Zack Snyder on his critics: "You're living in an f-ing dreamworld!"

[marhawkman]

I edited my previous post, btw, and added more. If Superman did the right thing, he shouldn't feel guilty, but he should still feel sad he had to kill. It's not something he has to do often. Should be rare.

This is something that's apparently super hard to get right. You basically have to spell it out as "I didn't want to do it but I had to do it." Even then people will misconstrue it...

[JAK]

Good point. I think the Death of Superman arc or killing Zod in the DCEU should have happened much later after this Superman had been firmly established. And show emotional consequences. Maybe have a movie with Mongul and an adaptation of "Exile" story.

Mongul would be great to see on screen, and "Exile" would be quite an undertaking. I'm not sure who would be best to do that story, but it'd be amazing to see, if done right.

This is something that's apparently super hard to get right. You basically have to spell it out as "I didn't want to do it but I had to do it." Even then people will misconstrue it...

I actually think people got that - and didn't like it, anyway... but a lot of that has to do with the execution of the scene (pun not intended), and what came just after it. We have to see Superman hear cries for help (for cinematic purposes a little girl would be best for the fastest heartsting-tug for the audience), and visibly set his own pain aside to step up and help others. His first "real" interaction with the general public being that would have a great impact, and would have done a lot to make that better. Still not great imo, but at least better. Cutting to "oh crap, the movie's almost done, get those happy/quippy scenes in there!" was never going to cut it.

I do agree that it's very hard to get right, though - and unless the landing is stuck *just* right, shouldn't even be messed with. If Zod got sucked into the Phantom Zone, nobody'd be complaining from the other direction.

[manwhohaseverything]

Questions, is the act of killing or killing of zod, superman should feel bad about?
If its killing of zod, then what about the collateral damage and deaths that happened that day?
Shouldn't superman feel more bad about that, than killing a monster?
If its the act of killing is what superman should feel bad about?
then my second question still stands. Shouldn't superman feel more bad about the collateral,than his moral integrity?
Personally, i don't care zod got killed.

[Ascended]

Yes, taking a life is something Clark should feel bad about. Because it means he failed. He's real big on redemption. We gotta remember that Clark has seen real, true, pure evil, and punched it in the face. After dealing with things like Darkseid, Satanus & Blaze, and Doomsday, do Lex Luthor or Zod *really* look evil?

Clark *will* kill. He's done it in almost every era and in almost every media adaptation. He's got a surprisingly high body count, especially if we include sentient beings that dont look human. So yeah, Clark will stiffen his upper lip and take a life if there's no other way. But he considers it a failure on his part; he's the guy who's supposed to do the impossible, and if he can't find a way to contain a threat then, in his mind, he's failed.

There's also the issue of his morality. Clark sees the world in black and white. An act is either right or wrong and he seems to struggle with morally gray choices. As his famous quote goes "there is right and wrong in this universe and that distinction is not hard to make." Dude does not see life the way most of us do, he doesn't understand the way intention and circumstance can change right and wrong the same way we do. And in his mind killing is wrong. So when he's presented with a situation where he has to kill in order to do the right thing and save lives, how does he reconcile that?

And given Clark's long-view, big-picture mentality, he also sometimes feels like he's removing a potential hero in the world when he takes a life. Consider the number of times Lex (and Zod too) have ended up helping save the world. If Clark had killed Lex in one of their first encounters, the world would've ended several times over without Lex's involvement (Our Worlds At War comes to mind, where Lex was pivotal in saving earth, as well as Forever Evil). If Clark takes a life, he worries he's condemning the future by removing someone who might make a difference.

And in Zod's case, this is one of the only remaining Kryptonians in the universe. Killing Zod isn't just killing one man, but also killing the chances of Clark's race being repopulated.

[manwhohaseverything]

Yes, taking a life is something Clark should feel bad about. Because it means he failed. He's real big on redemption. We gotta remember that Clark has seen real, true, pure evil, and punched it in the face. After dealing with things like Darkseid, Satanus & Blaze, and Doomsday, do Lex Luthor or Zod *really* look evil?

Clark *will* kill. He's done it in almost every era and in almost every media adaptation. He's got a surprisingly high body count, especially if we include sentient beings that dont look human. So yeah, Clark will stiffen his upper lip and take a life if there's no other way. But he considers it a failure on his part; he's the guy who's supposed to do the impossible, and if he can't find a way to contain a threat then, in his mind, he's failed.

