I think it's the single most polarizing and discussed comic book film in history, lol.

You're really trying to force you're opinion on me. There's lots of people who agree with it. I am not even the one came up with this pic. So get off your little rocking horse. =)

It was his first freaking 2 days on the superhero job...anyone that doesn't grasp that must be intentionally trying not to grasp that.

@lvenger: Put a "no" in front of the "kill policy" and you'll stop his sarcasm.

Dont act like like the Golden Age is the lone portrayal of a killing Superman when he killed Zod and co in your precious post-crisis run. He also killed Doomsday in the PC era. He's killed most in the PC era.

@superguy1591: And those times have been criticised for being insanely out of character in comparison to the countless times Superman has not killed anyone. Your arrogant crusade against me is getting tediously annoying now. I've known the character for a long time and any time Superman has killed or threatened to kill goes against his character and what he stands for. I've debunked your points before and I can do so again and again because you simply don't know how wrong you are about Superman. You say you like him and yet you hate a lot about the character. Some fan you are...

Zod killed himself using Superspeed. No other Zod was killed in Modern. In Modern comics how many men has superman killed?

Not even The Dark Knight was discussed this much.

Okay its been over if your still bitching about this movie you're just being a baby. People didn't bitch this much about Green Lantern and that was a way worse movie. If you don't like it thats fine but please quit beating a dead horse.

I wonder if that argument would hold up in a court of law? We should ask Soule

Maybe it can't catch a break because IT WAS NOT A GOOD MOVIE.

@wildvine: mines was better:P

@saint_wildcard:

It was, but it had already been quoted. And I'm a rebel.

@lvenger: Learn not to take things personally and you'll have more fun in life. I'm not attacking you, chief, we just have differing opinions on most things. And I never argued wether it was in or out of character for Superman to kill, I only said it has happened in the PC era the most.

I just wish you wouldn't put Superman killing Zod on the MoS guys like they pulled it out of thin air when they got it from a canon story that served as a great character moment and development for Superman in the comics. Whether you like it or not, charcaters are supposed to show and not just tell us why they believe in what they believe.

Would I have preferred if Superman had said something about how he'll never kill again in MoS? Yes, but I just wish people would stop acting like Superman killed and then said "Well, them's the breaks, I guess" and flew away laughing when Henry did his best to show us how much pain Superman was in for having killed.

Does it look like he's happy that he killed Zod? He was in distress from having done it.

It's sad that videos like this even have to be made...

Superman saved a ton of people, folks. Not even including the fact that he saved the whole planet.

I thought going it that it was an other bash video, glad I was wrong

@edgejohn: The comics company (or the superhero part of it) wouldn't be around without Superman.

Seriously, i've seen guardians and Rocket had an entire army of ships behind him to help defend from Ronan's forces. This insane crusade against MOS is getting even more stupid now. The character wasn't ultra man and he still saved people. He didn't kill civilians, that was zod. He killed Zod with a heavy heart and was completely distraught about the event. Now we can either have a superman who tries to be better in the next film or we can have a superman moping around crying woe is me every ten seconds because he was rookie. Newsflash! It was his second day at being superman. And can we also stop this whole idea of him taking the fight somewhere else. He tried that against Zod and when Zod realised he what back towards the city. So there was no way he was changing the fight venue. That would be like asking the guardians to stop Ronan from crashing into the planet. Ridiculous

To be fair if we put it into perspective, Zod was trying to destroy the world and he only destroyed one city. That's not too bad on Superman's part. And if you think this is supposed to be MOS's origin story, he's not the superman we know and love in this movie. He's still trying to find his way. Everything that's set up in the movie makes him the superman we know at the end of it, such as him being the glasses and tie clark kent we all know and love.

Then a million comments on how MoS started to do everything worst for everybody.

@deathpoolthet1000: I created a celebration thread about it

http://www.comicvine.com/forums/gen-discussion-1/congratulations-man-of-steel-1589809/#0

I absolutely loved Rocket Raccoon. He was likely my favorite character.

Some ignorant people on Comic Vine.

Pretty sure if Superman did save civilians instead of taking out the bad guys more people would have diead.

Well his dad did say to basically let them die

Sorry Clark, tonight's not your night kid.

