How Superman Resolved the Issue of Zod *MEGA SPOILER*

[Man_of_Tomorrow]

One of Zod's minions took a blood sample from Supes wile he was on their ship. Theoretically it could have survived, if the people survived that got sucked into the black hole/phantom zone at the end.

As I said before if the sample was enough there would be no need to go after Superman. You are making an assumption not supported by the events in the movie.

The black hole that sucked absolutely everyone and everything into it...yet repelled Lois Lane...the one thing in the cosmos immune the pull of a black hole...so Superman could grab her and then struggle to get free from the pull of the black hole (that only affected Lois once Superman grabbed her).

You again are making assumptions. If it were a sizeable enough black hole then the entire planet shouldve gone into it and the credits roll. Obviously that didnt happen so the black holes power and event horizon must've been limited. I doubt Jor-El wouldve shown them how to create a blackhole big enough to cause large scale damage. They were just trying to get rid of a ship. Lastly, she fell out of the plane before it crashed, there was distance between them. But maybe you missed that too.

But I'm done talking about this in a box office thread. Please refrain from misrepresenting my stance and posting mocking gifs towards me. I get it...you loved the scene...I didn't.

I didnt love it, but I can accept it in context. You keep making assumptions and also have been completely wrong on Zods motivation. If you dont care enough to at least provide criticism based on ACCURATE information then you welcome mocking.

 

[Heretic]

I agree with this. I don't have a problem with last resort self-defense killing, but the scene was clearly put in there for shock value "superman is a badass killing machine" statement. The writers didn't sell the build up to that well, and showed their lack of creativity with all the powers he's given.

Right because...it was shown that Superman was stronger...he had the upper hand in much of the fight (Zod needed weapons, he didn't) and at the time that he killed Zod, he had Zod down, in a headlock...and he chose to snap his neck instead of throwing him to the moon or whatever. I think that a scene where Superman kills the villain needs to be a "I have NO choice...I HAVE to kill this guy RIGHT FREAKING NOW" with no other alternatives (meaning, Superman doesn't have the upper hand with the villain on the ground in a headlock). Then...you need more than a scream (which could mean several things, especially given that it was never addressed in the film that Superman wouldn't kill or that he had some awesome moral compass that would have to be pushed to an insane degree...he could have been crying out because he killed the last of his species who could tell him about his home world, and he was likely grieving over his decision to destroy the ship with the embryos...or even mourning the tens of thousands of dead in Metropolis). Like the graveyard scene, they chose to cut away early, to the detriment of the emotion in the film and development of the character.

 

[Boy Scout]

He mourned.

For five seconds. He was perfectly fine afterwards.

He was put into a situation where if he didn't act Zod would have killed innocent people and the only way to resolve it was to put him down.

Or...you know...get him away from those people.

It affected him.

Very briefly.

It sounds to me like you want to turn him into an depressed emotional vegetable for the rest of the movie.

You'll be pleased to know that you're 100% wrong. What I wanted was for him to not kill Zod. However, if you're going to go there with this character, you should explore the emotional ramifications of the action. Otherwise, why bother?

 

[Dispatch Ninja]

For five seconds. He was perfectly fine afterwards.



Or...you know...get him away from those people.



Very briefly.



You'll be pleased to know that you're 100% wrong. What I wanted was for him to not kill Zod. However, if you're going to go there with this character, you should explore the emotional ramifications of the action. Otherwise, why bother?

What was the next scene after killing zod? I can't remember. Was it the "I think he's kind of hot" scene (ugh, they should have left that out)? Because I think that was years later.

 

[Heretic]

As I said before if the sample was enough there would be no need to go after Superman. You are making an assumption not supported by the events in the movie.



You again are making assumptions. If it were a sizeable enough black hole then the entire planet shouldve gone into it and the credits roll. Obviously that didnt happen so the black holes power and event horizon must've been limited. I doubt Jor-El wouldve shown them how to create a blackhole big enough to cause large scale damage. They were just trying to get rid of a ship. Lastly, she fell out of the plane before it crashed, there was distance between them. But maybe you missed that too.

You need to watch the black hole scene again. Lois is RIGHT NEXT TO IT. And the pull is so great that stuff is being lifted off of the ground and pulled up into the sky....but Lois (right next to the suction) fell AWAY from it...as other stuff and people were sucked past her and into the hole...Superman grabs her as she is falling (as other stuff is rising) and then Superman has to fight to get away from the suction. It makes NO SENSE.

