How Superman Resolved the Issue of Zod *MEGA SPOILER*

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ I would argue that destroying the chamber was preventing Zod from having a motivation to "terraform" Earth. Besides, I don't think they can live without Krypton's atmosphere. Or something like that. Still a little creepy, but it's a nice use of heat vision.

 

[Heretic]

^ I would argue that destroying the chamber was preventing Zod from having a motivation to "terraform" Earth. Besides, I don't think they can live without Krypton's atmosphere. Or something like that. Still a little creepy, but it's a nice use of heat vision.

Both Zod and Kal survived and actually got stronger without Krypton. Apparently Zod's big issue was that the adjustment would cause a good 45 seconds or so of pain before the average Kryptonian attained practically god-like powers. Not sure why he opposed that so much that he hatched a stupid plot that killed his entire race, including himself.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ I guess he was just "programmed" into it?

 

[Noach]

^ I would argue that destroying the chamber was preventing Zod from having a motivation to "terraform" Earth. Besides, I don't think they can live without Krypton's atmosphere. Or something like that. Still a little creepy, but it's a nice use of heat vision.

I guess their race is able to adapt to different solar sytem types and atmospheres, Kryptonian or not. As a red son and heavy gravity (old planet) weakens their abilities while a yellow sun and lighter gravity (young planet) places them at peak performance as a species, lol.

 

[chamber-music]

Zod is all about protecting and preserving the Kryptonian above all else. He needed a new Krypton so would wipe out the humans and make Earth another Krypton.

The way he is genetically engineered I think he saw having to share the planet with another species as not an option. Better to just wipe them all out and start over just like how he wanted to destroy the current regime on Krypton. Zod is a uber-patriot.

 

[Liam_H]

Funny since Clark was the last Kryptonian besides him at the end. You would think he would be against killing him. But I guess without the genesis chamber it didn't matter anymore.

 

[BatSpider]

For the ones that have not read it, Snyder and Goyer explaining Zod's death:



I understand their reasons, it makes sense and is good character development.

Excellent reasoning. They really are thinking of the long run. It wasnt just some stunt to add to the dramatic action of the movie.

 

[LostSon88]

I honestly didn't need an explaination. I totally got it by watching the movie.

Nevertheless, the process in which they came to that decision is interesting.

 

[samsnee]

I love Snyder's excuse...it's basically "After Superman commits genocide, he would never want to kill again."

Also, I'd like to point out that Snyder claims that Superman's aversion to killing is "in his DNA." This yet again shows that Snyder believes that Superman is who he is because of his Kryptonian birth, not anything done by the Kents. The man simply doesn't understand Superman.

Co-sign this. Superman avoids killing because he was raised that way. He wasn't raised to be afraid of his powers, just to be aware of how powerful he really is.

 

[Project862006]

Co-sign this. Superman avoids killing because he was raised that way. He wasn't raised to be afraid of his powers, just to be aware of how powerful he really is.

in some stories yes he was

 

[gdw]

I love Snyder's excuse...it's basically "After Superman commits genocide, he would never want to kill again."

Also, I'd like to point out that Snyder claims that Superman's aversion to killing is "in his DNA." This yet again shows that Snyder believes that Superman is who he is because of his Kryptonian birth, not anything done by the Kents. The man simply doesn't understand Superman.

He wasn't saying that was the case in the movie, he was saying that it was best to SHOW why he has this policy. Considering the number of people who complained about the telling rather than showing of things, this was a good approach, from a film making stand point. Just putting that out there first, the view of it from film making, before we go into whether or not it was right for the character.

I BELIEVE Snyder was saying that, in an origin movie: "if it’s truly an origin story, his aversion to killing is unexplained. It’s just in his DNA."
That is, he was saying, without explaining it, then it is "just in his DNA."
Not that it's "genetic," but that it just "is." It's just "who he is," rather than there being a reasoning for it.

Now, I imagine that the contention here is that there IS a reason, and it the Kents. I agree, and I actually think it pretty much still is in the movie.

