Should this Superman kill? - Part 1

[br0adband]

What if Superman is presented with a situation where he has to choose "us" over Lois? That's kinda what I was trying to get at with my post. In MOS, he killed Zod to save a family of 4. As these movies progress, his relationship with Lois is gonna run much deeper. That's what situation I want to see him in. Almost like Spider-Man 1 where Spidey has to choose between MJ and the kids. Only this time, Superman's choice has consequences.

See, that's the biggest gripe I have with this particular issue - that of Kal killing Zod - and the gripe is this:

Everyone keeps saying "Kal aka Superman kills Zod to save those 4 people" or something similar, and my instant reaction is "No, that's not the reason, it's much much larger than that: Kal killed Zod because if he didn't those 4 and many many more would probably die. It wasn't just those 4 - and yes I realize people will say it's semantics or whatnot, but the hell with it: the details matter."

Kal didn't kill Zod to save those 4 people: he killed Zod to save the whole damned world, and I mean that in an absolutely literal sense - the whole world, and everything that exists upon it including every species of every living creature (not just us humans), and so on.

Even without a World Engine to terraform it, you can be damned sure that if Kal failed to stop Zod at that point that Zod - who had already dismissed us as nothing and a nuisance basically - would have pretty much laid waste to this entire planet.

I get what other people are saying, but if you want to understand this movie as it exists on a significant level (based on discussions like this one), you have to accept the little details as well as the big big picture overall:

Zod had to die, period, because if he didn't then more a lot more would be lost than just 4 lives.

Now, with respect to your proposed situation, based on this movie and how they portrayed Superman - and I mean if your proposed situation had happened in this movie and not Zod attempting to kill those 4 people - I would have said Lois was a dead girl, period.

Now, if you mean your proposed situation happens in the next movie or whenever but after Kal kills Zod so that's on his conscience from now on, if he's put in a similar situation, and it's Lois' life vs more lives perhaps the whole planet again, I'd still say she's a dead girl.

That's my opinion on it, and I don't have a problem with it because Kal would do what Kal has to do, even if that means not saving Lois in such a situation.

In fact, if anything I'd say he'd do it himself - sounds odd but there's an honor in that: taking the life of a loved one when no other solution exists instead of letting "the bad guy" do it.

Keyser Söze, even.

 

[JonKent]

October 1988 Superman #22 Superman executed Zod,Quex-Ul and Zaora this after he already stripped them of their powers with gold Kryptonite However, as the three vowed to some day regain their powers and return to Superman's world to kill him,and the people of Superman's Eearth acknowledging that he couldn't afford to leave them on the now-dead pocket Earth to let them die on their own or try and imprison them on his world, Superman was forced to execute them with Kryptonite.This action caused him to question his powers and how to deal with evildoers for some time afterwards, to the extent that an encounter with Brainiac caused Superman to manifest a more violent alter-ego in his sleep Zod and his cohorts killed that universe Superboy and billions of people

 

[Rodrigo90]

That's deep.

 

[hunteri]

I actually have no problem with Superman Killing Zod to save "a few people". What they should have done was show superman trying to save people throughout the last fight. It just felt very cold on Superman's perspective. All they needed was 2 shots to show him trying to save people and Zod getting in the way or letting them die. This would have created a much more powerful reason for Superman to kill Zod.They missed that opportunity to make it a really powerful scene.

 

[JonKent]

I actually have no problem with Superman Killing Zod to save "a few people". What they should have done was show superman trying to save people throughout the last fight. It just felt very cold on Superman's perspective. All they needed was 2 shots to show him trying to save people and Zod getting in the way or letting them die. This would have created a much more powerful reason for Superman to kill Zod.They missed that opportunity to make it a really powerful scene.

The MOS Superman is an amalgam of all the Superman thru the ages but the no.1 personality is the Kingdom Come Superman who fights at 100% all the time,his costume is the new 52 with a darker hue of Kingdom Come.
Ths will be interesting when MOS finally meet Diana they're more alike now.

 

[JonKent]

Doomsday was a flesh robot grown in a jar.

