How Superman Resolved the Issue of Zod *MEGA SPOILER*

[John Locke]

Well...the reasoning there is that Zod was SO strong after a few hours on earth that Superman couldn't lift him, couldn't move him, couldn't really do anything to him except snap his little neck like a twig. Now...you might say that this makes no sense...but...you know...it was so cool and stuff.

He could move him but not by much. It's not like Zod didn't fight back. Kind of hard to move someone when their using all their strength to stop you. Also by having him in a headlock. The position he was in, if Superman took off the force would have snapped Zod's neck anyways.

 

[Heretic]

He could move him but not by much. It's not like Zod didn't fight back. Kind of hard to move someone when their using all their strength to stop you. Also by having him in a headlock. The position he was in, if Superman took off the force would have snapped Zod's neck anyways.

Superman was shown to be able to gently float his way into flight.

 

[John Locke]

You think Zod would have let him gently take off? Superman may be a lot stronger than Zod but with Zod using all his strength on Superman, Supes wouldn't be able to gently take off.

 

[Heretic]

Zod had lost his mind. His ridiculously stupid plan failed (the one that this master strategist spent years planning). You may have a point there...but since Zod made one stupid decision after another, I wouldn't put anything past him.

 

[samsnee]

Has this interview been discussed? Sounds like even Nolan didn't want that ending, only Goyer and Snyder did.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/62904

That was something that we had a lot of discussions about, and I know that originally Chris felt... that was not in the first draft. It's something that Zack and I wanted to do, and initially there was a lot of resistance, which I completely understand.

 

[Superman2007]

Yeah Goyer and Snyder explain it in the last 15 minutes of this podcast too https://soundcloud.com/empiremagazine/man-of-steel-spoiler-special

I don't think they'll have Superman killing people left and right in the sequels, but I'm glad they handled this scene the way they did.

 

[Marvin]

So again, why wouldn't Supes canonball him away from the city?

Curious...how did the fight got into space again?
I need to revisit the film.

 

[C. Lee]

Superman: Pardon me good sir.....but would you please step over here a couple hundred miles, so that I may severely thrash you?

Zod: Quite so, my good man.....one doesn't wish to rile the natives.

 

[Marvin]

Sigh...weaker as in he had the guy down. Like kicking an opponent when he's down. It's not quite fitting here but don't act like you don't know what he meant by "weaker". Also, Clark should be stronger than these guys as he's been soaking up Earth sun for 33 years. Zod only has been for like...3 hours really?

Which is it? Superman is stronger cause he finally has the upper hand(really?), or Superman is stronger cause(as people keep mentioning), he's been soaking up the sun for 33 years. I think y'all need to pick an angle and stick to it.

If they're exactly the same strength level, then why isn't Zod able to completely destroy Clark in a fight? Do you know how short a fight between a Seal Team Six member and a total civilian of the exact same weight would be? If Superman isn't stronger than Zod, than that whole final fight is insanity.

I recall the film showing them fighting to a stand still, but I need to revisit it.

For all the people that somehow believe Superman is soooo much stronger than Zod, please explain why he didn't just punch Zod's head off in one blow? He is a killer after all...like any old marvel hero.

Mind you this question is sort of a trap.

 

[redhawk23]

On the Empire podcast Snyder has some interesting comments about why he pushed for the ending that the film has.

Basically he felt that there was no real establishment for Superman's absolute aversion to killing.

He sought to put Superman into that impossible no when scenario and force him to make a decision of what to in that situation. His act didn't just take the life of that individual but it was very much a final rejection of Krypton.

Along with creating an identifiable history and motive for Superman's code going forward it also creates a situation for the viewer where death is not entirely off the table. It sounds like they don't plan on having Superman kill anyone, but it is a situation now where it is an actual choice of the character rather than an assumed element based on our expectations (kind of like how you always know the protagonist will survive). It now avoids that kind of situation.

 

[Marvin]

As for the killing specifically. My brother made a silly joke to me the other day when I brought this up with him.

Ironman traps Killian in his suit and blows him to hell, that doesn't work so they try a few more things and eventually smoke him and badly. Then his hot half naked middle aged girl friend and himself make out and we get fire works and everyone cheers, cut to the disney logo of all things.

