David S. Goyer Talks ‘Man of Steel’ Controversy & Setting Up ‘Batman vs. Superman’

Published 2 years ago by , Updated September 25th, 2013 at 9:36 am,

man steel controversy sequel David S. Goyer Talks Man of Steel Controversy & Setting Up Batman vs. Superman




Things may change in the future, but as of right now Man of Steel ranks among the most divisive superhero films in recent memory. Change is never easy, which is a big part of the reason why director Zack Snyder and screenwriter David S. Goyer’s modernized take on the Superman mythos – bearing all the hallmarks of a 21st-century (or, rather, post-Bryan Singer’s X-Men) comic book/superhero movie – continues to inspire passionate debates between fans both young and old.

We’ve addressed the outcry in response to how Kal-El (Henry Cavill) manages to ultimately defeat General Zod (Michael Shannon) in Man of Steel – and, perhaps more importantly, if many a person’s upset response may be more hypocritical than justifiable. Goyer has talked about the issue too, in addition to having touched upon how Snyder’s movie is structured to lead directly into the sequel – colloquially known as Batman vs. Superman, in the absence of an official title.

Goyer spoke about his and Snyder’s decision to have Superman kill General Zod during their final showdown in Man of Steel, while in attendance at a recent BATFA and BFI Screenwriters’ Lecture. The screenwriter/filmmaker/comic book writer flat-out said that he doesn’t agree with many of his peers’ no-budge approach, where it concerns how Superman is not allowed to ever kill another being (the following quotes were reported by Digital Spy):

“We were pretty sure [the ending to 'Man of Steel'] was going to be controversial. It’s not like we were deluding ourselves, and we weren’t just doing it to be cool. We felt, in the case of Zod, we wanted to put the character in an impossible situation and make an impossible choice.

“This is one area, and I’ve written comic books as well and this is where I disagree with some of my fellow comic book writers – ‘Superman doesn’t kill’. It’s a rule that exists outside of the narrative and I just don’t believe in rules like that. I believe when you’re writing film or television, you can’t rely on a crutch or rule that exists outside of the narrative of the film.”

Interestingly, Snyder previously admitted that part of his own reasoning for having Supes kill Zod in Man of Steel is because “if [the film] was truly an origin story, his aversion to killing is [otherwise left] unexplained.” This is worth mentioning, if only because Goyer also co-wrote Batman Begins with Man of Steel producer/story writer Christopher Nolan – the latter being a film that attempts to setup the Caped Crusader as a superhero navigating the ethically-murky waters of the new century, much like Man of Steel does with Superman.

Batman Begins Bale Neeson Photo David S. Goyer Talks Man of Steel Controversy & Setting Up Batman vs. Superman

In his review, Screen Rant’s Kofi Outlaw even referred to Man of Steel as being “Superman Begins” in terms of the structure and approach favored in Goyer’s screenplay. The writer has (literally) echoed those comments, as Goyer explained that the whole purpose of Snyder’s reboot was to introduce a new Superman who… well, isn’t really Superman quite yet:

“So the situation was, Zod says ‘I’m not going to stop until you kill me or I kill you.’ The reality is no prison on the planet could hold him and in our film Superman can’t fly to the moon, and we didn’t want to come up with that crutch.

“Also our movie was in a way Superman Begins, he’s not really Superman until the end of the film. We wanted him to have had that experience of having taken a life and carry that through onto the next films. Because he’s Superman and because people idolise him he will have to hold himself to a higher standard.”

In term of additional similarities, both Batman Begins and Man of Steel also show:

  1. The eponymous superhero causing a real mess of things, due to their inexperience and emotional vulnerabilities.
  2. How Batman and Superman form their ethical codes when it comes to killing others (in short: avoid it whenever possible).

Moreover, Man of Steel‘s ending has now allowed the “Superman doesn’t kill” code (in the future, anyway) to exist within the narrative, which means that Goyer now has a good reason to stick to that creed and even address it in the sequel (more on that in a moment). By comparison, Batman Begins shows Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) deciding to passively kill Ra’s al Ghul (Liam Neeson) by not saving him; yet, Bruce’s own moral reckoning didn’t come about until The Dark Knight Rises, when his actions come back to haunt him.