@reactor: .........."faps"

They didnt get it from a canon story. Goyer and Snyder wanted to have a cool, "not your Fathers Superman" Man of Steel who was willing to kill and they actively looked for ways that would make that happen - whether it made sense for the character or not. Thats why they went out of their way to write him into a corner so as to try and make it happen. Goyer felt that it would "modernize" the character to have him kill someone.

"So we started talking to some of the people at DC Comics and asked, ‘Do you think there is ever a way that Superman would kill someone?’ And at first they said, ‘No way.’ ‘But what if he didn’t have a choice…?’. Nolan thought it was a terrible idea but they persisted and persisted and eventually (not that he ever had much invested in the project from most accounts) he relented.

Snyder also tried to justify it by saying that Superman's "aversion to killing is unexplained" - promoting the idea that Superman needed some back-story where he offed a guy and felt bad to come up with his personal moral code. Of course Mark Waid handled this far more eloquently in Birthright where he said that, with his extraordinary senses, Superman could see the auras of living things and thus could actually perceive the moment of their death in a way that led to a profound value in life. Then again, according to Waid, DC has been somewhat uncomfortable with Superman for a long time and were always daydreaming about a way to make him more gritty and Batman-ish.

@fifthchild: John Bryne's Superman run to start the PC era of Superman, give it a look and come back. Plus, Bryne had him kill Zod for the same reason.

All this hoopla over him killing Zod is nonsensical; he killed Zod before. You yourself admit he was back into a corner and force into killing Zod. It's over, that moment didn't make or break this movie to me. I just wish you guys would stop trying to act like he's never killed before and that this moment was the ultimate betrayal of Superman.

And how how is killing Zod making Superman into Batman? Batman never killed before...like ever.

@killerinstinct4588:

Don't let it bother you. I don't!

What some people fail to grasp was that in MOS superman had only recently began to explore the limits of his powers. Man of Steel wasn't Christopher Reeve superman. He didn't have years of training. Hell, he had just recently learned how to fly.

But some fans don't see that. They think that just because he has all those powers, that he can do anything, when that's farther from the truth.

Seeing what little experience he had, and that he was able to deal with kriptonians that had way more combat experience than him, things could have gone way wrost.

And I find it funny that in the batman movies people actually believe that no one dies, just the bad guy. Looking at all the destruction seen in the trilogy, don't tell me that in the midst of all those guns firing and explosions that no innocent bystander got killed.

MOS just had shoddy writing in comparison to Guardians, that's about it. I don't think the MOS guys had a very good grasp on where Superman should go and so they dropped the ball.

@killerinstinct4588: I think they love to hate on superman because everyone is doing it. Most people I encounter who didn't like the movie, only mention it when asked. Or they say their opinion and stop talking about it. They don't make threads and memes, because the aren't trying to convince anyone to agree with them. Obviously there are people who hate the movie, but they hate the movie and move on.

@fifthchild: John Bryne's Superman run to start the PC era of Superman, give it a look and come back. Plus, Bryne had him kill Zod for the same reason.

And you do realise that was a hugely controversial issue that was despised by a lot of people? It hardly helps your argument that Superman killing people is somehow not a big deal.

All this hoopla over him killing Zod is nonsensical; he killed Zod before. You yourself admit he was back into a corner and force into killing Zod.

You are missing the point. I could write a story where Batman allowed himself to be sodomized by the Joker because he had no choice - it was the only way to save a bunch of innocent people. Would that mean it would be a good climactic scene for the next Batman movie?

It's over, that moment didn't make or break this movie to me. I just wish you guys would stop trying to act like he's never killed before and that this moment was the ultimate betrayal of Superman.

Superman's no killing code is a huge part of the character. Its often a cliche that i've grown to hate that its Superman's personality and ethics that make him who he is more than his powers but theres a great deal of truth there. Take that away and you may as well be making a movie about Hyperion.

Its part of the essence of the character that he inspires, he finds a better way and he doesnt make the kind of compomises we are forced to make in the real world every day. Its amazing that in a movie that drones on and on about hope that they completely blow this aspect. Then again, when you peek behind the curtain and see that Snyder/Goyer/DC/WB seemed to be more interested in making Superman a bad-ass character that kids wouldnt feel ashamed to like and that Snyder seemed to be much more enthusiastic about the idea of making a movie with Batman then its not really very surprising.

And how how is killing Zod making Superman into Batman? Batman never killed before...like ever.

