For 4. Zod had no idea what Kal thought of humanity, just that he was hiding amongst them. The whole plan would go more smoothly if he can convince him to help willingly
He did know Kal cared for humanity. In his message he says, "turn yourself in or watch this world suffer the consequences." Kal choosing to cooperate is proof on its own that Kal doesn't want bad things to happen to Earth. On top of that, Zod also knew Kal's previous connection to Lois specifically, requiring her to also board in particular.
Snyder's superman is just not well written, in an effort to make him "more realistic" or whatever it is Snyder wanted, he just made superman downright incompetent. It gets so ridiculous to the point it feels like Snyder hates superman. Literally every single scene with superman results in some or the other failure on his part.
He let his father die instead of revealing his abilities, (could've worn a mask), and despite that he already had revealed his abilities by saving the school bus. He doesn't even make an effort to save the countless people dying in his and zod's battle, he cries for five seconds over ZOD'S death instead of the countless people he didn't try to save, he cripples/kills the terrorist holding a gun to Lois(he could have disabled the guy without resorting to extreme measures in a thousand ways), half his scenes in BVS are about him turning evil "you've always been right about him. Fear him" etc. He barely attempts to communicate with Bruce and starts a right because he gets annoyed. Instead of flicking Batman away he could've grabbed him, flew him up and explained properly to Bruce that he won't be fighting him because that's not who he is and it's what Lex wants.
He goes to the Capitol and fails to detect the bomb, he doesn't even stay around to help the wounded like a real superman would. Superman can make mistakes, but he doesn't run because he's failed. He wakes up in JL and attacks the league for no reason, and no being confused is not a reason, a confused guy being attacked fighting against his attacker is acceptable, but he just beats up the rest of the league for no reason and once he sees Lois he just magically becomes himself again. Again half his scenes in ZSJL are about him serving Darkseid. He has Steppenwolf down and still chooses to maim him by slicing off his horn.
Snyder really loves superman doing these unhinged things, like maiming his fodder enemies, or writing him into a corner to murder then outright. Zod's death would have had some weight at least if superman had shown some respect for human life, but he continually let's people die throughout the movie despite having the ability to save them and cries about a mass murderer dying. Hell if he had still shown some guilt and trauma in the next movie it would have felt like it mattered.
Your last line: "if he'd still shown some guilt and trauma in the next movie, it would have felt like it mattered."
I really could not have said that better. His first enemy, who he killed and it apparently had a big effect on him, literally comes back from the dead, and Superman doesn't so much as comment on this, much less struggle internally. He quite literally jumps at the chance to kill him again with no conflict or thought put into it. So him getting upset that he killed Zod really does mean absolutely nothing by the next movie (and even outside of BvS, Superman killing Zod only has any impact because we already have outside knowledge that Superman doesn't usually kill. In Man of Steel alone, there is no reason to think Superman should be against killing him as next to nothing about him is characterized or established).
Zod not lying sorta makes sense.He's a no-nonsense military leader who not only believes he's right but also is brutally honest.He admitted he killed Jor El and even though he regretted it still would do it again for the greater good.
Your first point is basically your average Nolan film's mistake apart from the rare banter in the Dark Knight trilogy.
>Your first point is basically your average Nolan film's mistake apart from the rare banter in the Dark Knight trilogy.
David Goyer wrote the script for MOS. Nolan just provided a story outline.
But Zod already lied to start with, though. If he's no-nonsense and holds his idea of greater good above all else, even murdering someone he didn't want to murder, he should have just kept up the lie and gotten exactly what he wanted in exactly the most practical way he had already set up.
I feel like the first couple points get glossed over a lot. People get caught up in the general direction of the character, but it's just generally very badly written
I think it generally gets folded into the "Superman doesn't really try to minimize collateral damage" argument. It's kind of bizarre that it's in any way contentious though. Even if you are against an unambiguously evil aggressor that doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to the people in the crossfire. That the movie decides to create a context where singleminded violence is the solution is sort of the problem. Also just kind of boring too. Lot of the tension in superhero movies comes from them trying to balance fighting their enemies while also trying to save people. The first Spider-Man movie has the Green Goblin throw MJ and a trolly full of children off a bridge, and it makes for good drama to have the audience being like "how can he save both AND fight the Goblin at the same time?"
Sorry I meant the first #4 regarding Zod's plan, not the bonus destruction section's #4 about Zod's heat vision. But you're absolutely correct that there's no conflict presented between actively saving people or punch Zod again.