They took a sample of Superman's blood...that was never mentioned again. If it was destroyed and wasn't of value, then seriously...why even have that scene? Because the movie wasn't long enough? Alfred Hitchcock said something like "never show a shotgun on the wall if you aren't going to use it later" (not an exact quote)...and I say...don't take a blood sample from freaking SUPERMAN and then never mention it again.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Right because...it was shown that Superman was stronger...he had the upper hand in much of the fight (Zod needed weapons, he didn't) and at the time that he killed Zod, he had Zod down, in a headlock...and he chose to snap his neck instead of throwing him to the moon or whatever. I think that a scene where Superman kills the villain needs to be a "I have NO choice...I HAVE to kill this guy RIGHT FREAKING NOW" with no other alternatives (meaning, Superman doesn't have the upper hand with the villain on the ground in a headlock). Then...you need more than a scream (which could mean several things, especially given that it was never addressed in the film that Superman wouldn't kill or that he had some awesome moral compass that would have to be pushed to an insane degree...he could have been crying out because he killed the last of his species who could tell him about his home world, and he was likely grieving over his decision to destroy the ship with the embryos...or even mourning the tens of thousands of dead in Metropolis). Like the graveyard scene, they chose to cut away early, to the detriment of the emotion in the film and development of the character.

and if he'd not killed Zod? what then? Zod would just come right back and continue to slaughter people left and right, he did not have a choice. and seriously? the scream wasn't a clear enough statement for you? do we have to have a one minute monologue about the freakin thing? the screams timing makes it pretty damn clear what it's about, you're grasping for straws with that criticism, if you want to hear lengthy explanations on a characters emotions while they're expressing them, then film is quite simply not for you.

 

[Boy Scout]

What was the next scene after killing zod? I can't remember. Was it the "I think he's kind of hot" scene (ugh, they should have left that out)?

Yes.

And...I actually liked that line. t:

Because I think that was years later.

I don't think so. They did a really poor job of making that clear if it did.

 

[Heretic]

and if he'd not killed Zod? what then? Zod would just come right back and continue to slaughter people left and right, he did not have a choice. and seriously? the scream wasn't a clear enough statement for you? do we have to have a one minute monologue about the freakin thing? the screams timing makes it pretty damn clear what it's about, you're grasping for straws with that criticism, if you want to hear lengthy explanations on a characters emotions while they're expressing them, then film is quite simply not for you.

Not lengthy...but no...there is no reason to believe that he screamed because of sorrow for killing. Heck, he had already killed that one Kryptonian in Smallville (though that may have been a robot...not sure what that was...). He had spent his entire life searching for his race...and then he killed the final other member of his race...we have no reason to believe that he was screaming because he killed, as the story showed that he was likely mourning the death of his race at his hands. There is no reason to believe he would have screamed had Zod not been Kryptonian. They simply didn't cover Clark's morality in the film, opting to turn the Kents into people who would prefer Clark let humans die rather than use his powers.

A simple sentence like I mentioned from Alan Moore would have worked wonders. The movie couldn't pause for 5 seconds though...while it did ind time for ridiculous scenes like the one in the church, just so they could show us Clark next to Jesus for a good long shot.

 

[Dispatch Ninja]

Yes.

And...I actually liked that line. t:



I don't think so. They did a really poor job of making that clear if it did.

Yea I agree, the film definitely has its editing and pacing issues (which hopefully a director's cut blu-ray could address), but it seemed to me that that scene and the ending daily planet scene were pretty close to the same time frame, which I thought would at least be a couple years later since metropolis/daily planet is rebuilt and the employees are talking about going to basketball games and such.

 

[Str8 Rippin]

I think I'm in the "He shouldn't have killed Zod" camp, but the circumstances do make it somewhat understandable. However, in essence, it kind of breaks what it is that Supes is.

Most people have a hard time with Superman, because they can’t relate to him. Which is the point. We can’t relate to him. He’s years ahead of us. He possess wisdom, ethics, and morality that we as humans can’t understand. He is the Man of Tomorrow, and he represents a Utopian vision for what humanity can become. Or at least he did.