Batman Vs Superman Logoish David S. Goyer Talks Man of Steel Controversy & Setting Up Batman vs. Superman

Batman vs. Superman, like Goyer’s story for The Dark Knight, is expected to deal with the problem of escalation, as Supe’s actions in Man of Steel draw a battle-scarred and world-weary Caped Crusader (played by Ben Affleck) out of the woodwork. However, unlike the Joker in Dark Knight, Affleck playing Bruce Wayne -serving as the antagonist in the Man of Steel sequel (note: “antagonist” does not mean “villain”) - is going to confront Supe about the responsibilities that come with his god-like powers – and why the collateral damage caused by Kal-El in Man of Steel cannot be swept under the rug.

In other words, Goyer and Snyder’s artistic choices in Man of Steel could give rise to a sequel that is as philosophically-complex (if not more so) than The Dark Knight, in addition to being a successful expansion of the DC shared movie universe – so that a Justice League film takes another step closer to becoming a reality one day. If all that happens, then it’ll just go to show: change in how we approach comic book mythology, despite how tough it can be on the masses, really is for the best sometimes.

Where do you stand on the Man of Steel controversy? Do you think that if Batman vs. Superman proves to be a success, then it’ll prompt many people to re-evaluate Snyder’s reboot of the Superman franchise?


Man of Steel debuts on DVD and Blu-ray on November 12th, 2013.

Man of Steel 2/Batman vs. Superman opens in U.S. theaters on July 17th, 2015.

Source: Digital Spy

Follow Sandy Schaefer on Twitter @feynmanguy
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. So if it’s a realistic-ish take on Superman, and they aren’t sticking to any “rules” from the comics, does this mean they’ll get rid of the totally ridiculous notion that a now notorious alien, in an age of camera phones and the internet, who just helped destroy a major city, can disguise himself from everybody by putting on a pair of glasses?

    • Well said bro! Haha

      • There is a study out there (You will have to look for it yourself) that proves you can idolize something or someone and not know they have been around you, your entire life.

        • That sounds like an “out there” study all right.

          Look at the picture of Henry Cavil. Notice the color of his hair and skin? Notice how his bottom front teeth are a little crooked? Do you actually believe that anyone could spend a few moments up close with him, then he leaves and comes back dressed differently and and wearing glasses, and it would never cross anyone’s mind that they are the same people? And then that happens again and again over decades, they are never seen together, and nobody voices a suspicion?

          Please, give it up. I can’t believe I’m even having this discussion. You can’t have it both ways. If you want a darkly realistic Superman, expect some major change in the Clark Kent identity. Look at that last scene as a brief homage, a goodbye.

    • Haha, so true. That’s the biggest thing that bugs me about Superman.

    • totally agree!!! i never understood how people could never make the difference between supes and clark just because of a pair of glasses

  2. I blame it on “Superman Returns”.

    Superman’s son killed that thug who was going to hurt Lois. Superman just learned from that.

    Oh wait… those movies aren’t related are they. :)

    BTW: I find it a bit insulting that for Superman to invoke his “do not kill” rule, he has to kill someone. Morality is morality, it shouldn’t have to be learned. Same for the “don’t save your dad because it will expose you”… what? Gah.

    • I don’t think he meant that he got he his morality from killing someone. He said aversion. Superman didn’t want to kill him, he wasn’t trying to kill Zod the whole. I’m one of those that says Superman doesn’t kill but Goyer even said that he wasn’t Superman until the end of the film. He’ll carry that guilt. He will now have an almost phobic response to the idea of killing someone. He’s scarred by that now. Morality is learned. For some people in this world and in some cultures it is moral to do some pretty unspeakable things. There is no blanket morality but Superman will now hold himself to the highest of high moral standards and he’ll know what he’s talking about when he says “it’s wrong to kill.” It won’t just be some overinflated ego.