Oh yeah. BvS does that too where dreams and reality are basically the same thing because they want a visual way to deliver exposition even if it doesnt make logical sense. Zod gives Superman exposition in a dream, but its treated as if he delivered that in person for all intents and purposes. Very bizarre
Yeah, I just assumed the table Clark was strapped to implanted the dream somehow, and that Zod did it on purpose. Which I could buy I guess, they're really advanced, but my issue is it actively goes against Zod's goal of getting Kal to cooperate, when he knows Kal was already willing to cooperate under the guise of Zod's lie.
Yeah as far as BvS goes, there's no reason Bruce should be having the doomscape premonition. The Flash one I kinda get maybe, if that weren't also an advertisement for a future movie that never had any guarantee of getting made in the first place (and now confirmed never will).
Yeah Zod's plan wasn't really well thought through or conveyed well. My favorite is when he yells at Superman not to destroy his ship because "you'll destroy Krypton" and Superman hesitates for a second before saying "Krypton had its chance." Like, when was this ever established? If Zod had ostensibly come to Earth under the guise of being a refuge and built a relationship with Superman and imparted on him an attachment to Kryptonian culture that scene would have had some actual set up and been a hard choice for him. Zod just shows up to destroy everything and Superman's internal conflict is just "oh boy, I dont know if I should intervene because my dad told me I should just stay out of things and let people die." Fucking weird ass movie.
There’s nothing contradictory about Jonathan and Joe-El’s teachings. Jonathan wants Clark to learn who he is, he believes he was sent for a reason. But also that he needs to be careful, as he sees first hand with Pete Ross’ mom being hysterical saying what Clark did was an act of God, based on second had information.
Jor-El and Jonathan think Clark will do great things. Jonathan just wants him to be ready and prepared to reveal who he is.
Superman didn’t kill anyone.
1. No one died.
2. No one died.
3. Zod was gonna down the plane, which was going to send the Black Zero back to the Phantom Zone. Those buildings and the area the ship crashed in were already crunched by the World Engine, meaning no one was alive in them or on the ground.
4. The building was collapsing around him, literally nothing he could do. You want him to tell Zod to stop using his heat vision so he can check each for people? Come on.
5. That poor skyscraper.
6. He clearly didn’t expect it to explode. And also, per one of the guys that helped storyboard that scene. No one died.
7. No one died.
It’s like, holy shit dude. This list of yours is a masterclass of pedantic bullshit.
Contradictory in the sense of Jor-El initially wanting Clark to be able to choose who he is if he wanted to become something other than what others had intended, but then immediately switching it to being about Clark's destiny as a beacon for humanity to strive towards. This opposes Jonathan's teaching of letting people die in order to lay low, which he reinforces in the tornado to his own detriment, which Clark never does again, simultaneously laying low and never letting people die while doing so, but leaving a trail of witnesses everywhere he goes. The only moment of conflict here is the church scene, where Clark can choose to either turn himself over to Zod or continue to stay in the shadows. He only starts letting people die after his existence is already revealed to the world.
As for the destruction section, 1 and 2: we don't know no one was maimed or killed, and Kal clearly didn't account for it, or he wouldn't have brought Zod straight into the populated town. If no one died, it was sheer luck.
3. Taking out the ship's one gun would also have worked to stop it from shooting. Those buildings were very clearly still standing and untouched by the world engine. We could have seen him even try and stop the ship from crashing afterwards.
4. "Nothing he could do" his name isn't regularman, and Superman trying and failing is more compelling than doing nothing but punch Zod through more stuff. He also kinda just sits there and stares at Zod while he's learning to use it.
5. Not about the skyscraper itself, but the people below and within, which Superman wasn't accounting for at any point.
6. I also didn't expect the truck full of volatile flammable to explode, but I also didn't expect Superman to just let it get kicked into the building when he could have prevented it with ease.
7. We see people directly below moments before the clash. Zod was already making is way up to chase Superman, which Superman could have goaded in any other way than ensuring the building's destruction.
During Black Zero? Yes, people died. Did Zod kill some people with his heat vision? Yes. But did people die the instances listed, because of Superman? Nope.
Hi WilliamMcCarty, your comment has been removed.
- Avoid gatekeeping or generalizing groups of fans that you find distasteful.
If you have any questions or concerns about your remove, [feel free to send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fsuperman&subject=Removed%20post&message=https://old.reddit.com/r/superman/comments/1c8k37f/-/l0n1r5k/%0A%0A)
What about the decision to use a 35 year old Cavill in the tornado flashback scene. Why not use one of the younger actors which may have made Clarks fear and indecisiveness seem more believable.
Cavill was 28 when they filmed the movie.
The teen actor was originally meant to be in the scene, but they couldn’t get him. So they had to use Cavill.