By having Superman murder someone, even a vile a foe as Zod. Superman no longer represents the best in humanity. He represents the worst. He no longer brings out the best in the human race. He instead serves as our agent of justice. Doing whatever society demands of him. In killing, Snyder, Nolan, and Goyer throw away the most fundamental aspect of Superman. Alienating the character I invested the previous two hours in from Superman. They no longer make this narrative about Superman. They make it about a character with a similar look, with similar powers, but who will sacrifice his morals. To quote Superman “There is always away”. If that were true, and I believe it is, there was another way for Superman to have solved his issues in this film. But Snyder, Nolan, and Goyer miss the magic and the key aspect of the Superman character. And that’s just depressing. For those of you who enjoyed this, keep in mind there can not be a sequel. In killing Zod, Superman presents no reason not to kill his foes. Thus even if Lex makes his way into this movie franchise. He doesn’t stand a chance. For if Superman could stop the carnage by killing him. He will do so.

http://ravingnerd.wordpress.com/2013/06/14/ravingnerd-reviews-man-of-steel/

 

[Man_of_Tomorrow]

You need to watch the black hole scene again. Lois is RIGHT NEXT TO IT. And the pull is so great that stuff is being lifted off of the ground and pulled up into the sky....but Lois (right next to the suction) fell AWAY from it...as other stuff and people were sucked past her and into the hole...Superman grabs her as she is falling (as other stuff is rising) and then Superman has to fight to get away from the suction. It makes NO SENSE.

I will see it again, but if memory serves the blackhole grew before closing. It opens as she falls, he catches her once its grown and is at its maximum and then he struggles. The stuff rising was rising due to the black zero directly above it, lois was not directly below black zero. Perry, Jenny and the other guy were fairly close to the destruction on the ground and were unaffected.

They took a sample of Superman's blood...that was never mentioned again. If it was destroyed and wasn't of value, then seriously...why even have that scene? Because the movie wasn't long enough? Alfred Hitchcock said something like "never show a shotgun on the wall if you aren't going to use it later" (not an exact quote)...and I say...don't take a blood sample from freaking SUPERMAN and then never mention it again.

they took the sample when he was experimenting on him, then he found out the codex was encoded in his body, if the blood sample was enough then no need for Zod to go hunting for him. You mentioned that Zod didnt have to search him out because he had the sample. Again, making the assumption that the sample was enough. An assumtion not supported by anything in the movie, and actually contradicted by it.

 

[Boy Scout]

Yea I agree, the film definitely has its editing and pacing issues[...

God yes.

but it seemed to me that that scene and the ending daily planet scene were pretty close to the same time frame, which I thought would at least be a couple years later since metropolis/daily planet is rebuilt and the employees are talking about going to basketball games and such.

Honestly, I just wrote it off as terrible writing.

 

[Wolfwood]

Spoiler

I honestly thought Superman killing Zod was pretty powerful. Probably one of the few emotional scenes to actually make me choke up a little bit. My only complaint would be that they moved too quickly to a comedic scene.

 

[Heretic]

I will see it again, but if memory serves the blackhole grew before closing. It opens as she falls, he catches her once its grown and is at its maximum and then he struggles. The stuff rising was rising due to the black zero directly above it, lois was not directly below black zero. Perry, Jenny and the other guy were fairly close to the destruction on the ground and were unaffected.



they took the sample when he was experimenting on him, then he found out the codex was encoded in his body, if the blood sample was enough then no need for Zod to go hunting for him. You mentioned that Zod didnt have to search him out because he had the sample. Again, making the assumption that the sample was enough. An assumtion not supported by anything in the movie, and actually contradicted by it.

Yeah, the people seemed unaffected by pretty much everything. When the terraformer was working, we saw cars and buildings being flattened, and people running around next to it. Everything was being turned to dust all around the employees of the Daily Planet, who were somehow immune to it all. It all just seemed like a really cheap way to get us to worry about the characters. It's funny...a bunch of us were talking in line before the movie and I made a comment about how lame movies always show like a dog in danger...and there's this incredibly tense moment of "will this random family dog survive the devastation that has likely killed people we never saw???" and then the scene with the dog in peril happened and I heard several knowing laughs in the audience.

The sample had his DNA in it. If it wasn't enough and won't be used in a sequel (hey, maybe it is...you're the one arguing that it is no longer in play) then it was a wasted scene that took screen time away from more important things.

 

[Heretic]

I think I'm in the "He shouldn't have killed Zod" camp, but the circumstances do make it somewhat understandable. However, in essence, it kind of breaks what it is that Supes is.


http://ravingnerd.wordpress.com/2013/06/14/ravingnerd-reviews-man-of-steel/

The thing is...regarding that quote...people seem to think of this as Superman Begins, where we will watch the morally conflicted man of two worlds become the hero we know and love at some point in a sequel.

My problem is that I have read a lot of Superman comics...and I know that Clark became Superman because a simple, loving farm couple raised him to be the most moral person on earth. The point of Superman is NOT that he is struggling as a man between two worlds...the point is that he is more human than we are...thanks to this incredible family, he is better than us...and we are to look to him as our beacon of goodness...something we may someday achieve if we excel beyond our egos and weaknesses. This movie plays lip service to that, but it is nothing more than a meaningless monologue given the rest of the film. If the sequel is about Clark learning the true responsibility of being Superman, then I don't need to see that film. Because he learned that on a farm many years ago. The minute you change that important detail, you are talking about some other character not named Clark Kent.

