Can someone explain Rogal Zarr to me?

[Superlad93]

I sincerely think H'el was more interesting.

The stuff Superlad has mentioned, the hints of what might be a deeper well within Zaar, *is* interesting, conceptually. A self-loathing racist d-bag capable of uniting the masses behind him, and guilty of genocide. Some real obvious hitler parallels here, and mixing that with "secret brother" does have potential to be interesting. But what we've actually gotten on the page? Pretty damn thin and awful.

H'el at least had an interesting premise from the start, and stuff was actually done with it. Loved the idea that H'el was just a self-fulfilling paradox. Great villain concept, perfect for a guy who fights fifth dimensional imps. Execution wasn't there but the idea was.

Yup. If any part of the hints pay off? Super fascinating addition to the myth. But as of right, he's kind of just a big nothing. Pretty inoffensive for the most part, but lacking in a much needed clear and distinctive hook to inform his character.

Maybe if we'd have gotten a bit more on his past service to The Circle? Get him in his element to show more personality, but don't touch the mystery. That's really the thing isn't? We you have a character that's intentionally supposed to be some sort of an enigma they then live and die their personality and actions. And there's stuff there. He's not actually just a big rage monster who can't hold a conversation, but we don't press on that as hard as I'd like to distract from not knowing his deal.

[Jackalope89]

Frankly, I'm glad Bendis dropped this entire plotline as quickly as he did, as it failed to generate any enthusiasm from...pretty much everyone.

That said, I am curious as to what his whole deal was. I've forgotten, did Bendis ever actually explain who he was and what he actually did before shuffling him off to limbo? I'm sure he'll inevitably to brought back and immediately killed off in order to prop up the next Big Bad, but I would like to know what Bendis was aiming for with the character.

As has been said; there really isn't much to explain. He was just kind of there, and then tossed out when nothing much was done with him except making him punch Clark. But really hard.

Some half thought out stuff was thrown around, but nothing ever came of any of it. The only thing that stuck was making him the latest person to destroy Krypton.

[Masterff]

Supposedly, rogal zarr was mercenary who did the dirty work for a secret intergalactic group and might be a half breed kryptonIan and evidently created by jor el. For reasons unknown he hated kryptonIans and viewed their existence as a blemish or threat or both to living things everywhere and wanted to end their kind. We can speculate that this was due to general view of kryptonIans about half breed.some have even theorised that rogal zarr is jor el's son.anyways,he was the one who destroyed krypton and supposedly jor el was part of key conspiracy that lead to the end of Krypton.

Sorry another Kryptonian created villain?

-Doomsday
-H'El
-Rogal Zarr

wow....

[Bored at 3:00AM]

What have been the various explanations for Krypton's destruction anyway?

I can't remember what Seigel & Shuster's original idea was. Unstable planetary core?

Donner's film had something about Krypton's orbit decaying and it falling into its sun, right?

Byrne had it as the long-delayed consequence of the clone wars, didn't he?

The animated series had Brainiac responsible for covering it up, but he wasn't actually the cause of it like Johns established. I think.

Snyder had it because Kryptonians had over-mined their core for resources. Subtle.

My memory is fuzzy on all these. The reason for Krypton's demise really has never mattered. I honestly don't know why creators are so fixated on explaining it. The important part is that Krypton was this fantastical highly advanced world, but its people were too arrogant to believe they were about to die. They reason why is beside the point.

[manwhohaseverything]

What have been the various explanations for Krypton's destruction anyway?

I can't remember what Seigel & Shuster's original idea was. Unstable planetary core?

Donner's film had something about Krypton's orbit decaying and it falling into its sun, right?

Byrne had it as the long-delayed consequence of the clone wars, didn't he?

The animated series had Brainiac responsible for covering it up, but he wasn't actually the cause of it like Johns established. I think.

Snyder had it because Kryptonians had over-mined their core for resources. Subtle.

My memory is fuzzy on all these. The reason for Krypton's demise really has never mattered. I honestly don't know why creators are so fixated on explaining it. The important part is that Krypton was this fantastical highly advanced world, but its people were too arrogant to believe they were about to die. They reason why is beside the point.

I don't remember siegel and shuster explaining destruction in his origins by them during first years. They weren't fixated on superman's past much. Bill finger origin had it though.

[Ascended]

Sorry another Kryptonian created villain?

-Doomsday
-H'El
-Rogal Zarr

wow....

As well as some versions of Brainiac, the Eradicator, that guy from Godfall, and all the Phantom Zone criminals if we want to count villains who weren't artificially created.

[Frontier]

My memory is fuzzy on all these. The reason for Krypton's demise really has never mattered. I honestly don't know why creators are so fixated on explaining it. The important part is that Krypton was this fantastical highly advanced world, but its people were too arrogant to believe they were about to die. They reason why is beside the point.

I think Bendis just did it to give his new, original, villain some big emotional and physical heft, even if it didn't carry past his first appearance much.