Batman is traditionally seen as a dark, edgy character and thats a huge part of his appeal. Superman of course was not. Heres what DC thought about the pre-MOS Superman courtesy of Mark Waid:

“I’ve talked over and over to the people at DC over the last ten years, and I know what WB’s feeling is about Superman, which is that he’s stupid, he’s corny and why can’t he be more like Batman? Well, because he’s not Batman, but there’s nothing Hollywood loves more than safe bets.”

Killing Zod was a lazy, cynical marketing-driven move to try and "fix" the character. On the other side of the fence, Marvel had a character who might be perceived as corny, "goody-two-shoes" and unappealing in Captain America. Instead of "fixing" the character they let the public get to know him as he is and concentrated on making good movies. Worked out pretty well.

Actually if you look at Snyder's explanations as to where he wanted to go, his intentions were very defined and direct. There was almost no grey area as to what he wanted, he was always very specific. Different tastes =/= shoddy writing

@reactor: Different tastes indeed, I take it he also intended for that God awful camera shake pollute the entire picture.

@fifthchild: Understand this, im not arguing over whether or him killing was a good idea or not. I'm just pointing out that it was canon, simply put. He's killed before , no matter how controversial, and it served as a great character moment for Superman to develop his no kill policy. Waid had the "soul-vision", but DC and most people didn't agree to it. Trust me, when I listen to the complaints about this movie, 90% of the people don't talk about him killing and the other 5 are usually Reeve era Superman fans who sya Superman doesn't kill. The GP didn't give two clocks about Superman killing and if MoS was a good movie ( I thought it was okay.), most reviewers would have given it a better score regardless of killing Zod.

That would just be weird and a bit distasteful. Come up with a more pragmatic scenario.

Once again, I'm not arguing whether or not it was a great idea or not. Im saying that it has happened before. I'm also not saying that he should kill in the next movie or ever again, I said it was a great character moment for Superman that could serve as great development for him in this movie-verse. If Batman and Superman are fighting in BvS and Superman gets the upper hand and is a second away from putting the finishing blow on Batman, Batman should say something along the lines of "Are you going to kill me like you killed Zod, Clark?" to which Superman retreats and moves stops fighting. I know that that's probably not going to happen since Snyder starts out with great concepts, then leaves them in the worst place. Take Pa Kent telling Clark that maybe he should save the bus full of kids. Once again, a great concept left incomplete. Instead of leaving it there, they should've had Pa Kent says "Maybe...maybe not, Clark. I don't know, I don't have all the answers. What I do know is that I'm proud of what you did; I just wish you hadn't been seen because if your mom and I lost you, we don't know what we would do.". That humanize a Pa Kent and turns him into a sympathetic character who just wants to protect his only son.

Also, I seriously doubt they wanted to portray a badass superhero by having Superman backed into a corner and forced to kill, then cries about it. Maybe I'm wrong, but that hardly screams badass to me.

I know Superman isn't WB's favorite, I'm not here to defend WB or Zack Snyder when they're making a TDKRTeutons adaptation and expecting it to help their cinematic universe when it would most likely put an end to their Superman franchise. I'm not here to defend them, I'm here to say that you guys not to stop acting like it was an ultimate betrayal when it is canon. That's all.

@superguy1591 said:

@fifthchild: Understand this, im not arguing over whether or him killing was a good idea or not. I'm just pointing out that it was canon, simply put. He's killed before , no matter how controversial, and it served as a great character moment for Superman to develop his no kill policy. Waid had the "soul-vision", but DC and most people didn't agree to it. Trust me, when I listen to the complaints about this movie, 90% of the people don't talk about him killing and the other 5 are usually Reeve era Superman fans who sya Superman doesn't kill. The GP didn't give two clocks about Superman killing and if MoS was a good movie ( I thought it was okay.), most reviewers would have given it a better score regardless of killing Zod.

I'll agree with you that MOS was hardly a masterpiece that was brought down by one single scene. When I saw it there were people walking out during the climactic Zod battle and I think the movie was generally on the wrong track. There were bits i liked and bits i didnt but, putting aside the controversy for a moment, the kill-scene is symptomatic of the overall problems which the film suffered from.

