Grant Morrison gives his version of how MOS should've ended.

[Doctor Know]

"You mentioned Superman earlier, and I just wanted to thank you for that one beat in All-Star Superman where he stops on the building and just hugs a girl who’s about to kill herself. That’s one of the best and most powerful Superman moments I’ve ever seen, and, holy jeez, I’m tearing up right now just thinking about it.

GM: I did as well! What I love most about that is that it’s actually real kids’ lives! You can look this up online. Kids writing in saying ‘I was about to commit suicide and I read that scene and I didn’t,’ and then other people said ‘that happened to me as well.’ For me, that’s Superman! That was how Superman works. He’s not real, he can never be real, he’s never going to break anyone’s neck, but he just saved a kid’s life. A creature of paper saved a kid’s life, and to me, that’s what’s great about comics and about superheroes. They don’t have to be real to be functional.

Speaking of Superman breaking necks, what did you think about Man of Steel?

GM:I try to just take things on their own level. I enjoyed a lot of the film. It’s not my Superman in any way, but I enjoyed a lot of the work. But I just couldn’t buy into snapping Zod’s neck. Superman would have got Zod and flew him to the moon and punched the shit out of him on the moon. Superman thinks ‘Zod’s getting his powers from the sun, but he’s only been here for a few weeks, he won’t be that powerful. So it’s basically my power against his.’ That’s what happens in my scene. Then he hits him to Mars. Then he hits him to Pluto. The two of them punching it out on the barren, black landscape of Pluto.

Yeah, I’d rather have seen that!

GM: Then Zod’s losing his powers, and Superman’s maybe losing his a little bit, so who goes first? That would be my version. To me, Superman’s the one character who solves problems by NOT killing people. Honestly, I think that should be a rule, because there’s no others. It makes you think differently if you’re doing it. You can’t just solve this problem Elliott Ness would solve it or the way Arnold Schwarzenegger would solve it. You should solve it like Superman would solve it.

I don’t know if Arnold Schwarzenegger solves any problems.

GM: (laughs) He causes more problems than he’s ever solved. But just for your imagination, just to allow you to play with that as a concept. But filmmakers have got their own ways of looking at things, and there’s this idea of trying to make everything grounded and real, and so obviously they believe that it’s real that most of us would snap the necks of our enemies, given the chance."

Full article here.
http://www.craveonline.com/comics/ar...in-annihilator

[Drz]

Wasn't the point of Superman killing Zod, that he was literally making this mistake but he felt he had no other choice? Henceforth he won't anymore try and kill anyone.

It's not like there was a Phantom Zone device to use againts Zod or anywhere else to contain him. Superman's decision was rushed, but fictional characters are allowed to make mistakes.

[Dispenser Of Truth]

Not a fully fleshed out resolution, but I've said it before and I'll probably say it again: I'd much prefer Superman getting in a fistfight with Zod on the barren, black landscape of Pluto and finding a way to save everyone to Clark being Very, Very Sad again.

Really? I would have had Superman try to talk him down, and finding a way to get him back to the Zone or out into space with his people willingly. Zod gives this whole, impassioned speech of his loneliness and pain, and Superman can't offer up more than a "you're a monster Zod, and I'm going to stop you". This after Zod explaining his original totally insane and unnecessary plan to him in the first place, and Clark not taking two seconds to suggest pursuing any alternative options or ask any questions. That struck me as even more out of character than the killing. I know there's a million "well, for the movie there had to be changes, you can't be inflexible about that sort of thing with adaptations" responses waiting to be sent...but when he's not capable or evidentially even willing to reach out a hand of compromise, forgiveness and understanding to someone clearly confused and in pain when doing so could make a difference--even if that someone is a fierce enemy--then how is it even Superman any more? I mean, have them punch each other through some (clearly evacuated) buildings first, but.

[Vanguard-01]

Superman did try to talk Zod down. Superman tried to appease Zod by handing himself over to him. Zod made it clear that nothing less than the destruction of the Earth would satisfy him.

As for Grant's brilliant solution? Zod is still a better fighter than Superman. All he needs to do is create a moment of separation between him and Superman, and he can jet away from the moon and back to Metropolis. He wanted to force Clark to watch as he tortured the people he was trying to protect to death. He would totally think about doing that. He would especially think about that if he began to notice that his powers were ebbing away from Earth. He's a tactical thinker. "Oh, no! I'm losing power here! Time for a tactical retreat!"

