Would the DCEU Earth have been better off if Kal had never existed?

[Superbat]

You believe that Zod would have ignored the fact that they have 'powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men' by being on Earth? The tactical advantage of something like that is not something he would likely dismiss - regardless of how insane he may have become through 33 years of wandering the cosmos and finding his people dead at every turn.

Zod did not want powers after Krypton was recreated. In MOS Kryptonians get their powers from the combination of the Sun and Earth's atmosphere. Zod was going to recreate Krypton's atmosphere on Earth because he did not want Kryptonians to grow up the way Clark did. He tells this to the Jor-El AI.

So he did dismiss in the movie.

The genesis chambers were already pre-loaded with 'in utero' Kryptonians, all he had to do was terminate the unworthy ones. The codex was for 'blank slate' chambers. It's implied that the genesis chambers at the other outposts were beyond recovery - Zod already knew which bloodlines and houses etc he considered worthy, the codex was mainly for 'going forward after the planet's demise' as, at that point, there was no access to the genesis chambers that had been sent out during the great expansion. The Black Zero changed that.

Zod makes it clear to Clark that he needs the codex for Krypton to live again. If it wasn't on Earth he wouldn't have stayed on Earth after reterving the scout ship, which only happened because it was activated by Clark's presence or him reactivating the ship.

Care to provide a side-by-side list so we can see how the 'some' stacks up?

I'm not going to summarize the events of every other superhero movie. If you can list superheroes whose major threat have all been a result of their existence, I'll take a look.

[Doctor Know]

Sure. I'd say DCEU Superman's percentages in this are higher, though.

Zod, Lex and Steppenwolf are notorious bad actors. Same with Brainiac, Darkseid, Legion of Supervillains, Imperiex,Cyborg Superman, Mongul (Warworld), etc. These characters are going to target Earth whether Supes is there or not.

Now you could use characters likes Silver Banshee, Parasite, Lobo, Maxima, Livewire, and the Elite. Whose stories are independent of any prior connection to Supes. But the issue with them is that they devolve into fist fights most of the time. Normally not enough to stretch into a feature film. Same way you couldn't make a feature film using just one of the Flash's Rogues. They can't carry a movie. It's the reason so many CBMovies are just hero vs their evil twin.

People may not have specifics, but I think they may have more of an idea than a first glance would show. Seeing how JL got bad reviews, but when people spoke of Superman in the film, they generally liked him.. that's not glowing praise or anything, but it does suggest a general direction of potential tastes as it pertains to the character.

I listed the things people demand of Superman (mainly from MOS criticisms) on a prior page. It was meant to showcase laundry list of check boxes and lampoon the criticisms themselves. No other character is expected to perform at such a high level of scrutiny and it's likely the very people making the criticisms can't name examples of what they're asking for if prompted.

"Superman inspiring people, making the world a better place, making use of the Daily Planet crew, whimsical scenes with Lois, jokes (preferably pop culture jokes and one liners, like the MCU movies), have go get'em action scenes, an entertaining plot and villain, and stand up and cheer moments. Oh, and it can't be a remake of the Donner movies."

[adkal]

Zod did not want powers after Krypton was recreated. In MOS Kryptonians get their powers from the combination of the Sun and Earth's atmosphere. Zod was going to recreate Krypton's atmosphere on Earth because he did not want Kryptonians to grow up the way Clark did. He tells this to the Jor-El AI.

So he did dismiss in the movie.

The scenario posited is Clark is not there: ergo, he would not have known about a Kryptonian child suffering to adjust to Earth's atmosphere.

Zod makes it clear to Clark that he needs the codex for Krypton to live again. If it wasn't on Earth he wouldn't have stayed on Earth after reterving the scout ship, which only happened because it was activated by Clark's presence or him reactivating the ship.

An insane Zod, yes, but it's an insane Zod further fueled by Kal's presence. Without Kal there, without that awareness that Kryptonian babies will suffer in order to adjust to the atmosphere (ignoring that it's more likely that the genesis chamber would pre-adapt the babies (super-advanced tech and all that (Kal was naturally born and so didn't have those 'adjustments' incorporated)).

Zod wasn't thinking straight. None of them were, really (he's supposed to be a master tactician but he doesn't consider opening up a multi-fronted battle and make use of his Sol-enhanced followers, for example). After decades of being alone and finding their people dead everywhere they went, they were all pretty far gone. Without Kal standing up to them and (unwittingly) pushing their buttons (and Jor haunting him), Zod likely would have approached things quite differently. Keeping Krypton 'pure' didn't mean stifling them but, rather, taking their best and making them better, under his guidance.

Regarding the codex, it only made it easier for him to pick and choose the bloodlines etc. As I said before, he already had a list in mind and there were likely in utero Kryptonians in that (still working) genesis chamber (which is why he pleaded to Kal to not destroy it).

I'm not going to summarize the events of every other superhero movie. If you can list superheroes whose major threat have all been a result of their existence, I'll take a look.

