How Superman Resolved the Issue of Zod *MEGA SPOILER*

[Gamingboy]

As I said in a similar thread, it feels like this can only be truly judged depending on how it's followed up on in future movies. If this is something that haunts Kal/Clark/Superman and makes him even more determined to never take another sentient life, then it'll work. If it's something ignored, glossed over or god-forbid happens again, then it'll probably bother me far more than it does now.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Superman's 'no killing' rule, the same rule used by characters such as Batman and Spider-Man, were included by the writers as a way to justify the limitations put in place by the Comics Code Authority. Now that it's gone, the rules should be relaxed, and in the cases of other characters it has been.

I think the same when people gets mad at Batman 89.

Superman shouldn't kill as a general rule because his powers give him an overwhelming advantage. He could kill every criminal on Earth but he doesn't because it's not right for him to do so.

I don't see, however, how this applies to a murderous supervillain who will not listen to reason and is directly threatening those around him.

I think the key here is not that Zod is a "murderous supervillain who will not listen to reason and is directly threatening those around him," because that could describe every Superman villain.

The key here is that Zod is as powerful as he is.

If Superman let Zod kill those people, he would look like a fool. He would be directly responsible for their death. He would be a coward who couldn't bring himself to do what was right just because he doesn't feel comfortable doing it.

For me, Superman crying out in anguish over Zod's death is enough. It shows that he is not prepared to kill unless he absolutely has to. This makes Superman a stronger character rather than "I will not kill ever", because it shows he focuses on what is right rather than what makes him feel good.

The problem is that if Superman is able to turn Zod's neck like that he's able to turn his head, thus saving those people. He didn't need to kill him right there. And if for not allowing Zod to kill, he had killed thousands with his machine. I remember dozens of buildings torn down.

Basically the movie tried to put a critic situation, but it was much more critic before and Superman showed that he was strong enough to save that family from Zod. So we're left to think that Superman was just exhausted, or just thought, Ok, this guy just told me he'd rather die than surrender, so be it.

 

[redhawk23]

It was made entirely clear that Zod was not going to stop at anything. It was his stated belief and engineered purpose to carry out his intended task. There was no reasoning Zod, there was no imprisoning Zod, and he posed and immediate laser-burning threat to a family and had led had just pulverized half the city with the intent to terraform the world and kill 7 billion people.

Superman made the only choice there was and he was only one who could make it.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Just a quick question, isn't tho debate similar to the one people are still having over Batman "not saving" Ra's in Batman Begins?

 

[BH/HHH]

Just a quick question, isn't tho debate similar to the one people are still having over Batman "not saving" Ra's in Batman Begins?

Well yeah they are similar only difference is Superman had no choice in the moment but Batman did have a choice he just chose to take the you can die option lol but tbh I didn't blame Batman in Begins, Ra's had left him for dead in Wayne Manor so he did the same.

 

[DorneyDave]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV4CqelFTlA

That's all I have on this topic.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Well yeah they are similar only difference is Superman had no choice in the moment but Batman did have a choice he just chose to take the you can die option lol but tbh I didn't blame Batman in Begins, Ra's had left him for dead in Wayne Manor so he did the same.

If Superman had the strength to turn Zod's head fast enough to snap his neck, he was strong enough to turn Zod's head away from the family. He had a choice.

But I agree, Batman also had a choice. And the terrible thing is that it had been Ra's who taught him to forget compassion. And that's what Batman did. And thus, he learned Ra's lesson. So I guess Ra's died a happy master.

 

[Mad Ones]

My problem with Superman killing Zod is that the movie has huge religious symbology, to the point where Superman is almost literally the second coming. The movie explains that humans are flawed and waiting for an infallible saviour, which is what Superman was set up to be for the entire movie. But in the end Superman murdered someone. Just an odd direction to take this messiah theme in, I thought.

 

[BH/HHH]

If Superman had the strength to turn Zod's head fast enough to snap his neck, he was strong enough to turn Zod's head away from the family. He had a choice.