There's also the issue of his morality. Clark sees the world in black and white. An act is either right or wrong and he seems to struggle with morally gray choices. As his famous quote goes "there is right and wrong in this universe and that distinction is not hard to make." Dude does not see life the way most of us do, he doesn't understand the way intention and circumstance can change right and wrong the same way we do. And in his mind killing is wrong. So when he's presented with a situation where he has to kill in order to do the right thing and save lives, how does he reconcile that?

And given Clark's long-view, big-picture mentality, he also sometimes feels like he's removing a potential hero in the world when he takes a life. Consider the number of times Lex (and Zod too) have ended up helping save the world. If Clark had killed Lex in one of their first encounters, the world would've ended several times over without Lex's involvement (Our Worlds At War comes to mind, where Lex was pivotal in saving earth, as well as Forever Evil). If Clark takes a life, he worries he's condemning the future by removing someone who might make a difference.

And in Zod's case, this is one of the only remaining Kryptonians in the universe. Killing Zod isn't just killing one man, but also killing the chances of Clark's race being repopulated.

That didn't answer my other questions. I am sorry. And your answers screams self righteous jackass who gives more priority towards his moral integrity,than the lives that were lost .because let's face it "his leap of faith" didn't turn out that great.
How am i supposed to connect to a guy who feels more bad about killing, than the lives of the people that died that day? They were thousands. Those lives mattered more than the jackass that decided to commit a genocide or superman's code. Its like saying Superman should feel bad for killing someone like hitler or stalin while they were on their killing spree. I am sorry this is beyond me.
Oh!the guy that decided to become a vigilante doesn't understand there is a subjective nature to morality.that is not credible.
Edit-i have no problem with superman doing penance or whatever. But, it has to be for the right reasons.

[marhawkman]

That didn't answer my other questions. I am sorry. And your answers screams self righteous jackass who gives more priority towards his moral integrity,than the lives that were lost .because let's face it "his leap of faith" didn't turn out that great.

It's not a leap of faith if the results are guaranteed. The idea of living in peace with Zod and his people was a dream come true for Superman. He wouldn't BE Superman if he hadn't tried peace. Superman doesn't smite people for crimes they haven't committed yet. He tries to make friends with them, reason with them, then if that fails.... In the case of Zod, he knew Zod wasn't a nice guy, but he was hoping to at the very least talk Zod into setting his kingdom up someplace not already populated.

How am i supposed to connect to a guy who feels more bad about killing, than the lives of the people that died that day? They were thousands. Those lives mattered more than the jackass that decided to commit a genocide or superman's code. Its like saying Superman should feel bad for killing someone like hitler or stalin while they were on their killing spree. I am sorry this is beyond me.

"fell bad" in what way? To Superman meeting Zod was like a family reunion with family he'd never met before. Losing that family HURT. More? Less? doesn't matter. It HURT A LOT.

Oh!the guy that decided to become a vigilante doesn't understand there is a subjective nature to morality.that is stupid.
Edit-i have no problem with superman doing penance or whatever. But, it has to be for the right reasons.

Superman didn't think about Zod's actions. He saw his OWN actions as genocide. It was by his hand that the Kryptonian race was wiped out. That is what he mourned above all else.

[Agent Z]

I know, but I’ve listened to podcasts with creators like Phil Jimenez who have spoken about their opinions of Diana’s modern laxness about killing and I find myself sympathetic to their reasoning. Their opinion is that DC has lost sight of the initial core of who Diana was, someone who is about love, redemption, and rehabilitation, someone who actually was fairly successful at reforming her villains. That’s been lost in favor of making her the violent one who needs to be restrained by Bats and Supes and they don’t like that. They especially don’t like that it’s become her “thing”, she’s the Trinity member who kills.

And while this is an understandable complaint I'm not sure how it applies to Diana killing a man who invaded Earth, tried to kill her and her team mates and had already attacked and murdered some of her people. She wouldn't be any more violent than Superman or Batman in this continuity (especially not this continuity's version of Batman).

To be honest, I always felt DC was far too forgiving of how often Bruce went Jack Bauer on people while condemning Diana for use of lethal force even when it was justified.

I mean, surely you didn't believe she was going to rehabilitate Steppenwolf of all people did you?

Yes, taking a life is something Clark should feel bad about. Because it means he failed. He's real big on redemption. We gotta remember that Clark has seen real, true, pure evil, and punched it in the face. After dealing with things like Darkseid, Satanus & Blaze, and Doomsday, do Lex Luthor or Zod *really* look evil?

To be honest, I feel like saying Clark is big on redemption is a bit of an exaggeration. I’m not saying he doesn’t do it or encourage it at times but it never struck me as any more important to him than your average superhero. I’ve heard the same said about Batman and I disagree with it even less given his actions.