So, there you go, Mr. Morrison. Zod doesn't just stay on the Moon and let Superman pummel him into oblivion. Now what?

Oh, and even if the plan works? So Superman has an unconscious Zod on the surface of the Moon. Great! Now what? There's still no prison on Earth that can hold him. Keep him on the Moon? Without his powers, he'll die there in no time. Some solution.

And Dispenser? Watch the movie again. By the time Superman said Zod was a monster and he was going to stop him, Zod wasn't talking about an unnecessary plan to kill Superman. He was ranting about how he had lost his soul because he no longer had a people to protect. NOTHING Zod said before the final battle suggested that there was a SHRED of rationality left in him at that point. He really was a monster. And he really needed to be stopped. There were no alternate solutions Clark could offer him.

[Rahul]

I guess the best to wish for at this point is that further portrayals of the cinematic Superman is more closer to the Silver Age Superman(in terms of characterization of course....), and its still doable...

[Superlad93]

Superman did try to talk Zod down. Superman tried to appease Zod by handing himself over to him. Zod made it clear that nothing less than the destruction of the Earth would satisfy him.

As for Grant's brilliant solution? Zod is still a better fighter than Superman. All he needs to do is create a moment of separation between him and Superman, and he can jet away from the moon and back to Metropolis. He wanted to force Clark to watch as he tortured the people he was trying to protect to death. He would totally think about doing that. He would especially think about that if he began to notice that his powers were ebbing away from Earth. He's a tactical thinker. "Oh, no! I'm losing power here! Time for a tactical retreat!"

So, there you go, Mr. Morrison. Zod doesn't just stay on the Moon and let Superman pummel him into oblivion. Now what?

And Dispenser? Watch the movie again. By the time Superman said Zod was a monster and he was going to stop him, Zod wasn't talking about an unnecessary plan to kill Superman. He was ranting about how he had lost his soul because he no longer had a people to protect. NOTHING Zod said before the final battle suggested that there was a SHRED of rationality left in him at that point. He really was a monster. And he really needed to be stopped. There were no alternate solutions Clark could offer him.

Well it wasn't like Zod was actually trying actively kill people till Superman subdued him ten feet away from a family. So that speech about killing them all was more tell than show. He seemed pretty focused on beating the crap out of Kal. Then like you said Zod wasn't thinking rationally or tactically. It was all instinct at that point. So Superman could have taken advantage of that and had a David vs Goliath match on Pluto where David suddenly gets stronger than Goliath and Superman ends up beating Zod with his smarts, grit, and never give up attitude. The mad dog Zod would be too overcome by rage and sadness to really notice the difference in power till it's too late. Then a cold dramatic Gravity-like flight back to earth holding a knocked out Zod and the just make it back in time. Now the tricky part would be where to put him till they can make accommodation. Well how about the other side of the world were the world engine was operating. It could very well be written that there was still lingering atmosphere/gravity spikes that Superman can drop him in. Then using the wreckage from the engine on that side of the world (didn't get sucked away) they could have worked towards building a atmospheric cell. Superman could bend and mend the wreckage and do it quite fast to boot.

Morrison's take isn't developed (it was an off the cuff hypothetical after all) but it COULD have worked. The filmmakers put together a contrived situation that ended as it was telegraphed to. Don't get me wrong I took the movie on it's own for what it was and I thought it was fine up till a point. The kill is not my problem (don't see the real point though) it's the reasoning in the movie and behind the movie. Both foolish.

[Kuwagaton]

Thanks to Morrison for finally commenting and not being irrational about it. As expected, a clean and simple solution grounded in fantasy. I really enjoyed the film but I think it definitely could have used some touches of this kind of element.

[Superlad93]

Thanks to Morrison for finally commenting and not being irrational about it. As expected, a clean and simple solution grounded in fantasy. I really enjoyed the film but I think it definitely could have used some touches of this kind of element.

More fantasy and wonder would have been MUCH welcomed. I mean god forbid there be some less grounded fantasy in my Superman movie. I just saw not too long ago a movie staring a tree and a raccoon. That movie had more raw heart that MOS had. I say this as a person who thought the movie was fine for the most part. Oh it's not like my raccoon and tree movie lacked spectral and action. Oh no. It was filled to the brim with it and along with that it came with ideas like a colony excavating spinal fluid in the craved out head of a dead god! The sheer creativity!