But I agree, Batman also had a choice. And the terrible thing is that it had been Ra's who taught him to forget compassion. And that's what Batman did. And thus, he learned Ra's lesson. So I guess Ra's died a happy master.

I'm pretty sure if Superman could have pulled Zod away he would have. Remember Zod had powers too. He didn't have a choice it was the family or Zod.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I'm pretty sure if Superman could have pulled Zod away he would have. Remember Zod had powers too. He didn't have a choice it was the family or Zod.

I'm pretty sure you need more strength to break a neck than to turn another man's head away.

 

[bullets]

Regardless of agreeing or disagreeing I'm sure many of us can agree that seeing a super neck break with the shock waves etc was pretty cool

It really was. I loved the shockwave effect.

 

[THANOSRULES]

If Superman had the strength to turn Zod's head fast enough to snap his neck, he was strong enough to turn Zod's head away from the family. He had a choice.

But I agree, Batman also had a choice. And the terrible thing is that it had been Ra's who taught him to forget compassion. And that's what Batman did. And thus, he learned Ra's lesson. So I guess Ra's died a happy master.

SO..and if he turns his head away what happens next? Zod isnt defeated or anything...he's still a threat. There was no damn choice. Kill Zod or be killed and everyone else gets killed.

With no way to contain Zod you stop him any way you can..whenever you get an opportunity. It was not a choice at that point after Zod demonstrated who he was. Clark gave him the choice for much of the early movie.

Clark had an opportunity and he took it. It's nothing a Police officer wouldnt have done.

Clark didnt murder zod. He stopped him. (and this killed Zod by matter of how he was stopped)

 

[Senator Pleasury]

SO..and if he turns his head away what happens next? Zod isnt defeated or anything...he's still a threat. There was no damn choice. Kill Zod or be killed and everyone else gets killed.

With no way to contain Zod you stop him any way you can..whenever you get an opportunity. It was not a choice at that point after Zod demonstrated who he was. Clark gave him the choice for much of the early movie.

Then why didn't he kill Zod before, when he was not trying to kill a family but thousands of lives while tearing Metropolis's buildings down?

But that's not the card this movie played. It was supposed to be an "extreme" situation. But it wasn't actually more extreme than it had been before.

Clark had an opportunity and he took it. It's nothing a Police officer wouldnt have done.

Except a police officer doesn't have the exact morals Superman does. Superman could have prevented thousands of death if he had killed Zod before. How was that family's lives more urgent than thousands of people's?

Clark didnt murder zod. He stopped him. (and this killed Zod by matter of how he was stopped)

I haven't said "murder" myself.

 

[Kevin Smith]

So....guess this means there's no Kingdom Come movie in the future then, huh?

 

[Poetic Chaos]

I'm looking forward to when Lex starts causing trouble and Supes just punches his head off.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Edit

 

[FreeRadical]

Just a quick question, isn't tho debate similar to the one people are still having over Batman "not saving" Ra's in Batman Begins?

Kind of, the problem with that it's like 'an eye for an eye' Ra's leaving Bruce to die in a fire, so Bruce leaves Ra's to die in the train.

Nolan's Batman is very grey e.g TDK 'no kill rule'. Joker wants Batman to unmask himself or he will keep killing, but Bruce refuses - but he could to it, but some people die. Batman in TDKR does kill (inadvertently) Taila and the truck driver, but with a nuke about to go off - he had no choice.