But... you're the one making the claim that DCEU Superman, in contrast to the others (whether other versions of Superman or other DCEU heroes), is the one to have had 'major threat(s) that have all been a result of [his] existence', so isn't the onus on you to substantiate your claim?


Anyway, we're just going to go round in circles on this

[stargazer01]

Basically, when there is a Kryptonian on Earth, there will be big trouble and lots of destruction because few are as godly powerful as Clark Kent is, so the destruction is on epic levels. Look at the comics and animation, lots of explosions and buildings destroyed in many of the fights. And event the Donner movie, Lex created a huge earthquake, and he didn't need the help of Superman to do it. Do the writers address if the damage done hurt people who were in the buildings? Not much if at all. Sometimes they say the area was quickly evacuated. In Superman 2 the villains were flying through the building potentially killing someone. But people expect more answers in Man of Steel because... it's not Chris Reeve as Superman.

A lot of destruction and even death comes with the territory. Sure, Superman The Movie doesn't show the deaths like Man of Steel does. Same with other superhero movies, but there is no doubt in my mind that lots die as result of the collateral damage, just like Batman leaves lots of criminals permanently damaged or dead but they don't show it to keep the illusion.

[JAK]

Zod, Lex and Steppenwolf are notorious bad actors. Same with Brainiac, Darkseid, Legion of Supervillains, Imperiex,Cyborg Superman, Mongul (Warworld), etc. These characters are going to target Earth whether Supes is there or not.

True, but the circumstances are what makes the difference here. There are several things that Clark's presence enables, but that's part and parcel to a lot of sci-fi plots as well as superhero ones.

Now you could use characters likes Silver Banshee, Parasite, Lobo, Maxima, Livewire, and the Elite. Whose stories are independent of any prior connection to Supes. But the issue with them is that they devolve into fist fights most of the time. Normally not enough to stretch into a feature film. Same way you couldn't make a feature film using just one of the Flash's Rogues. They can't carry a movie. It's the reason so many CBMovies are just hero vs their evil twin.

Not by themselves, but I'd say several of them could do for a sequel, depending on the framework. Especially Lobo and Maxima together, if done right. Before last year, nobody thought Aquaman could carry a movie, either.

I listed the things people demand of Superman (mainly from MOS criticisms) on a prior page. It was meant to showcase laundry list of check boxes and lampoon the criticisms themselves. No other character is expected to perform at such a high level of scrutiny and it's likely the very people making the criticisms can't name examples of what they're asking for if prompted.

"Superman inspiring people, making the world a better place, making use of the Daily Planet crew, whimsical scenes with Lois, jokes (preferably pop culture jokes and one liners, like the MCU movies), have go get'em action scenes, an entertaining plot and villain, and stand up and cheer moments. Oh, and it can't be a remake of the Donner movies."

That's fine, but that's also oversimplification. One approach of the reverse would be to say that "those who do like it just like anything with an 'S' plastered on it." I don't believe that at all, incidentally, and I feel neither statement does the respective "side" any justice.

Not everyone who either liked or disliked the films does so for the exact same reasons. For myself, I place characterization above all. I want a smart, decisive Superman that is clearly shown learning and growing (especially if he's new), with personality traits very much in the Fleischer model as a basis. That's a take we haven't seen since well before Donner/Reeve, and it would feel a lot more fresh since it's very much an inversion of the Donner films and just about everything since (they've all taken shades of Donner's model and focus, usually my least favorite parts). I also think that would do well in a modern context. Inspiration and power fantasy are important to the mix, yes, but there are more ways to approach that than we've been shown in any recent adaptation.

If the world is dark and cynical, I want him to stand out from that and be a true contrast - but not as a Christ-allegory, but more Samson. More of the "I'll drag the mountain to me if I have to" kinda thing. Which is good (imo) because that sets up potential character conflict in different ways, too.

I'm not saying plot isn't important... but there're plenty of movies where the plot is secondary to the characters, but the characters are so good or entertaining to watch, you don't care. The original Ocean's Eleven is not what I'd call a good movie, plot-wise, but seeing their personalities all together makes it worth the watch. A focus on character and character building would be nice, is all I'm saying. And above all, the characters should drive the plot, not the other way around (something a number of superhero movies are bad about). I could say more and get crazy specific, but that'd take pages.

But others feel differently than I do. Some do want a take like Reeve with more of a modern gravitas and weight to it (something I think Cavill can do very well, and did at times in MoS). That could work, but it wouldn't be my preference. And in that lies another layer: there's what people would absolutely choose if it were their choice to make, there's what they'll be fine with, there's what they'll accept... and what they won't. That's another likely reason why you don't see too many specifics.

[Lightning Rider]

Yep they would have been, especially if Snyder actually got to do his plan where Superman is corrupted by Anti-Life. DCEU Supes does nothing but make life worse for Earth. If he had died Earth would have been spared so much suffering and would have been a better place. It’s really pathetic, far from being a beacon of hope DCEU Superman brought only suffering and pain.

We're ignoring the countless lives he saves daily. We don't see every single instance, but we see enough to assume that it's a good amount on a regular basis.