Doomsday is also programed to kill any Kryptonian he encounters besides he killed Superman too.

 

[JonKent]

t:

I think having Superman resort to killing is lazy writing. There is always a way and like Grant Morrison likes to embed in our subconscious, "nothing is impossible." Having Superman kill because he has no other choice shouldn't happen because Superman is intelligent enough to find that way or go into a beat down induced coma.

Oh my,i just remembered the scene in the Justice Lords where the Superman of that dimension stop Doomsday by using his Super heat vision and lobotomize it. Just imagine the powerful Zod reduce to a super drooling vegetable

 

[Sawyer]

I hope he isn't.

Because he forgot about what he learned from Zod's death 5 minutes later after breaking satellites and smiling at Lois over his secret.

The ending wasn't dramatic enough for that drama to move into future stuff.

If it ended with him being moody over murdering Zod, then sure. But since it showed him acting like if he hadn't killed someone, then what's the point?

Yeah, that was worse than the actual act...

"Okay, I killed him. I'm torn up... still torn up... Lois, embrace me, I'm torn up here.... alright, I'm back. Where's that satellite?"

It's definitely something that needs to be presented better in the sequel.

 

[The Guard]

I don't understand why the fact that Clark is shown moving on with his life means he somehow "forgot" what happened.

It's called "the next scene".

Sheesh.

 

[Sawyer]

Yeah, but..... it's KIND OF a big leap from "NOOOOOOO!!! " to "**** your drones, son! HAHAHA!!!!" in the span of about 30 seconds.

 

[Nathan]

It's either that, or wasting minutes of screen time watching him mope around. It clearly affected him, we don't need to watch him cope with it, right now at least, when it doesn't serve a purpose for the moment. I'm sure they'll explore in the sequel how much of an impact, killing Zod had on him.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I'm sorry, but they could've ended it more fittingly with the context of just murderering Zod.

 

[PacificBoy]

I'm sorry, but they could've ended it more fittingly with the context of just murderering Zod.

Agree. While I understand that Clark has probably moved on in the last Daily Planet scene (and done his moping in the backdrop), the scenes cut too quickly from him killing Zod to the oddly placed levity in the "he's kinda hot" comment a scene later.

A question: Has the script for MoS2 been written yet?

 

[Tempest]

Superman was forced to do what our armed services or police forces are expected to do almost everyday: Make a choice that sometimes involves ending the life of another person.

There was no other choice in that VERY EXACT INSTANT to "do it better" or to find a non-lethal way of dealing with Zod. Superman could have released Zod, and spent more time fighting him, which would have resulted in more destruction of the city, which would have lead to an even higher number of casualties. And there was no way for Superman to know for sure that he would ever be able to catch Zod again. The good general appears to have lost his mind from grief and rage.

Dozens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of lives were hanging in the balance. And the enemy was not just another human, easily subdued. Zod didn't care who he killed or what he did to his surroundings. Superman had so little time to consider the options available to him. Could he risk all those lives just so that he didn't "have to get his hands dirty"?

Besides, I fail to see how Superman screaming in grief, and needing to be held, is somehow not 'enough' of a reaction. That was more powerful than watching ten minutes of him moping around and whining that he had to kill.

It would be nice, yes, if in the second film, they have him possibly hesitate, or to talk about how he never wants to have to make that choice again. But, I don't need him to angst over it for forever. Why?

Nobody likes a mopey superhero, who is too self-absorbed in his own issues.

Anyways, Superman's reactions are fine. Was he supposed to go hide in a hole for five months, grow a beard, and stop eating while he wept continuously? Anyone who knows police officers or military personnel who have had to make the most terrible of choices, knows that these people pick up their lives as best they can.

And to give you some real time perspective, consider that the length of time it takes to type even just two or three sentences is really more time than Superman had to figure out what to do. Considering the pressure he was under, he indeed did the right thing.

 

[Rodrigo90]

^Exactly. The scenes after were really off imo.

They're working on a script now I think.

 

[PacificBoy]

^Exactly. The scenes after were really off imo.