Clearly he has a solid moral grounding, and was raised as such. However, he was put in a situation that directly confronts his morals, and he was forced to make a choice. A choice he never wanted to ever have to make in the first place. That IS Superman, the idea that he would never want to make that choice.

Now that he HAS, as we saw in that moment, and his reaction, that aspect of his morality is even MORE cemented. Now he absolutely will NEVER kill. He will make sure he is NEVER in that position again. He had never encountered anyone the likes of Zod before.
In fact, he's never even had to really "fight" anyone. He's ONLY been saving lives*.

Similar to how, in the books, he saw killing Zod and his ilk as being the wrong thing to have done in the end.
Of course the books were able to give this aspect much more due, as they can far more easily spend a year on the aftermath.
I imagine, if they are smart, this will be a significant part of the sequel. It is a pertinent point and theme to touch on and carry through.


*Brings up the complaint others have had about him not showing a concern for people's safety in the film, yet it was pretty clear that that's ALL he was doing prior to being confronted with people he had to actually fight. Not to mention that one of the big aspects of the film was that he was essentially choosing humanity over what was left, and every potential greater future, of his race.

 

[scifiwolf]

EDIT: I wasn't happy with my post

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

EDIT: scifiwolf wasn't happy with his/her post

 

[The Guard]

Now that he HAS, as we saw in that moment, and his reaction, that aspect of his morality is even MORE cemented. Now he absolutely will NEVER kill. He will make sure he is NEVER in that position again. He had never encountered anyone the likes of Zod before.
In fact, he's never even had to really "fight" anyone. He's ONLY been saving lives*.

Exactly.

Much as Batman was a rookie in BATMAN BEGINS, Superman is a rookie in MAN OF STEEL. He's going to have to learn things. Apparently people want Superman to be a fully formed character already. But he's got to go through some trial and error first.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Yup, and Snyder said exactly this in the Empire podcast.

 

[BlueLantern]

Exactly.

Much as Batman was a rookie in BATMAN BEGINS, Superman is a rookie in MAN OF STEEL. He's going to have to learn things. Apparently people want Superman to be a fully formed character already. But he's got to go through some trial and error first.

I agree with you in general, but there's one problem I see. It stems from knowing that this version of Superman is thirty-three years old.

Look at the Donner films. He spent 12 years training with his Dad in the Fortress of Solitude so we know what he's doing as such. Smoking weed.

Snyder's Clark has been roaming North America for god knows how long since his father died. Somehow despite this he hasn't understood the concept of being mankind's protector or knowing his value to humanity?

I don't expect him to necessarily be a fully formed character straight off the bat, but it begs the question of what he learned through his travels. He was roaming for potentially sixteen years. It's twice the amount of time that Bruce was gone from Gotham so it's a bigger leap of faith.

Sure, we can take into consideration that having superpowers compounds the matter, but to say that the situation is flawed is an understatement. I want to know what he'd been up to on his Jesus journey.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

Both Zod and Kal survived and actually got stronger without Krypton. Apparently Zod's big issue was that the adjustment would cause a good 45 seconds or so of pain before the average Kryptonian attained practically god-like powers. Not sure why he opposed that so much that he hatched a stupid plot that killed his entire race, including himself.

The goal wasn't to create a planet where his people could live like gods. The goal was to make a planet that they didn't have to share with humanity.

The world engine was a weapon to Zod. Not a tool for salvation.

 

[The Guard]

I agree with you in general, but there's one problem I see. It stems from knowing that this version of Superman is thirty-three years old.

So a 33 year old can't still be finding himself?

Snyder's Clark has been roaming North America for god knows how long since his father died. Somehow despite this he hasn't understood the concept of being mankind's protector or knowing his value to humanity?

It's left ambiguous. We don't know that he was doing that since his father died...we only know that he was doing it for a while.

It's pretty clear that he realizes he should be using his powers to protect people...but the larger question of his role in human events? Come on now, that kind of thing takes some time to figure out.