      • Well said. Well said.

      • Exactly

  3. Come on, when you fight somebody and that somebody pushes you and people are around you, you are definitely going to hurt someone. It is the force you use against the other. Another thing, people were not in the buildings because of the tremors the world engine was causing. That explains why the buildings were empty.

  4. So when Superman killed Doomsday nobody on Earth, seemed to have a problem with it. Doomsday is more powerful than Zod, so imagine when they make a MOS 3 and Doomsday is probably in it and Supes kills Doomsday, once again fans are going to get mad and bi**h and complain about it

    • When did superman kill doomsday?

      • In the Death of Superman comic series, when Doomsday and Supes are in front of the Daily Planet they keep throwing huge window shattering punches to each other, then they both collapse in front if the Planet

        • Define killing, cause that statement definitely backs nothing up. Not that I have a problem with superman killing. I personally think it would have been better if they delayed the superman killing till MOS 2, but lets see where Goyer takes this.

          • Yeah, would’ve been better to see a semi seasoned supes taken to that point

        • No…

          He knocked doomsday out, then they strapped him to a rock & flung him out into space.

          • Then you see Doomsday laughing.

          • Doomsday did die, he just doesn’t stay that way. If you read any of the expansion stories about him they explain how he was created like that.

            • Semantics. But it wasn’t a technical death.
              Besides, when doomsday attacked, they tried literally every single thing to stop before he was brought to that point to attempt to kill him.

              With ZOD in MOS, we saw that he was willing to kill everyone on earth…but we didn’t see that Supes battle with him was costing human casualties.
              Yes, obviously, people were dying as entire buildings were demolished, but unless we see a person die, we feel nothing. In order to justify Zods death, we needed to see & feel the cost of not killing him; more than just one family almost dying.

              I’m only upset about zods death, because I wanted Michael Shannon to return in future sequels.

  5. It seems Snyder and Goyer need to step back and realize that they didn’t create Superman originally.

    • Fair statement. It does seem like they’re going to take more liberties with the character and I’m not sure I’m for that.

    • Too late, Goyer is making a whole new world and I think he will be taking certain liberties that people will not like. At least he seems to have some understanding of batman, hopefully that is a plus moving forward.

      • Liberties? Like Mandarin type liberties? Liberties with canon are a slippery slope and I just don’t trust Goyer or Snyder after what I saw in MoS.

        • Wow! I’m surprised it took this long before an IM3 comment showed up. :-)

        • Agreed. It’s not that Goyer and Snyder don’t have good ideas, it’s that their execution of those ideas stink.

        • First off, a movie should stand on its own. The justification for any decision made in MOS shouldn’t be “well this was done so that perhaps in the sequel…”.

          NO. There has to be a reason for watching this movie. What happens in the future is irrelevant right now.

          Goyer says Clark doesn’t really become Supes until the end of the movie, which is ridiculous. That is like Dark Knight Rises ending right after Bruce escapes the pit, or Batman Begins ending after Bruce Wayne throws the gun in the lake. The main character shouldn’t start his arc at the end of the movie.

          Which only reinforces my belief that this was not a superhero film, because Clark wasn’t heroic. He hardly did anything that any person with his supernatural powers would not have done. Goyer himself admitted that he wasn’t really a superhero until the end.

          I shouldn’t have to wait until the sequel to see what is so heroic about Clark Kent, just like I didn’t have to wait until the Dark Knight to be inspired by Bruce Wayne.

          Goyer and Snyder == Great ideas, but suck at executing them. Though I respect the writer of the article above, his funniest comment was about MOS2 being as “philosophically complex” as the Dark Knight Trilogy. “MOS” and “philosophically complex” should never be in the same sentence.

          • Then it’s not a superhero film. It’s a alien invasion flick. It’s an origin story, they can’t simply rush through that so they can fit the standard of calling it a superhero film or a ‘Superman’ film.