Superman, faces an enemy that will wipe the planet out in less than 24 hours after superman isn't able to fight any more. And unlike the marvel u, there is no one else to take up the fight. He's put into a corner, makes a tough choice, smokes his enemy, shows a very vivid amount of regret, his hot middle aged overly dressed girl friend shows up to console him, tears are shed...

And people say superman is not being held to a higher standard then the rest?
His two cents.

 

[blumatic]

On the Empire podcast Snyder has some interesting comments about why he pushed for the ending that the film has.

Basically he felt that there was no real establishment for Superman's absolute aversion to killing.

He sought to put Superman into that impossible no when scenario and force him to make a decision of what to in that situation. His act didn't just take the life of that individual but it was very much a final rejection of Krypton.

Along with creating an identifiable history and motive for Superman's code going forward it also creates a situation for the viewer where death is not entirely off the table. It sounds like they don't plan on having Superman kill anyone, but it is a situation now where it is an actual choice of the character rather than an assumed element based on our expectations (kind of like how you always know the protagonist will survive). It now avoids that kind of situation.

I guess thats kind of cool. Next time he's in that situation fans, like Mark Waid, will be like oh no not again, only to have Superman solve the issue with no casualties or, not kill the bad guy, only to have te bad kill the innocent Superman wanted to protect.

I love it. Im engaged.

 

[Rock Sexton]

As for the killing specifically. My brother made a silly joke to me the other day when I brought this up with him.

Ironman traps Killian in his suit and blows him to hell, that doesn't work so they try a few more things and eventually smoke him and badly. Then his hot half naked middle aged girl friend and himself make out and we get fire works and everyone cheers, cut to the disney logo of all things.

Who is "everyone"?

 

[Marvin]

Who is "everyone"?

The people in the movie.
(and my theater too lol).

 

[Rock Sexton]

The people in the movie.
(and my theater too lol).

Ahhh the anecdotal "my theater" evidence.

 

[kedrell]

As for the killing specifically. My brother made a silly joke to me the other day when I brought this up with him.

Ironman traps Killian in his suit and blows him to hell, that doesn't work so they try a few more things and eventually smoke him and badly. Then his hot half naked middle aged girl friend and himself make out and we get fire works and everyone cheers, cut to the disney logo of all things.

Superman, faces an enemy that will wipe the planet out in less than 24 hours after superman isn't able to fight any more. And unlike the marvel u, there is no one else to take up the fight. He's put into a corner, makes a tough choice, smokes his enemy, shows a very vivid amount of regret, his hot middle aged overly dressed girl friend shows up to console him, tears are shed...

And people say superman is not being held to a higher standard then the rest?
His two cents.

Ah, but since when has Iron Man had a no killing rule? He's been killing people since the first film. Superman's is well known even among non-comic book readers.

 

[KalMart]

As for the killing specifically. My brother made a silly joke to me the other day when I brought this up with him.

Ironman traps Killian in his suit and blows him to hell, that doesn't work so they try a few more things and eventually smoke him and badly. Then his hot half naked middle aged girl friend and himself make out and we get fire works and everyone cheers, cut to the disney logo of all things.

Superman, faces an enemy that will wipe the planet out in less than 24 hours after superman isn't able to fight any more. And unlike the marvel u, there is no one else to take up the fight. He's put into a corner, makes a tough choice, smokes his enemy, shows a very vivid amount of regret, his hot middle aged overly dressed girl friend shows up to console him, tears are shed...

And people say superman is not being held to a higher standard then the rest?
His two cents.

Middle aged? Slap your brother for me.

 

[Hcmarvel]

Superman is absolutely held to a higher standard than Iron Man. Superman is, in hero terms, the polar opposite of The Punisher. They are the two ends of the spectrum basically. The same way I wouldn't buy it if Punisher failed to killed a Child Molester in a scene, I fail to buy Superman killing.

Whatever, we won't ever agree on this one.

One last thing - That Snyder interview you reference is, I think, a perfect showing of why I don't trust Snyder to handle this killing issue. The idea that every time Superman gets in the a fight, the audience knows "Well...he miiiiiiight kill that guy" is not the character. Not one bit. The fun with Superman stories is specifically seeing how he is going to win the day without killing someone. That's the point of the character. But that's not "kewl" these days. So cracked neck it is.