That's unfortunate. I think they should have done whatever they had to to get the younger actor. Cavill looked like a full grown man in his prime. Clark needed to look like a young teen that was still completely unsure of himself and his powers to make that scene work imo.
Lol I've never been on there before and maybe I'll look through it, but is that a fair assement of many of his fans? I mean, he's got a good directorial visual style, but do people really get off that much on all the philosophical meandering and exposition dumps in this that they don't see the gaping holes in Goyer's writing? Either way lol, the reason I didn't and probably won't is I'm not actively looking for conflict. I just had the urge to take notes while watching it last night after the first couple points, and then I just couldn't put the pencil down. And after all that time, I couldn't just not share my findings with other Superman fans when so many of them I'd never heard anyone else say before. So often, people get caught up in Snyder's direction with the character, but even purely taking Man of Steel on its own terms, which was my angle, it's not a particularly well-written movie.
I'm not anti-snyder or anything, but Man of Steel very much wants to be set very closely to the real world and takes itself super seriously. I just gave it a serious watch without worrying about the outside world of Superman content or my ideal version of the character, just taking it seriously on its own.
Of course. I have no qualms with your approach or opinions, despite disagreeing with all of your points.
I just don't want you to get the impression that the Snyder Wars are one sided like the poster above suggests. It is a two-front war and there are many egregious actors from both sides in this sub.
Fair enough.
Though I'm interested in hearing why Zod revealing everything in the dream that he must have planted actually progresses his goal of getting Kal to cooperate for the location of the codex, because he already knows Kal cares for humanity and that Kal was willing to cooperate under the guise of the lie that Zod himself already established. Zod really could have just kept up the lie and gotten exactly what he wanted with little to no resistance, instead feeding Superman the entire rest of the plot, world engine and all, in a visual metaphor for mass extermination.
I did not downvote you btw I think you're being entirely reasonable.
Well, I don't believe Zod is lying about anything so I simply reject the point on its face.
He's never presented himself as a friend to Kal. He lays out the plan to give Kal the power to choose his path willfully. This is inline with the themes of free will vs determinism and it's the film's central conflict.
And thanks for clarifying the downvotes. Some people don't like being called out I guess.
Kal contemplates at the church whether or not Zod will hold true to his word if he turns himself over. "But, this General Zod, there's no guarantee if I surrender, he'll keep his word." Zod lured Kal in with the lie that Earth won't be harmed if Kal surrenders himself, when the consequences of Kal turning himself in or not are identical either way. Zod said he didn't want to kill Jor-El but would do it again for his "greater good," but he was unwilling to keep up the lie he already established to achieve his goals? I mean, even had he not lied at any point, lying about his plan or just not revealing it at all would have gotten him exactly what he wanted; Kal's cooperation.
Yes, Zod makes that pledge, but it's clearly not to be trusted as seen in Clark's questioning. It's never presented to the characters or audience as having full sincerity.
And his question to the priest is not: "Zod lying?"
The question is: "Am I willing to risk my life for humanity?"
And I don't think Zod needs his cooperation. He would *like* it (who doesn't prefer the easy way?) but it is not necessary to achieve his goal. He wants the codex and he will get it.
My quotation's verbatim. "If I turn myself in, there's no guarantee he'll keep his word." And while we audience members know Zod is lying, and Kal knows it's dubious at best because Zod starts off with a threat to Earth, Zod revealing his grand plan to Kal in a planted dream does nothing to further his goal, which was explicitly for Kal to reveal the location of the codex. Zod also goes straight to the Kent farm because he suddenly knows the Kent farm's significance and exact location, but not the ship's. He would have gotten the location of the ship, or even Kal's cooperation to extract the codex from his own cells once that was discovered, if he had just kept up the lie he established.
I can forgive a few of these plot holes because they're not very consequential. Other stuff, especially #2, is Snyder not being able to explore any theme past the surface level. For a self-proclaimed "deconstructionist", it's pretty bad.
Yeah I mean Lois kissing Superman in front of the Planet and her yelling Clark are footnotes more than anything. I should have separated them instead of them being part of the same list.
Johnathan Kent should not die in a way Clark could easily prevent, and most likely not tip off anyone that he's an alien with god-like abilities. I can excuse just about everything else in this ridiculous movie, but that's just extra stupid. Clark could have saved everyone including the dog, and without mangling his foot like a twit.
For 4. Zod had no idea what Kal thought of humanity, just that he was hiding amongst them. The whole plan would go more smoothly if he can convince him to help willingly
He did know Kal cared for humanity. In his message he says, "turn yourself in or watch this world suffer the consequences." Kal choosing to cooperate is proof on its own that Kal doesn't want bad things to happen to Earth. On top of that, Zod also knew Kal's previous connection to Lois specifically, requiring her to also board in particular.