I do disagree however that the idea of Superman killing someone (and we are talking about breaking a mans neck with his bare hands mind you) is not a big deal or something that its weird or hypocritical for people to be upset about it given that its such a huge part of his character, despite the presence of a handful of anomalous, widely reviled, scenes that might be used as precedence (Theres also precedence for Superman making a porno film in another not exactly celebrated John Byrne issue).

Look I could buy and enjoy a story in which Superman struggled with his no kill policy and was forced to fail - look at Alan Moore's classic "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?". But it would have to be executed a hell of a lot better than this and done for the right reasons - not as a cynical means to try and broaden Superman's appeal.

That would just be weird and a bit distasteful. Come up with a more pragmatic scenario.

You are referring to my Batman scenario? Again you miss the point. Its not a matter of the character "having no choice". Its the choices of the film-makers, who were chomping at the bit to have Superman kill, that were so far of the mark. You can put any character in a situation where they have to do something they shouldn't or dont want to do. That doesnt mean its a good idea.

Once again, I'm not arguing whether or not it was a great idea or not. Im saying that it has happened before. I'm also not saying that he should kill in the next movie or ever again, I said it was a great character moment for Superman that could serve as great development for him in this movie-verse.

It could have been a great character moment for Superman. But it wasnt. After some tears we cut to Superman needlessly destroying millions of taxpayer dollars worth of military equipment and merrily going of to start his new job at the Planet. And we are left with interviews where Snyder talks about how "Superman had to learn that killing is wrong" and how he is going to be real upset about it in the future.

Off the top of my head I would have been pretty fine if there was a scene where a young (as in circa teenage years - not 33) Clark intentionally or otherwise killed someone and was subsequently haunted by the decision which would later shape his life. Having it as the climax of a two and a half hour movie OTOH....As one Superman fan on another board said "Dont make me sit through an origin story for almost 3 hours just to see Superman lose in the end".

If Batman and Superman are fighting in BvS and Superman gets the upper hand and is a second away from putting the finishing blow on Batman, Batman should say something along the lines of "Are you going to kill me like you killed Zod, Clark?" to which Superman retreats and moves stops fighting.

Honestly - apart from feeling like an empty nod to the controversy that would hardly be a hard-hitting emotional moment for me. Its too obvious.

I know that that's probably not going to happen since Snyder starts out with great concepts, then leaves them in the worst place. Take Pa Kent telling Clark that maybe he should save the bus full of kids. Once again, a great concept left incomplete. Instead of leaving it there, they should've had Pa Kent says "Maybe...maybe not, Clark. I don't know, I don't have all the answers. What I do know is that I'm proud of what you did; I just wish you hadn't been seen because if your mom and I lost you, we don't know what we would do.". That humanize a Pa Kent and turns him into a sympathetic character who just wants to protect his only son.

I thought it was a brave idea to have Kent give voice to the idea that maybe Clark shouldn't have saved them. I liked it when I saw it in the previews. But ultimately both father characters more or less spouted exactly the sort of thing you might write if you were jotting down ideas on a napkin while the Donner Superman movies were on in the background. And, asmentioned before, all the talk about hope and potential felt a little bit hollow given the way the movie ultimately played out. Its not always possible or desirable to adhere to the timeworn writers rule of "Show - dont tell" but its a well-established rule for good reason.

Also, I seriously doubt they wanted to portray a badass superhero by having Superman backed into a corner and forced to kill, then cries about it. Maybe I'm wrong, but that hardly screams badass to me.

I'm not saying they wanted to make him into an 80s action hero and have him say "Zod - I think its time you took a break" before snapping his neck but it think its painfully clear how Snyder/WB et al were trying to position the character. Its no coninidece that we were besieged by stories featuring "MurderMan" in other media when all the Injustice stuff played out in comics & games.

I know Superman isn't WB's favorite, I'm not here to defend WB or Zack Snyder when they're making a TDKRTeutons adaptation and expecting it to help their cinematic universe when it would most likely put an end to their Superman franchise. I'm not here to defend them, I'm here to say that you guys not to stop acting like it was an ultimate betrayal when it is canon. That's all.

There are so many terrible, wretched stories that are "canon" for any comicbook character - a feature film, let alone an origin story doesnt roll around all that often & its the film-makers job to distill that material into the best possible version of the character and story. Arguing that Superman killing is no big deal because Byrne wrote a story where he killed some guys is getting the whole thing backwards - we shouldnt be scouring the back-issues to try and cobble together a justification for the very deliberate choices that they made. The movie should embody the best moments from Superman's rich history.