They're working on a script now I think.

Ok thanks, cos the way a lot of the themes/issues were written, it seems that it'd be only addressed in the sequel, i.e., the taking of Zod's life, Superman as embodiment of hope, Clark Kent the reporter/regular Joe (rather than Clark the Man of Steel).

Speaking of which, was Clark called the Man of Steel at all? Not meant as a nitpick but as a genuine question.

 

[Sabaoth]

Killing Zod makes this Superman unpredictable and separates him (at least in the mind of the general public) from previous incarnations and from the terrible "boy scout" label that has plagued the Man of Steel since Frank Miller's Batman.
Not that I am saying boy scouts are bad or anything, just that Superman cannot be one in today's world of Wolverines and Iron Men.
When I was a teen , all my friends hated Superman because he was the guy who did not have his own opinion, he just did as he was told by some authority, because authority (ie. the government, the president- see Miller's DKR) determined what is just and what isn't. So instead of Superman he was just seen as a Supercop.
Goyer destroyed this image in MOS. In fact, he said something along the lines that killing Zod made this Superman unpredictable in an audio interview promoting MOS.
By the end of MOS, it is clear this this Superman follows the beat of a different drummer: his own. He will do what is Good and Right but as he determines it to be.
Believe it or not the controversy caused by Superman killing Zod is probably causing many to go see the movie who normally wouldn't have.

 

[Dr.]

I'm sorry, but they could've ended it more fittingly with the context of just murdering Zod.

Except… that is not the context.

Murder is a criminal act, which customarily requires criminal intent and premeditation (i.e., “malice aforethought”).

Killing in self-defense or in the defense of others (“justifiable homicide”) isn’t a crime. Indeed, it’s considered a moral (if regrettable) action.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Thanks for the correction

 

[Rodrigo90]

Ok thanks, cos the way a lot of the themes/issues were written, it seems that it'd be only addressed in the sequel, i.e., the taking of Zod's life, Superman as embodiment of hope, Clark Kent the reporter/regular Joe (rather than Clark the Man of Steel).

Speaking of which, was Clark called the Man of Steel at all? Not meant as a nitpick but as a genuine question.

Yeah. This entire fim is just about building up Clark and Superman.

Never called Man of Steel in the film. It's just the metaphor of the story and character

 

[Tempest]

Except… that is not the context.

Murder is a criminal act, which customarily requires criminal intent and premeditation (i.e., “malice aforethought”).

Killing in self-defense or in the defense of others (“justifiable homicide”) isn’t a crime. Indeed, it’s considered a moral (if regrettable) action.

I thought Superman killed Zod in the comic books. Wasn't it some sort of special Kryptonite?

So why are people being so weird about Superman killing Zod in this film? I don't get it.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I'm fine with it.

As long as he doesn't do it again

 

[Tempest]

I'm fine with it.

As long as he doesn't do it again

Superman has killed at least twice, possibly three times. I think we'll be fine if he has to kill again.

Although if he's dealing with Lex Luthor, I assume they'd go the route of having the nut imprisoned until the third installment comes out, when he will escape and then summon Doomsday, and then all three of them die, at least until the Justice League Movie.

And I'm totally fine with that.

 

[PacificBoy]

Superman has killed at least twice, possibly three times. I think we'll be fine if he has to kill again.

Although if he's dealing with Lex Luthor, I assume they'd go the route of having the nut imprisoned until the third installment comes out, when he will escape and then summon Doomsday, and then all three of them die, at least until the Justice League Movie.

And I'm totally fine with that.

I hope he doesn't kill again, at least in this franchise, until the above or similar scenario happens at the end of the series, where he has to kill to stop the unstoppable. If he kills in the sequel, and kills another sentient being like Zod, it negates the whole point of his remorse over killing Zod.

 

[The Guard]

[quote\Superman was forced to do what our armed services or police forces are expected to do almost everyday: Make a choice that sometimes involves ending the life of another person.[/quote]

Exactly.

It will be interesting to see if they take the angle of Superman always trying to find a way around it moving forward.