            • No sir. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Superman’s story is not an “alien-invasion” story. It’s a “superhero” story. The “alien-invasion” angle is not what has made Superman’s character the most enduring superhero of the past century. To spend the entire movie on that single aspect of his character would be like having all of Batman Begins take place during Bruce Wayne’s childhood after his parents died.

              No one is stopping Goyer and Snyder from making an alien-invasion flick if they want to. Build a new character from scratch. Don’t use an already-established and already-famous brand to present it. That’s fraudulent. I’m not saying they were beinge frauds, just that they did not do a good job (to me) with the creative freedom they were given.

              • Lol you’re over exaggerating how much of the film was flashbacks.

                So in the end it’s not the film itself but what you deem worthy of a ‘suphero’ film? Okay. You’re no different then people saying he doesn’t smile enough lol. You already have a vision of what a Superman film should be, thus not letting other ideas in. Now that’s a shame.

          • I’ll have to disagree. The whole point of a sequel is to link the two films in a franchise, otherwise there’s no point. Sequels were originally meant to continue an open-ended story.
            & it’s not hard to make a Superman movie ‘psychologically complex’ btw. You’re looking down on these movies for no reason & I see it as ‘hate’. Why do you do that?

            • Let’s say Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises never existed.

              At its core, Batman Begins would still be a great story about a man who saw his parents get murdered, dealt with it through his adolescence, then grew up and channeled that negative energy into something positive. Each part of Bruce Wayne’s arc was explored in -depth.

              What made the Batman character special was already evident after the first movie. The Dark Knight only explored the story further and more in-depth.

              Man Of Steel, however, was a story about an alien sent to another planet, and his alien family coming back for him.

              If you’re a person who has never heard of Superman, and MOS was your 1st impression of the character, what reason did MOS give you to care about Clark Kent?

              Not much, and that’s a problem with the film IMO. That much should at already be clear by the 1st movie. But Goyer’s justification is simply “We’re waiting for the next movie…”. No. There has to be a reason to watch and enjoy the 1st one.

              • That’s not what a sequel is meant to be (something else that bothered me about TDK trilogy). The Lord of The Rings is how a planned sequel is executed. You can’t simply base your other films on how successful the first movie was. Like I said before, each instalment has to cover a part of the story for everything to make sense. Begins should have been incomplete without its following sequels.

              • “If you’re a person who has never heard of Superman, and MOS was your 1st impression of the character, what reason did MOS give you to care about Clark Kent?”

                Hmmm… let’s see here…

                That part where a very young Clark has to cope with the fact that he can see through people and hurt them very easily…

                … and that part that explains why he doesn’t because he is raised by some good ‘ol ‘merican folks…

                …and that part where he learns to fly for the first time and his facial expression reflects what mine would be the first I learned to fly…

                • Beautifully said, good Doctor… :)

              • MOS was made to set up a universe and there have been lots of films that finish open ended and leave things for the sequals. Star Wars the Empire Strikes Back, the first 2 LOTR films, even the original Italian job.
                Too be honest that was the only ending they could have had for ZOD anythig else would seem like a cop out.
                My main problem with the film was the sound editing

  6. Has Sandy taken over Andrew’s role in talking about all things Man of Steel? lol

  7. Superman didn’t kill Doomsday. If that comes to pass, it will also be justified . You cannot reason with a being that was created for destruction.

    • +1

  8. Superman doing what HAD to be done and screaming in anguish made him more human , as a combat veteran who’s been put in such a position i personally know it will solidify his future actions on the values of not taking life carelessly making him a more inspiring and deserving leader for the JLA and the world .

  9. Are you ppl STILL crying about this movie??? OMG, my 2 yr old gets along better in life than you grown up, OR so called grown ups.
    Get over it, move on in life and just enjoy the damn movies, I mean we can go back to the days of never having any CBM’s… Maybe that would just be better than bringing all of these grown-up babies to the forefront.