[Auguste Dupin]

Not a fully fleshed out resolution, but I've said it before and I'll probably say it again: I'd much prefer Superman getting in a fistfight with Zod on the barren, black landscape of Pluto and finding a way to save everyone to Clark being Very, Very Sad again.

Really? I would have had Superman try to talk him down, and finding a way to get him back to the Zone or out into space with his people willingly. Zod gives this whole, impassioned speech of his loneliness and pain, and Superman can't offer up more than a "you're a monster Zod, and I'm going to stop you". This after Zod explaining his original totally insane and unnecessary plan to him in the first place, and Clark not taking two seconds to suggest pursuing any alternative options or ask any questions. That struck me as even more out of character than the killing. I know there's a million "well, for the movie there had to be changes, you can't be inflexible about that sort of thing with adaptations" responses waiting to be sent...but when he's not capable or evidentially even willing to reach out a hand of compromise, forgiveness and understanding to someone clearly confused and in pain when doing so could make a difference--even if that someone is a fierce enemy--then how is it even Superman any more? I mean, have them punch each other through some (clearly evacuated) buildings first, but.

What plan? Zod doesn't have a plan. That's the point of the scene. The guy just lost his entire motivation. He's completely broken. He's not thinking straight anymore. From that point on, his entire motivation is "murder every single being on Earth and force Superman to watch". How can you suggest any alternative option to that? Like, is Clark supposed to say "look, if I break my own neak, are you leaving these people alone?".After the loss of the genetic chamber and the rest of his troops, Zod isn't pursuing any rational agenda. he just wants revenge. That's like telling Frank Castle there's more rational alternative than grabbing a gun and murder every gangster in New York. That's probaby true, but the guy's not going to listen to you, because that's not about what's rational at this point.
As for Morrison's alternate ending....on the one hand, it sounds pretty awesome. On the other hand, it might have been a bit of a tonal shift with the rest of the movie.

[Deniz Camp]

I'm fine with Morrison's take, and would have preferred it, but it's not really analogous. It's not a 'solution', it's an entirely different outcome with entirely different objectives.

The filmmakers had a very different goal in mind. Morrison's version would not have satisfied that desire.

[Carabas]

As for Grant's brilliant solution? Zod is still a better fighter than Superman. All he needs to do is create a moment of separation between him and Superman, and he can jet away from the moon and back to Metropolis. He wanted to force Clark to watch as he tortured the people he was trying to protect to death. He would totally think about doing that. He would especially think about that if he began to notice that his powers were ebbing away from Earth. He's a tactical thinker. "Oh, no! I'm losing power here! Time for a tactical retreat!"

So, there you go, Mr. Morrison. Zod doesn't just stay on the Moon and let Superman pummel him into oblivion. Now what?

Also, the sun actually shines much more bright on the moon because there's no atmosphere filtering out the worst of it. It's why astronaut's have those reflective visors on their helmets. Zod and Supes would get a big powerboost there.

[Qwathings]

Wasn't the point of Superman killing Zod, that he was literally making this mistake but he felt he had no other choice? Henceforth he won't anymore try and kill anyone.

According to Snyder, the point was to go against people's expectations. The idea that Clark is now capable of anything, even killing, is meant to add excitement. He believed the audience would think Superman would never kill, despite MOS making no effort to establish what this version of Clark thought or felt about killing, nor establish any kind of status quo for Clark as Superman. The audience was supposed to walk into the movie with an expectation of who the character is and judge the killing based on that, because the movie gives us nothing else to judge it against. We don't see Clark's beliefs before facing Zod, and so we have to guess at what they were and at what kind of change must have taken place to change them or possibly keep them the same.

It's not like there was a Phantom Zone device to use againts Zod or anywhere else to contain him. Superman's decision was rushed, but fictional characters are allowed to make mistakes.

That was a situation created by the writing. If Goyer and Snyder wanted a different outcome they would have set up a different situation into the script. There could have been any other solution if the creators desired it. Limits to a character only exist because a writer created them.