I don't expect him to necessarily be a fully formed character straight off the bat, but it begs the question of what he learned through his travels. He was roaming for potentially sixteen years. It's twice the amount of time that Bruce was gone from Gotham so it's a bigger leap of faith.

Sure, we can take into consideration that having superpowers compounds the matter, but to say that the situation is flawed is an understatement. I want to know what he'd been up to on his Jesus journey.

He was saving people. He was learning to use his powers, and trying to find his place in the world, even though he was more or less in hiding and alienated. It's kind of common sense based on what the movie actually shows us.

 

[Marvin]

EDIT: I wasn't happy with my post

I love your courage. If only more had it

 

[Marvin]

I love Snyder's excuse...it's basically "After Superman commits genocide, he would never want to kill again."

Also, I'd like to point out that Snyder claims that Superman's aversion to killing is "in his DNA." This yet again shows that Snyder believes that Superman is who he is because of his Kryptonian birth, not anything done by the Kents. The man simply doesn't understand Superman.

Co-sign this. Superman avoids killing because he was raised that way. He wasn't raised to be afraid of his powers, just to be aware of how powerful he really is.

You two have got to be kidding me right now. Like the movie it appears you see what you either want to see, or are just too quick to observe that you don't see what's really written.

I suggest you take a second look at what Snyder said about DNA.

 

[Marvin]

2.... 2 movies it can be argued 1 but meh.

Unless RA's, Dent, and Talia are alive in "some BS extended cut" I don't see how anything can be argued.

 

[BlueLantern]

So a 33 year old can't still be finding himself?

It's left ambiguous. We don't know that he was doing that since his father died...we only know that he was doing it for a while.

It's pretty clear that he realizes he should be using his powers to protect people...but the larger question of his role in human events? Come on now, that kind of thing takes some time to figure out.

He was saving people. He was learning to use his powers, and trying to find his place in the world, even though he was more or less in hiding and alienated. It's kind of common sense based on what the movie actually shows us.

I'm well aware he was saving people and it was left ambiguous but that's what I have a problem with. People criticized the ambiguity of what Donner's Superman was upto in the fortress and this film does no better at addressing his journey apart from the lead in during the first act.

The thing is that the taking time to figure things out is what I want to see. Sure, the alien invasion, punching and explosions are cool but I really wanted to see his journey. Not for the entirety of the film, but I'd have definitely wanted to see it since then him becoming Superman basically at the end of the second act would be far more rewarding.

I remember people criticized Smallville for taking 10 years to get him into the suit. This film does it even longer and doesn't even immerse the viewer into that very journey. It was disappointing. It's not a game breaker but I'd have paid more to see his journey than the punching.

 

[The Guard]

His journey doesn't have to be a literal journey he took throughout the world. His "journey", in story terms, involves growing up, every subsequent reveal about his past, his origins, and his destiny. The film absolutely immersed the viewer in those things.

 

[Mikelus]

Exactly.

Much as Batman was a rookie in BATMAN BEGINS, Superman is a rookie in MAN OF STEEL. He's going to have to learn things. Apparently people want Superman to be a fully formed character already. But he's got to go through some trial and error first.

Exactly, much better and less lazy than becoming Superman after 12 years of training at the FOS.

 

[BlueLantern]

His journey doesn't have to be a literal journey he took throughout the world. His "journey", in story terms, involves growing up, every subsequent reveal about his past, his origins, and his destiny. The film absolutely immersed the viewer in those things.

Mate, I am well aware that his journey is his inner journey. Come on, I'm not that out of it. I think what was shown was quite admirable but I can't say that more of the same wouldn't have been appreciated.

I'm a sucker for the origin story and was perturbed at how lax Donner's film was with detailing those twelve years and went 'he's training'.

I'd have preferred more character and less final act explosions. Just me.

And to be honest now that I've thought about leaving Metropolis out of it and focusing on Smallville, that journey would have come full circle and been down right fantastic to see. Smallville on screen? Big deal. I'd love it.