if he just killed the Joker on first contact.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Batman at least has a code. He doesn't kill the minions or the Joker. He isn't judge, jury, and executioner of Gotham.