And again, how exactly is this Superman learning and creating his "don't ever kill" rule? What about the act of killing Zod didn't work? It didn't make the world not trust him. It didn't send him into an emotional tailspin. What was the downside of killing? All he learned was that killing works, and really, he should have killed Zod immediately.

 

[Marvin]

Ahhh the anecdotal "my theater" evidence.

actually that part was a joke.
Just wanted to let it be known that people enjoyed the film as a whole, as did I.

 

[LostSon88]

Conviently ignoring the look on his face after he killed him. Not exactly the look of a man content with what he had just done.

If you really think that "all he learned was that killing works" by killing Zod, you wearnt paying much attention.

 

[Marvin]

Superman is absolutely held to a higher standard than Iron Man. Superman is, in hero terms, the polar opposite of The Punisher. They are the two ends of the spectrum basically. The same way I wouldn't buy it if Punisher failed to killed a Child Molester in a scene, I fail to buy Superman killing.

Whatever, we won't ever agree on this one.

He is held to a higher standard(by the film makers), and the point is proven in the simple comparison between his film and damn near any other hit superhero film these days. Some people want an even higher standard to be met it seems.

And again, how exactly is this Superman learning and creating his "don't ever kill" rule? What about the act of killing Zod didn't work? It didn't make the world not trust him. It didn't send him into an emotional tailspin. What was the downside of killing? All he learned was that killing works, and really, he should have killed Zod immediately.

How is it that you came to this conclusion?

 

[Marvin]

Ah, but since when has Iron Man had a no killing rule? He's been killing people since the first film. Superman's is well known even among non-comic book readers.

Talking about the way the filmmakers have conveyed the characters. One deal with issue with "grace" the other as an after thought.

..are you not entertained? lol.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Superman is absolutely held to a higher standard than Iron Man. Superman is, in hero terms, the polar opposite of The Punisher. They are the two ends of the spectrum basically. The same way I wouldn't buy it if Punisher failed to killed a Child Molester in a scene, I fail to buy Superman killing.

Whatever, we won't ever agree on this one.

One last thing - That Snyder interview you reference is, I think, a perfect showing of why I don't trust Snyder to handle this killing issue. The idea that every time Superman gets in the a fight, the audience knows "Well...he miiiiiiight kill that guy" is not the character. Not one bit. The fun with Superman stories is specifically seeing how he is going to win the day without killing someone. That's the point of the character. But that's not "kewl" these days. So cracked neck it is.


And again, how exactly is this Superman learning and creating his "don't ever kill" rule? What about the act of killing Zod didn't work? It didn't make the world not trust him. It didn't send him into an emotional tailspin. What was the downside of killing? All he learned was that killing works, and really, he should have killed Zod immediately.

I think that unfortunately, Zack's involvement in the writing hurt the tone. He should just direct the next one

 

[Rock Sexton]

I think that unfortunately, Zack's involvement in the writing hurt the tone. He should just direct the next one

Wait, he was involved? Link?

 

[Hcmarvel]

He is held to a higher standard(by the film makers), and the point is proven in the simple comparison between his film and damn near any other hit superhero film these days. Some people want an even higher standard to be met it seems.



How is it that you came to this conclusion?

Look I'm not saying he was celebrating killing Zod. And I know he seemed sad about it after. But I felt that it was because by killing Zod he was now the only Kryptonian left in the universe (I guess a few of them are in the Phantom Zone but he had no way to get to them). But, not to answer your question with a question, but what part of killing Zod was bad for Clark? We never learn that he had a rule against killing, so it's not some shattering of his moral fiber. He saved the family, saved the world...all in all killing Zod was definitely the "right" thing to do.

The only reason to not kill if you are a hero like Superman, is because it is such a slippery slope. And people may not trust you if you do it. But once you have killed someone, there is no reason not to kill any villain who claims he will "never stop". Because none of them will ever stop. They're super-villains. It's kind of their thing.

What Snyder basically says is that Superman dipped his toe into killing baddies, said "eh...that's not for me". But he may change his mind next time. Sweet lord...