Otherwise he's just your average alien warrior who hates Kryptonians.

[Tzigone]

I can't remember what Seigel & Shuster's original idea was. Unstable planetary core?

Old age. Perfectly natural (except, of course, planets don't explode because they're old, but presumably natural within the narrative). Nobody harvested anything or environmentally destroyed it. No villain doing so, either. I like hastily devised rocket idea (weeks prep at most). I know it's nothing, and that the council not listening to Jor-L (I think that first showed up in comic strip?) is just the way it is now. I mean, them laughing at their foremost man of science...just make them all dumb.

Old age.jpg

[Thor-Ul]

How exactly did he destroy Krypton?

I wasn't enthusiastic either, not just because this is another time Krypton's destruction has changed, but also because I find the idea that Krypton was destroyed because its inhabitants refused to believe in "climate change" way funnier.

Me too. Is kinda like a cautionary tale, with the kryptonians beings these people so advanced and intelligent and wise and yet, they were blind by their own hubris and bias about what was happening under their feet.
Make someone destroying the planet is like transforming the vision of Superman in something like a crime. Here you have a culprit about the destruction of Krypton. punch him and you have justice. A destruction of Krypton by the own negligence of their people made it a more tragic. A destructor of the planet made it cliche. And never had sticked.

[Tzigone]

Me too. Is kinda like a cautionary tale, with the kryptonians beings these people so advanced and intelligent and wise and yet, they were blind by their own hubris and bias about what was happening under their feet.
Make someone destroying the planet is like transforming the vision of Superman in something like a crime. Here you have a culprit about the destruction of Krypton. punch him and you have justice. A destruction of Krypton by the own negligence of their people made it a more tragic. A destructor of the planet made it cliche. And never had sticked.

I'm the one who doesn't like them blinded by their own hubris. I don't prefer the cautionary tale aspect. More than that, I don't like the idea that the loss of life could have been averted "if only someone had listened." I'll grant it's tragic, but so is a natural death with no warning. And there's not "guilty party", no one that failed, no recipe for a lesser tragedy. And, frankly, over the years I've grown to dislike the "one lone voice" trope in regards to plagues, disasters, etc. Ends up promoting fringe views in real life (AIDS denialism, anti-vax on autism fears, etc.). Not saying the fringe is never right, but mostly not so much. Especially after evidence is presented. And with Jor-El warning their should be time to present evidence, for other scientists to agree, etc. If the council (or whoever is in charge) demands it all be kept secret, they're even more guilty of their race's death.

[Superlad93]

punch him and you have justice.

While not inaccurate, it is an oversimplification of what the plot ended up being about, and what it was analogous to in the real world.

It was a reopened murder mystery that, yes, had a "gunman", but it also shed light on the systemic corruption of the galaxy. The new cautionary tale ends up being about transparency from those who are in power. We see this directly payed off by the formation of the United Planets and Clark revealing his identity to his home all in the interest of transparency and accountability for those in power.

There's a simplicity and elegance to the climate change angle, yes, but it's not really something that has ever payed off in real time in a story after the fact. Both are incredibly topical.

[Ascended]

I prefer the "cautionary tale" versions of Krypton's destruction, but there is a lot of merit to using that to springboard into topics of political corruption and the eventual rise of the United Planets. I am very cool with the idea that Krypton's death eventually had such a positive, important impact on the galaxy. I like the parallels and potential there. It's not my first choice, and I've utterly hated other versions of this like JMS' earth 1 OGN. But Bendis is taking the idea and building forward with it, and I appreciate the hell out of that.

If the execution weren't there, or if we were only getting hints of a greater story (like we are with Zaar) then I'd be against this use of Krypton's demise. But Bendis is making it work and I like what he's building here, even if Zaar himself has, so far, been less interesting than a wet towel. I mean, they could've used the Doomsday virus for this and gotten the same result, and when you don't impact a story any more than Doomsday, you're not a character, you're a plot device at best and a prop at worse. Zaar is just a prop. But the story he props up has some worth to it.

[Superlad93]

While I largely agree, I do think the hate for Zaar can get a bit overblown. Let's be real: he's no better than basically every version of Zod outside of the current one and the one from New Krypton. From what we've read, Zaar's not offering much in terms of on-screen contributions outside of xenophobia, and a particular hate for House El. But neither was Zod, ya know? Literally.

For me Zaar's more frustrating than he is bad, and that's because of all of the dangling carrots that he comes with that all imply a far more interesting character than we're being allowed to see. If he were just a big gray dude and nothing else? I wouldn't give him a second thought, but the fact is that the story points to more, and unfortunately tells us to wait.

[williamtheday]

I thought I read on this board that this Rogal Zarr guy was an update of the 60's "Black Zero" story that was itself later ignored.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

The current consiraracy behind krpton’s destruction is incredibly underdeveloped. I hear defense about Bendis’s direction having nuance that’s hard to take seriously when the why? And how? Aren’t there at all. Despite having plenty of time to explain it.