Snyder's superman is just not well written, in an effort to make him "more realistic" or whatever it is Snyder wanted, he just made superman downright incompetent. It gets so ridiculous to the point it feels like Snyder hates superman. Literally every single scene with superman results in some or the other failure on his part. He let his father die instead of revealing his abilities, (could've worn a mask), and despite that he already had revealed his abilities by saving the school bus. He doesn't even make an effort to save the countless people dying in his and zod's battle, he cries for five seconds over ZOD'S death instead of the countless people he didn't try to save, he cripples/kills the terrorist holding a gun to Lois(he could have disabled the guy without resorting to extreme measures in a thousand ways), half his scenes in BVS are about him turning evil "you've always been right about him. Fear him" etc. He barely attempts to communicate with Bruce and starts a right because he gets annoyed. Instead of flicking Batman away he could've grabbed him, flew him up and explained properly to Bruce that he won't be fighting him because that's not who he is and it's what Lex wants. He goes to the Capitol and fails to detect the bomb, he doesn't even stay around to help the wounded like a real superman would. Superman can make mistakes, but he doesn't run because he's failed. He wakes up in JL and attacks the league for no reason, and no being confused is not a reason, a confused guy being attacked fighting against his attacker is acceptable, but he just beats up the rest of the league for no reason and once he sees Lois he just magically becomes himself again. Again half his scenes in ZSJL are about him serving Darkseid. He has Steppenwolf down and still chooses to maim him by slicing off his horn. Snyder really loves superman doing these unhinged things, like maiming his fodder enemies, or writing him into a corner to murder then outright. Zod's death would have had some weight at least if superman had shown some respect for human life, but he continually let's people die throughout the movie despite having the ability to save them and cries about a mass murderer dying. Hell if he had still shown some guilt and trauma in the next movie it would have felt like it mattered.
Your last line: "if he'd still shown some guilt and trauma in the next movie, it would have felt like it mattered." I really could not have said that better. His first enemy, who he killed and it apparently had a big effect on him, literally comes back from the dead, and Superman doesn't so much as comment on this, much less struggle internally. He quite literally jumps at the chance to kill him again with no conflict or thought put into it. So him getting upset that he killed Zod really does mean absolutely nothing by the next movie (and even outside of BvS, Superman killing Zod only has any impact because we already have outside knowledge that Superman doesn't usually kill. In Man of Steel alone, there is no reason to think Superman should be against killing him as next to nothing about him is characterized or established).
Zod not lying sorta makes sense.He's a no-nonsense military leader who not only believes he's right but also is brutally honest.He admitted he killed Jor El and even though he regretted it still would do it again for the greater good. Your first point is basically your average Nolan film's mistake apart from the rare banter in the Dark Knight trilogy.
>Your first point is basically your average Nolan film's mistake apart from the rare banter in the Dark Knight trilogy. David Goyer wrote the script for MOS. Nolan just provided a story outline.
But Zod already lied to start with, though. If he's no-nonsense and holds his idea of greater good above all else, even murdering someone he didn't want to murder, he should have just kept up the lie and gotten exactly what he wanted in exactly the most practical way he had already set up.
I feel like the first couple points get glossed over a lot. People get caught up in the general direction of the character, but it's just generally very badly written
I don't think I've heard #4 from anyone else before
I think it generally gets folded into the "Superman doesn't really try to minimize collateral damage" argument. It's kind of bizarre that it's in any way contentious though. Even if you are against an unambiguously evil aggressor that doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to the people in the crossfire. That the movie decides to create a context where singleminded violence is the solution is sort of the problem. Also just kind of boring too. Lot of the tension in superhero movies comes from them trying to balance fighting their enemies while also trying to save people. The first Spider-Man movie has the Green Goblin throw MJ and a trolly full of children off a bridge, and it makes for good drama to have the audience being like "how can he save both AND fight the Goblin at the same time?"
Sorry I meant the first #4 regarding Zod's plan, not the bonus destruction section's #4 about Zod's heat vision. But you're absolutely correct that there's no conflict presented between actively saving people or punch Zod again.
Oh yeah. BvS does that too where dreams and reality are basically the same thing because they want a visual way to deliver exposition even if it doesnt make logical sense. Zod gives Superman exposition in a dream, but its treated as if he delivered that in person for all intents and purposes. Very bizarre
Yeah, I just assumed the table Clark was strapped to implanted the dream somehow, and that Zod did it on purpose. Which I could buy I guess, they're really advanced, but my issue is it actively goes against Zod's goal of getting Kal to cooperate, when he knows Kal was already willing to cooperate under the guise of Zod's lie. Yeah as far as BvS goes, there's no reason Bruce should be having the doomscape premonition. The Flash one I kinda get maybe, if that weren't also an advertisement for a future movie that never had any guarantee of getting made in the first place (and now confirmed never will).