Superman snapping Zod's neck is reflected back to what Jonathan said to Clark, after the bus crash, maybe he should let the kids die. Jonathan could have been saved in the hurricane, but refused. Superman actually pleaded to Zod during the neckhold, but he had no choice (even though he could have covered his eyes?). He let out a scream of anguish at least. (Remember when Supes cooked Luthor in JLU on TV? He said he felt great afterwards)
I wonder if Jonathan was in the same situation as the family, would he tell Clark to let Zod burn him?
But I don't know how they will deal with the consequences (if they will) in the next film or when Superman fights a foe like Darkseid. Will he show mercy or not, especially if the villain pleads?
I remember the Daredevil film where Daredevil was just killing at the start, but there was a point where he was beating a thief up, I think the thief's son pleaded with Daredevil to stop and Daredevil felt guity, saying he's not 'the bad guy'. During the battle with Kingpin

Spoiler

Kingpin is defeated, and wants Daredevil to finish him, but he doesn't and walks off

I'll be happy if they show this version of Superman feeling conflicted in the future, especially against an adversary that has committed an atrocity (and being beating half to death by Supes). What if they do it again? Should he snap thier neck's as well or throw them in prison?

 

[Kevin Smith]

I don't remember the "s" shied throw from Superman 2 killing anyone...

 

[Marvolo]

I think it was a perfect moment.

Kal didn't want to kill this man. Probably his last link to his world. But at the same time he couldn't let another human die through inaction on his part. He chose humaity over his own world. There was no other way around it, and really I think Zod wanted to die. He had no purpose and needed an end to it.

And I got the feeling there was meant to be a mirror to Pa Kent's death tho I can't quite iron it out. This is kinda what I've got.

Kal trusted Pa Kent and allowed him to die, because Pa didn't think the world was ready. Zod's beam was about to kill another father and the entire family if he didn't use his powers so he put his trust in humanity that it would understand why he did what he did.

And I don't think the next film will be a depressed angsty Superman. After he shoots down that drone and while speaking to the general you can tell he seems more chipper and more like the Superman we are used to.

 

[BH/HHH]

I'm pretty sure you need more strength to break a neck than to turn another man's head away.

Well yeah fair point there but then what? Zod would have just gone after them again. I think Supes really didn't have a choice. As I said aswell I loved that moment.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

I don't blame Batman for leaving Ra's and though I haven't seen MOS it seems Superman did what he had to do. I just think the debate and people having problems with what he did is the same as people having problems with what Batman did. To tell you the truth what Batman did was worse IMO but I don't hold it against him.

 

[Marvolo]

When it happened my whole theater was like "oh ****..." lol

 

[Heretic]

David S. Goyer wrote a scene in which he put Superman in a situation where he had to kill the villain. Therefore David S. Goyer should not be writing Superman.
Superman should be an ideal that we strive towards, and no one wants to strive towards being a killer. Along with Superman's apparent lack of care for the massive amount of death and destruction wrought upon Metropolis, this scene showed why Goyer was the wrong choice to take on this character.

Goyer is also the man who wrote the story in the comics where Superman renounced his American citizenship.

This is a man who hates what Superman is and he has been given control over the character.

 

[DACrowe]

I think it was a perfect moment.

Kal didn't want to kill this man. Probably his last link to his world. But at the same time he couldn't let another human die through inaction on his part. He chose humaity over his own world. There was no other way around it, and really I think Zod wanted to die. He had no purpose and needed an end to it.

And I got the feeling there was meant to be a mirror to Pa Kent's death tho I can't quite iron it out. This is kinda what I've got.

Kal trusted Pa Kent and allowed him to die, because Pa didn't think the world was ready. Zod's beam was about to kill another father and the entire family if he didn't use his powers so he put his trust in humanity that it would understand why he did what he did.

And I don't think the next film will be a depressed angsty Superman. After he shoots down that drone and while speaking to the general you can tell he seems more chipper and more like the Superman we are used to.

I liked the thematic resonance of Superman reluctantly killing his Kryptonian side. But the consequence of him breaking his "one rule" (which is never explicitly developed in the movie) or the personal effects it has on his own mind are glossed over.

Thematically it makes sense. But it was both underdeveloped before and after the event, making it feel like a cheap one-off moment.

That is my problem with the scene.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Thing with Superman versus Kryptonians is always "How is he going to defeat them if they're equally powerful?" Because it would be too simple to just kill them... Oh...