And given Clark's long-view, big-picture mentality, he also sometimes feels like he's removing a potential hero in the world when he takes a life. Consider the number of times Lex (and Zod too) have ended up helping save the world. If Clark had killed Lex in one of their first encounters, the world would've ended several times over without Lex's involvement (Our Worlds At War comes to mind, where Lex was pivotal in saving earth, as well as Forever Evil). If Clark takes a life, he worries he's condemning the future by removing someone who might make a difference.

Wait, when has Zod saved the world?

[manwhohaseverything]

It's not a leap of faith if the results are guaranteed. The idea of living in peace with Zod and his people was a dream come true for Superman. He wouldn't BE Superman if he hadn't tried peace. Superman doesn't smite people for crimes they haven't committed yet. He tries to make friends with them, reason with them, then if that fails.... In the case of Zod, he knew Zod wasn't a nice guy, but he was hoping to at the very least talk Zod into setting his kingdom up someplace not already populated.
"fell bad" in what way? To Superman meeting Zod was like a family reunion with family he'd never met before. Losing that family HURT. More? Less? doesn't matter. It HURT A LOT.
Superman didn't think about Zod's actions. He saw his OWN actions as genocide. It was by his hand that the Kryptonian race was wiped out. That is what he mourned above all else.

Trying for peace is besides the point. Pa warned him of consequences. He must pay the price for his choices. The death of the thousands on that day is to a degree on clarks hand as well. If penance has to be done it would be for that.
What are you talking about? zod killed jor el. Family my foot.those two aren't family.
Dude, what are you talking about, again ? Krypton was already dead. Réunion with zod is not a family reunion. The first thing he says to preacher is zod can't be trusted.

Oh yeah! Zod commiting a genocide against humans was not in Clark's mibd. Ever. /s

[Jon Clark]

Questions, is the act of killing or killing of zod, superman should feel bad about?
If its killing of zod, then what about the collateral damage and deaths that happened that day?
Shouldn't superman feel more bad about that, than killing a monster?
If its the act of killing is what superman should feel bad about?
then my second question still stands. Shouldn't superman feel more bad about the collateral,than his moral integrity?
Personally, i don't care zod got killed.

Superman killed Zod. Whatever the rightness or the wrongness of the killing is- Superman did it. I might feel bad if I saw a person hit by a car. I would hope I'd feel worse if I hit the person, because it was my actions and not some third party that led to the injury/death.

So I want Superman to feel worse when he punches Zod through my wall than he feels when Zod punches him (or some other object) through my wall. I want Superman to actually have some responsibility for his own actions.

Should the whole battle of Metropolis be a tragedy to Superman- yes. Should Superman feel any worse for the dead than Lois or Bruce feel- I'm not sure. Should he feel worse for killing Zod than Lois or Zod feels- I should hope so.

[Agent Z]

Superman killed Zod. Whatever the rightness or the wrongness of the killing is- Superman did it. I might feel bad if I saw a person hit by a car. I would hope I'd feel worse if I hit the person, because it was my actions and not some third party that led to the injury/death.

So I want Superman to feel worse when he punches Zod through my wall than he feels when Zod punches him (or some other object) through my wall. I want Superman to actually have some responsibility for his own actions.

Should the whole battle of Metropolis be a tragedy to Superman- yes. Should Superman feel any worse for the dead than Lois or Bruce feel- I'm not sure. Should he feel worse for killing Zod than Lois or Zod feels- I should hope so.

Why is Zod not responsible for putting himself in a position where somebody had no choice to kill him?

This is exactly the problem with these types of conversations when it comes to this conversation. That the onus is on Superman and Superman alone to create an outcome where no one dies. It's like the critics of this scene ignore that Zod was the one who invaded Earth, Zod was the one who lured Superman aboard his ship in bad faith, Zod was the who wanted to commit genocide of the human race and in the end it was Zod who wanted the fight not Clark. Frankly it comes across as victim blaming.

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman killed Zod. Whatever the rightness or the wrongness of the killing is- Superman did it. I might feel bad if I saw a person hit by a car. I would hope I'd feel worse if I hit the person, because it was my actions and not some third party that led to the injury/death.

So I want Superman to feel worse when he punches Zod through my wall than he feels when Zod punches him (or some other object) through my wall. I want Superman to actually have some responsibility for his own actions.

Should the whole battle of Metropolis be a tragedy to Superman- yes. Should Superman feel any worse for the dead than Lois or Bruce feel- I'm not sure. Should he feel worse for killing Zod than Lois or Zod feels- I should hope so.