At the end of the day, if you or others liked or loved the movie then good for you. But I cant get onboard with this idea that Superman killing someone in his triumphant return to the screen is something that other fans dont have every right to feel is a bit of a travesty.

@fifthchild: Again, if i had a say in the movie, Superman wouldn't have killed Zod. I would've gone with the soul-vision, but I'm not in charge. I'll admit that Snyder and Goyer did seek to have Superman kill Zod in a way to make Superman more edgy, but I don't think it's a bad thing so long as Snyder, Affleck and Terrio plan to develop on this further.

Like I said, they had a ton of great concepts that were left unfinished in MoS that need to be developed in BvS (MoS 2 would've been better with just Lex and Superman, but again, I'm not in charge.) and the kill was one of them. One of my friends went from a die hard Superman fan who hated him and turned into a huge Superman thanks to MoS and the killing was one of the reasons--the other was the suit being changed.

Whether some of you want to admit to this or not, the GP, before MoS, wasn't too fond OG Superman because they thought he was "Too good". They had been forced fed the idea that Superman is "good because he's good" and thats hard for them to relate to. If Snyder and Goyer's approach was to dissect Superman and make the GP see why he is the way he is, they started it, but fumbled. Instead of having Superman say that he doesn't kill because he's too good to kill or that he's better than that, potentially having Superman being haunted by the horror of having watched the life flash out of Zod and vowing never to kill again will resonate more with an audience because it paints Superman as a sympathetic character instead of a preachy one.

- Fair enough.

- I'm not ready to condemn them just yet, I was waiting for MoS2 to do that, but it looks like BvS will have to be how I judge them. And teenage Clark killing looks serial killer-ish, Superman doing it makes the story be about Superman learning what it means to be an ideal of hope and not Clark.

- Maybe, but if you have a Superman haunted by his actions in Man of Steel in BvS before he fights Batman, it would make sure people are reminded that he was on the floor crying after he killed Zod. Remember, he pleaded, he begged Zod to stop, he didn't go into the fight wanting to kill him. When it happened in the movie, my reaction wasn't Superman did what needs to done or that Superman is badass. It was just a winch and then me being surprised at how well Henry was able to convey emotions without words. You can't just brush it under the rug, it needs to be addressed. Superman can tell Batman about Zod's eyes and why he doesn't kill anymore to explain his No kill policy.

- Can't deny that; Glen Ford's Pa Kent was better than Costner's Even though Costner did a great job acting wise. I disagree though about Jor-El, I thought Crowe's version was more fatherly and less godly to Superman.

- I'm sure WB thought it was a great idea to have him kill Zod, but, again, I'm not willing to bash them yet until I see their Batman movie.

- I don't love Man of Steel, I thought it was okay. I needed Superman to exhibit some heroism while he showed off that he is a powerful man. I also thought that, though Goyer and Snyder tried to inject humor in MoS, the jokes all fell flat.

LMAO Origins was dumbest movie ever! I know mos had it's problem, but origin was a hot mess!

hhmmm..

@edgejohn: The Comic Industry wouldn't be better without Superman. It would be better with writers and artists who really do understand Superman and not try to hard to make him cool. Personally the only thing I don't like about Superman is when his stories become too much science fiction (the Daily Planet is my favorite part of Superman comics) though its more of a personal preference and how recently in the New 52 it kinda feels like they are trying too hard to make Superman cool.

On the topic of the whole Superman bashing thing. I think all of the bashing is just making fun of Man of Steel. I really don't think there is anyone who hates Superman. If it was because they hated Superman I am sure many wouldn't have cared about how Superman acted in Man of Steel and make fun of it.

@joshmightbe: You have just become my favorite Comic Viner.

Isn't the whole point of this website to discuss comics and comic related media? If someone wants to talk about a movie ad nauseum then let them, it's their right. You don't have to post in the thread. Just ignore the damn thing.

not to be a nit picker but this video missed a lot of saves from the 1st superman movie (even if you follow his rules of "seeing" those saved)

Like the schoolbus on the golden gate bridge (u see the kids), Jimmy Olsen on the dam, (air force 1 had 5ppl in the cockpit that you see) etc.