 

[Man_of_Tomorrow]

The sample had his DNA in it. If it wasn't enough and won't be used in a sequel (hey, maybe it is...you're the one arguing that it is no longer in play) then it was a wasted scene that took screen time away from more important things.

I have said no such thing. You mentioned the sample saying Zod had his blood so why go after him. You were questioning his motives. Im merely pointing out that going by what was shown the assumption is the sample wasn't enough. Now if the sample props up in a future movie and they use it for EXACTLY what Zod wanted (make kryptonians) then it would be a plot hole, and a bad one. But that hasnt happened yet.

 

[Heretic]

I have said no such thing. You mentioned the sample saying Zod had his blood so why go after him. You were questioning his motives. Im merely pointing out that going by what was shown the assumption is the sample wasn't enough. Now if the sample props up in a future movie and they use it for EXACTLY what Zod wanted (make kryptonians) then it would be a plot hole, and a bad one. But that hasnt happened yet.

Either they will use the sample (bad plot hole) or they won't (wasted scene).

I GUESS there is a third option...they use it to try to make some clone and end up with Bizarro or something...but seriously, no thanks.

 

[Stringer]

I was fine with it.

 

[DACrowe]

Okay, at first I was okay with it because I am no stickler for comic fidelity if you do something well or interestingly. For example, I love the changes they made to the Superman/Lois Lane relationship in this film, which really made it fresh and new.

However, the more I think about this ending the more it felt like a cop out thematically. There was no build up. In many ways it feels like a retread of The Dark Knight's ending where Batman has to kill Two-Face to save Gordon's son. Besides the kid belonging to Gordon, thereby instantly making us more concerned about the outcome, the scene works because:

a) It is ambiguous whether Batman directly caused (or intended to cause) Harvey Dent's death.

b) The whole movie showed Batman grappling with his "one rule" and how far he would go not to break it.

Man of Steel never develops the one rule and pretty much relies on us knowing about it before watching the movie. It just happens. He screams and gets over it. Deal with it.

Thematically we did not feel why it was such a major moment for him and we did not see him ever struggle with avoiding it. In fact, he probably killed a few hundred people when he chooses to ignore Zod blowing up oil tankers when he tosses them into buildings. It is weird.

 

[Norminator79]

WOW!!! So Superman NEVER kills?? What about "the death of Superman" series? In Man of Steel Superman had no choice. Zod would have killed everyone because he knew thats the only way to hurt Superman.

 

[Man_of_Tomorrow]

how many times did supes kill doomsday? I know of 2, the first time and then the limited series where he left him at the end of time to be crushed by entropy.

 

[Str8 Rippin]

Okay, at first I was okay with it because I am no stickler for comic fidelity if you do something well or interestingly. For example, I love the changes they made to the Superman/Lois Lane relationship in this film, which really made it fresh and new.

However, the more I think about this ending the more it felt like a cop out thematically. There was no build up. In many ways it feels like a retread of The Dark Knight's ending where Batman has to kill Two-Face to save Gordon's son. Besides the kid belonging to Gordon, thereby instantly making us more concerned about the outcome, the scene works because:

a) It is ambiguous whether Batman directly caused (or intended to cause) Harvey Dent's death.

b) The whole movie showed Batman grappling with his "one rule" and how far he would go not to break it.

Man of Steel never develops the one rule and pretty much relies on us knowing about it before watching the movie. It just happens. He screams and gets over it. Deal with it.

Thematically we did not feel why it was such a major moment for him and we did not see him ever struggle with avoiding it. In fact, he probably killed a few hundred people when he chooses to ignore Zod blowing up oil tankers when he tosses them into buildings. It is weird.

So do you personally choose to accept that death or no?

 

[DACrowe]

I am fine with Superman killing Zod. But the way they did it felt cheap and empty. Unearned. Thus, I do not like it.

 

[Smashlilman]

never mind

 

[DorkyFresh]

But the way they did it felt cheap and empty. Unearned.

I totally disagree. Bane's death felt cheap and empty. Superman did everything within his physical powers to stop Zod and when faced with a hard decision, Clark decided to save lives by ending one...and in doing so he felt immense guilt and sorrow for having to do what he did. His cry "NOOooooo!!" showed that he absolutely did NOT want to do what he did.