Your comparison is wrong.those situations are not comparable . Something similar, would be a guy who was on road rage trip killing people and someone stopping him causing the death of the driver.he should feel more bad about the life that are lost during the event, because of his failure to act fast enough or in an effective manner . Not for the jackass behind the wheel who decided to go for a ride killing and putting others in danger.
Superman killing zod=/= me hitting someone with a car.
In the first situation, zod is a mass murderer. His choice.my choice to kill him, to prevent further deaths.
Second situation, the victim had no choice. My actions caused death.

[Jon Clark]

Why is Zod not responsible for putting himself in a position where somebody had no choice to kill him?

This is exactly the problem with these types of conversations when it comes to this conversation. That the onus is on Superman and Superman alone to create an outcome where no one dies. It's like the critics of this scene ignore that Zod was the one who invaded Earth, Zod was the one who lured Superman aboard his ship in bad faith, Zod was the who wanted to commit genocide of the human race and in the end it was Zod who wanted the fight not Clark. Frankly it comes across as victim blaming.

1) I hate the whole "victim blaming" concept. It implies that people have no responsibility for their own actions. You go into a high crime neighborhood and walk down the street counting large bills, odds are you get mugged. Claiming you should not have done that, is not the same as invalidating the mugger's guilt or saying you deserve to be arrested for causing the mugging.

2)The reason Zod's actions aren't brought up is because the bottom line comes down to Superman's decision and what spills out from that. It's like the "no violence" policy at schools. If the rule is YOU can't hit another person then the onus is on YOU regardless of the provocation not to resort to violence. A kid insulting you mother, a kid knocking your books out of your hand or a kid punching you in the face are not acceptable justifications for YOUR actions. The other kid should have to answer for his actions- but it is a separate issue from you answering for what you did.

[Agent Z]

1) I hate the whole "victim blaming" concept. It implies that people have no responsibility for their own actions. You go into a high crime neighborhood and walk down the street counting large bills, odds are you get mugged. Claiming you should not have done that, is not the same as invalidating the mugger's guilt or saying you deserve to be arrested for causing the mugging.

2)The reason Zod's actions aren't brought up is because the bottom line comes down to Superman's decision and what spills out from that. It's like the "no violence" policy at schools. If the rule is YOU can't hit another person then the onus is on YOU regardless of the provocation not to resort to violence. A kid insulting you mother, a kid knocking your books out of your hand or a kid punching you in the face are not acceptable justifications for YOUR actions. The other kid should have to answer for his actions- but it is a separate issue from you answering for what you did.

1) The victim blaming concept exists because there is a tendency for people to dismiss a victim's pain and suffering. Whether you like it or not, this is a problem that does exist. Telling a person who has been assaulted, mugged, raped, conned etc does nothing of value. The focus should be stopping the perpetrator of the crime.

2) If Superman had killed Zod because he knocked over his books or insulted his mother, you might actually have a leg to stand on here. We are not talking about two kids fighting in a school yard where there is a zero-tolerance policy for violence. We are talking about a genocidal madman who had made it clear that the only way to stop him from carrying out his desires was death. Negotiation and imprisonment had already been tried and failed. You are treating Superman like he is the one who committed the crime here not the guy who attempted genocide.

[Jon Clark]

Your comparison is wrong.those situations are not comparable . Something similar, would be a guy who was on road rage trip killing people and someone stopping him causing the death of the driver.he should feel more bad about the life that are lost during the event, because of his failure to act fast enough or in an effective manner . Not for the jackass behind the wheel who decided to go for a ride killing and putting others in danger.
Superman killing zod=/= me hitting someone with a car.
In the first situation, zod is a mass murderer. His choice.my choice to kill him, to prevent further deaths.
Second situation, the victim had no choice. My actions caused death.

They are comparable. I am saying that Superman killing someone else should bother him more than someone else killing the same person for the same reason.

It's not about Zod being evil or good. It's about Superman having a direct role in the death.

Same situation as in the movie except that a US soldier shoots Zod with a weapon that actually kills him. I'd expect Superman not to feel as bad about Zod's death as I do when Superman snapped Zod's neck.

I just don't think Superman needs to feel any worse for all those dead people than the average Joe feels about it. I do expect him to feel worse for a death he caused.

[Agent Z]

They are comparable. I am saying that Superman killing someone else should bother him more than someone else killing the same person for the same reason.

It's not about Zod being evil or good. It's about Superman having a direct role in the death.

Same situation as in the movie except that a US soldier shoots Zod with a weapon that actually kills him. I'd expect Superman not to feel as bad about Zod's death as I do when Superman snapped Zod's neck.

I just don't think Superman needs to feel any worse for all those dead people than the average Joe feels about it. I do expect him to feel worse for a death he caused.

Which he did.