    • Don’t be silly. Have you ever been in and argument or debate about something of past occurrence? Cause if you have that makes you no more an adult than your 2 year old according to your statement. People have different passions, who are you to put someone down for advocating for something they are invested in. I am pretty sure their are things you find hard to get over, that people here will find dumb.

      • IT WAS 5 MONTHS AGO…. Not last week! GET OVER IT, I understand it can be a passion but DONT let it run the person you are and if your still crying 5 months later about a MOVIE, WTF would any of you do if your wife’s left you? CURL UP IN A BALL AND DIE? get real! This is soooo stupid.

        Yes I have had debates but not about a damn movie 5 months after it was released. IT IS VERY CHILD LIKE.

        PEACE OUT

        • You miss my point. How can you liken a marriage separation to a movie debate?. Film is passion to some people and they will jump on any opportunity to talk or debate about it. You have passions that other people will find immature or silly, does not give them the right to put you down does it?… Think before you respond.

          • Im not saying the 2 are alike, but Im saying that if you get so worked up over a movie HOW can you handle anything that gives you grief in real life?

            I can tell you I didn’t like the end of the movie like most of you, but that is SOO far in the past it just is NOT worth all of this anymore! I Love the passion of comic book fans, but this is just too much. The movie is what it is and it will not change no matter how bad I want it to, EVERYONE bit**ing will be in line to see the sequel so what is the point of doing what we all did AGAIN 5 months ago? I just don’t get it.

            • I don’t necessarily agree with the way you constructed your post, but I agree with your sentiment. During the first two weeks that IM III was released, I wrote a lot on here about my various problems with the movie. Once I got all of it out of my system, I moved-on. I don’t see the point on continuing to b**** about the movie or Superman killing Zod.

              • Obviously its not about when the movie came out. These debates will continue to happen for decades to come. Maybe not as much as immediately following the release, but always amongst friends and family. Walk into a comic book shop and say the wrong thing and see if someone won’t try to debate you on it. The date of when it was released is irrelevant because to some it was like it was yesterday

  10. My problem wasn’t that he killed Zod, it was that it was so obviously tacked on at the end. I read that Zod originally died with the rest of the crew when they get sucked into the negative zone, but then Goyer and Snyder insisted on changing it. You can just see the movie getting an unnecessary extension once Zod yells for Superman after his crew dies in the middle of the desolate wasteland of Metropolis. It screwed up the story’s pacing and was just plain forced. Goyer should know better.

    • /discussion

    • I would have found it hilarious if Superman had oissed in Zod’s mouth after killing him.

    • +10000

      • Who think that Batman has never used a gun.

        They’d be wrong.

        Don’t assume current canon and/or popular opinion is always 100% true.

        Honestly, flawed characters are the best kinds of characters.

        And good characters CHANGE, for better or for worse.

        Or did you not get the Story 101 memo? No? Didn’t think so.

        That’s probably one of my biggest gripes is people b*tching about characters changing. Don’t see this as a comic-book movie. See this as a movie. Period. Even comic-book characters should change. There are plenty of crappy CMBs to watch if you’d rather the makers don’t try and do something to not make the characters so cut and dry, black and white.

    • @AmazingFantasy#15 Thank you so much for pointing out what everyone should have seen. I appreciated every legitimate point you made. I have been a Supes fan for my whole life which is a very long time, starting with the old George Reeves TV series & then went nuts over Chris Reeve’s movies in the late 70′s & 80′s & then totally loved Superman Returns. I even read a lot of the comics in the 60′s. When I saw MoS the 1st time, I was a little upset to say the least at the destruction of Metropolis as there were a few scenes that reminded me of 9/11 that I watched happen live on TV & was traumatized by it as I’m sure millions were that horrible day. I had to really think about it afterwards to wrap my head around it, & be OK with all of it & after seeing it the 2nd time, I was OK with it. I never had a problem with Supes killing Zod at all, as I felt the same way you did. & BTW, I totally loved that 1st scene where he attacked Zod through Smallville yelling about his mother, that still gives me chills & I thought it was a brilliantly done scene. I saw it 9 more times at the theater because I fell in love with this re-imagining & think that it was very much like a Superman Begins story & if others would just understand that, there wouldn’t be so many complaining, IMO. Now, I’m so excited about the sequel, I can’t stand the long wait for it, & I’m going nuts waiting for any tidbits after filming begins next year & of course hoping to hear about the rest of the cast & possible villains. I am hoping for Lex & believe they will have him in the sequel, & can’t wait to hear who will portray him as well.