[PocketfulofKryptonite]

Zod asphyxiating on Pluto as his solar charge wore out in comparison to Superman's could have been equally tragic and served to kill off Zod, driven mad with grief in a warrior's rage. Have Superman take the beating to wear Zod out and as he's about to strike a critical blow, start choking and his lungs start to freeze and seize up with cold nitrogen gas... then have Clark try fly them back to Earth as fast as he could, getting stronger as he approaches the sun but realising for Zod it's too late... same result but at least it looks like Clark actually tried to do the right thing only for it to not be enough rather have them wreck most of the city fighting, no doubt killing plenty of people even if he saved the three people in the train station by killing Zod.

I wish Snyder had called up Morrison now. Between Clark wrecking that guy's truck, probably costing him his job, letting his father die and killing Zod, he's not actually very likable by the end of the movie. Just a selectively petty, destructive and immature guy with too much power and not enough real concern for the consequences of his actions. Ruins his home town and helps destroy most of a city fighting across it.

[Doctor Know]

I see it as struggle between idealogies, expectations and translations in respective media.

Idealogies:
Writers like Joe Kelly (Superman #775), Mark Waid (Birthright, Kingdom Come) and Grant Morrisson (All Star Superman, Action Comics Superman) all view Superman as a character who can always find another way and would never kill. While writers like John Byrne (Man of Steel), Dan Jurgens (Death of Superman, New 52 comics), Mark Millar (Ultimate X-Men, Superman Red Son) write their Superman as character who confronts his problems and sometimes has to make hard choices. Snyder is admittedly a big Superman fan. He obiously sees the character different than say Waid, Morrisson and Kelly. However Snyder's vision is no less valid.

The discord among Superman fans comes from that sheering of idealogies. Writers like Waid, Morrisson and Kelly weren't the biggest fans of MOS. While writers like Jurgens, Millar praised it. Margot Kidder, Teri Hatcher also liked MOS. Geoff Johns, Johhn Byrne and Richard Donner have yet to voice their feeling about the film. MOS has it's detractors and it's fans. The positive thing is more Superman and other DC movies will be made thanks to WB's renewd confidence in the brand.

Translations
Film and print are two different medium. Snyder as a film maker; who is establishing a new Superman franchise, does not have the flexibility a comic book writer has. Snyder chose to wrap things up with the Kryptonians permanently at the conclusion of his film. He probably will not use them again in his future films. Writers like Waid and Morrison can keep cranking out stories with Superman clashing with the same villains over and over because of the media they work in (and the revolving door justice system in comics). Excluding one shots and elseworlds, there is never going to be a comic issue where a writer permanently ends a well known villain character. And even if they did, the next writer on the comic can just bring them back through science, time travel, cloning, magic etc. Working in a film medium, you usually have one go with your villain and that's it. Choosing to end Zod's life for a film is fine. Choosing to off Zod in issue one of a comic only screws things for the next guy to helm the character.

Expectations
Let's not pretend Morrisson and Waid were not expecting another Chris Reeve type Superman film, that would have stirred their emotions the same way Superman The Movie did. While Morrisson gave a fair and even handed review of MOS last year. Waid through the tantrum about his gripes with MOS. Keep in mind that neither Morrisson or Waid have any nice words for Superman Returns. Which by the criteria they set for other Superman films (be like the GOOD Reeve era movies) is ironic because Returns xeroxed nearly everything from Superman I and II. Snyder gave us a go get'em action movie Superman, and started him off facing a Justice League threat. And not some real estate scheme by the mortal Lex Luthor. They say expectation is the root of all disappointment, I can see why neither Morrisson or Waid love MOS, but at least Morrisson has more positive things to say about it than negatives.

[LoneNecromancer]

I wish Snyder had called up Morrison now. Between Clark wrecking that guy's truck, probably costing him his job, letting his father die and killing Zod, he's not actually very likable by the end of the movie. Just a selectively petty, destructive and immature guy with too much power and not enough real concern for the consequences of his actions. Ruins his home town and helps destroy most of a city fighting across it.

Yeah, how dare that petty destructive prick save all of humanity after they just handcuffed him and handed him over to the aliens. How dare he save Lois' life multiple times or spend most of his younger years saving people, pulling trapped workers of an oil rig or pushing a bus of drowning children out of the water. How dare he barely react to bullies. How dare he ruin a city or a town because he had the damn indecency to fight across it... I mean, it's not like there was some pressing need, like say an alien invasion that wanted to wipe out the Earth's inhabitants. And most of all, how dare he kill a genocidal lunatic to save some lives.