  11. Why is this something to which people are crying about? The same issue has been Superman’s reality from 1988 – 20XX (I can’t remember the exact date, but you get my drift).

    In Superman Vol. 2 Issue #22: Superman kills three sentient beings. He more than kills them – he executes them. For exactly the same rationale that Superman killed Zod in _Man of Steel_. And he swore he would never do it again…

    Superman experiencing this is a big part of his 75 year mythos, my fellow nerds. Just do you research.

  12. I don’t have a problem with Superman killing a villian every now and then because Superman killed before occasionally (I do not want to to become a character trait however) but I was bothered a lot more with the carelessness. Thousands have died in the destruction and instead for looking for survivors, Kal made out with Lois accompanied by a lame attempt at humor (it goes downhill from here after first kiss). Also, buildings were destroyed and superman made no attempt to contain the damage or move the battle to somewhere less populated.

  13. I also heard nolan’s original idea was to send zod back to the negative zone or whereever they were first sent to from krypton yet goyer persisted on killing zod. I wonder what other original ideas nolan planned yet goyer overuled him on?

    • Source? Link? ANYthing?

        • Fair enough.

          “The screenwriter then said, “I came up with this idea of heat vision and these people about to die, and I wrote the scene, gave it to Chris, and he said, ‘Okay you’ve convinced me.’””

          Even though the initial idea WAS different (touche’), everyone was on board for the altered scene by the time the film was being made. The scene’s legitimacy, thus, WAS earned.

          • It seemed more likely that Nolan just didn’t want to continue the arguement in fear of delaying the film.

            • I did not get that impression. Nolan has never struck me as one who is easily cowed…or swayed. I think you are reaching because you did not like the film.

              However, since I have no desire to argue (since neither of us will EVER convince the other, most likely), I will simply agree that we differ in our approaches to and opinions of the film, and that is okay.

              • I can’t convince you either. But the destruction did bother me.

                • “But the destruction did bother me.”


                  Nice to know DC can make a movie that actually gets the blood stirring.

                  • Yep. Precisely.

  14. Don’t worry people. Once Supes meets Grandpa Wayne, he will tell him off.

  15. I just dont understand what people are upset about. It seems like almost everyone LOVED the original 2 supermans with Reeves no? Now whats the difference between snapping someones neck vs crushing every bone in his hand and throwing him down a bottomless pit in fortress of solitude??? What? You dont actually SEE a direct kill so that makes it ok?

  16. Well said Goyer.
    And yeah I didnt like Man of Steel that much, but I think the set is ready for greater things.

  17. Urgh…the excuses.

    • Cool. The explanations…

  18. First off, a movie should stand on its own. The justification for any decision made in MOS shouldn’t be “well this was done so that perhaps in the sequel…”.

    NO. There has to be a reason for watching this movie. What happens in the future is irrelevant right now.

    Goyer says Clark doesn’t really become Supes until the end of the movie, which is ridiculous. That is like Dark Knight Rises ending right after Bruce escapes the pit, or Batman Begins ending after Bruce Wayne throws the gun in the lake. The main character shouldn’t start his arc at the end of the movie.

    Which only reinforces my belief that this was not a superhero film, because Clark wasn’t heroic. He hardly did anything that any person with his supernatural powers would not have done. Goyer himself admitted that he wasn’t really a superhero until the end.

    I shouldn’t have to wait until the sequel to see what is so heroic about Clark Kent, just like I didn’t have to wait until the Dark Knight to be inspired by Bruce Wayne.

    Goyer and Snyder == Great ideas, but suck at executing them. Though I respect the writer of the article above, his funniest comment was about MOS2 being as “philosophically complex” as the Dark Knight Trilogy. “MOS” and “philosophically complex” should never be in the same sentence.

    • MOS does stand on its own. It does, however, ALSO lend itself to a continuation of the story and development of the universe.

      • I respect the fact MOS stood on its own for you. MOS worked for some people, and did not for others. I’m one of the people whom it did not work for, but my opinion is no better than yours.

        • Fair enough.

  19. …And the only reason Nolan signed off on the idea of Supes killing Zod is because Nolan is not a control-freak. It’s not his project – It’s Snyder & Goyer’s, so Nolan knows he needs to let them have their freedom.

    I don’t need a link to prove it. It’s obviously not Nolan’s vision. If Batman, a mere human, is able to go without explicitly killing someone, then why should a man with supernatural powers need to?

    • …or, maybe, he was convinced that the idea has merit.

      • That’s possible too. I need to calm down.

  20. What’s there to “re-evaluate”. Man of Steel was great, this movie definitely stepped up the game, one example I can’t get out of my head is the end product of how much damage was done not just to Metropolis but to parts of the world compared to what I saw in The Avengers movie.

    I knew Zod’s killing would spark a controversy but I think fans are either good at mimicry or just lack comprehension.

  21. Well the movie got people thinking and talking and debating – that’s what the best cinema does. ;-)

  22. The way I look at this movie is simple it Supes from an alternate universe sorta like the Avengers being from the Ultimate universe.
    By doing that I can stomach him killing Zod, however why the hell would you ever want to kill of Zod is another irritating issue but never mind.

    I grew up reading superman and he doesn’t kill period, it is 1 of the things he just never does nor should he, and truth be told he will never do that in the mainstream comics, DC know not to screw around with that, if they did not even witness protection could save them from all the fans forming a lynch mob.

    What I would like is for either the writers or directors to step up and follow the source material for a change.

    Superman doesn’t kill
    Nick Fury is a white guy (okay Sam Jackson rocks, but still)
    The Vulcan homeworld never blew up.
    Batman doesn’t quit to go shack up with catwoman, he shacks up with her while being the bat (earth 2)
    Green Arrow, could b**** but for some reason not so much to b**** about unless they screw up the flash in season 2.

  23. As much as we all enjoy DC Movies popping up from time to time, I would have to say I am personally fed up with origins. They have done the origin thing to death. How many more times do we have to see Superman’s beginnings??? Why can’t they just change the actors but carry on the phenomenon? Even Marvel are considering reboots to a number of already established Characters. NO MORE ORIGINS…PLEASE

  24. I like Goyers variation on MOS

  25. They should change the back story to Superman always kills, then maybe he can start with Goyer for writing that boring ass movie.

    • Sorry you missed out on the GREAT film so many of us actually saw…

  26. I really try to take in every comic book movie as though it is the first time the characters story has been told. I think if you go in with that mindset you have a far better chance of just enjoying the story, rather than going through a mental checklist the whole time as to how it compares to your favorite (or some composite) version of the character.
    When I saw Man of Steel, I treated it like no other version of the character exists, and I really enjoyed it. That doesn’t mean you can do no wrong with a character but it does loosen the reigns a little.

  27. So the Phantom Zone was not a possiblity? The fact that Supes never kills is what seperates him from all other super heroes.

    • It´s not only that he killed. The problem is that the scene is very bad done. In the way it was shown it had THOUSANDS of ways of preventing Zod to kill that family without killing him. Not to mention that nobody knows exactly why Zod is not able to break free. What is so special in the way that Supes grabs him that he can´t fly against a wall? And I also seriously doubt that a Kriptonian can break the neck of another kriptonian (yeah they are incredibly strong, but they are also incredibly invulnerable).

      As a conclusion, if you want to put Superman in a life or death situation, is fine, but do it in believable way.

      • Fortunately, they DID.