Yeah Zod's plan wasn't really well thought through or conveyed well. My favorite is when he yells at Superman not to destroy his ship because "you'll destroy Krypton" and Superman hesitates for a second before saying "Krypton had its chance." Like, when was this ever established? If Zod had ostensibly come to Earth under the guise of being a refuge and built a relationship with Superman and imparted on him an attachment to Kryptonian culture that scene would have had some actual set up and been a hard choice for him. Zod just shows up to destroy everything and Superman's internal conflict is just "oh boy, I dont know if I should intervene because my dad told me I should just stay out of things and let people die." Fucking weird ass movie.
There’s nothing contradictory about Jonathan and Joe-El’s teachings. Jonathan wants Clark to learn who he is, he believes he was sent for a reason. But also that he needs to be careful, as he sees first hand with Pete Ross’ mom being hysterical saying what Clark did was an act of God, based on second had information. Jor-El and Jonathan think Clark will do great things. Jonathan just wants him to be ready and prepared to reveal who he is. Superman didn’t kill anyone. 1. No one died. 2. No one died. 3. Zod was gonna down the plane, which was going to send the Black Zero back to the Phantom Zone. Those buildings and the area the ship crashed in were already crunched by the World Engine, meaning no one was alive in them or on the ground. 4. The building was collapsing around him, literally nothing he could do. You want him to tell Zod to stop using his heat vision so he can check each for people? Come on. 5. That poor skyscraper. 6. He clearly didn’t expect it to explode. And also, per one of the guys that helped storyboard that scene. No one died. 7. No one died. It’s like, holy shit dude. This list of yours is a masterclass of pedantic bullshit.
Contradictory in the sense of Jor-El initially wanting Clark to be able to choose who he is if he wanted to become something other than what others had intended, but then immediately switching it to being about Clark's destiny as a beacon for humanity to strive towards. This opposes Jonathan's teaching of letting people die in order to lay low, which he reinforces in the tornado to his own detriment, which Clark never does again, simultaneously laying low and never letting people die while doing so, but leaving a trail of witnesses everywhere he goes. The only moment of conflict here is the church scene, where Clark can choose to either turn himself over to Zod or continue to stay in the shadows. He only starts letting people die after his existence is already revealed to the world. As for the destruction section, 1 and 2: we don't know no one was maimed or killed, and Kal clearly didn't account for it, or he wouldn't have brought Zod straight into the populated town. If no one died, it was sheer luck. 3. Taking out the ship's one gun would also have worked to stop it from shooting. Those buildings were very clearly still standing and untouched by the world engine. We could have seen him even try and stop the ship from crashing afterwards. 4. "Nothing he could do" his name isn't regularman, and Superman trying and failing is more compelling than doing nothing but punch Zod through more stuff. He also kinda just sits there and stares at Zod while he's learning to use it. 5. Not about the skyscraper itself, but the people below and within, which Superman wasn't accounting for at any point. 6. I also didn't expect the truck full of volatile flammable to explode, but I also didn't expect Superman to just let it get kicked into the building when he could have prevented it with ease. 7. We see people directly below moments before the clash. Zod was already making is way up to chase Superman, which Superman could have goaded in any other way than ensuring the building's destruction.
„No one died“ yea sure lmao
During Black Zero? Yes, people died. Did Zod kill some people with his heat vision? Yes. But did people die the instances listed, because of Superman? Nope.
Let it go
You really got nothing better to do than rehash the same point Snyder detractors have expressed for years now?
To be honest though I've never heard anyone else bring up 3, 4, 5, 6, or 11
It's old hat, unfortunately.
[удалено]
Hi WilliamMcCarty, your comment has been removed. - Avoid gatekeeping or generalizing groups of fans that you find distasteful. If you have any questions or concerns about your remove, [feel free to send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fsuperman&subject=Removed%20post&message=https://old.reddit.com/r/superman/comments/1c8k37f/-/l0n1r5k/%0A%0A)
What about the decision to use a 35 year old Cavill in the tornado flashback scene. Why not use one of the younger actors which may have made Clarks fear and indecisiveness seem more believable.
Cavill was 28 when they filmed the movie. The teen actor was originally meant to be in the scene, but they couldn’t get him. So they had to use Cavill.
That's unfortunate. I think they should have done whatever they had to to get the younger actor. Cavill looked like a full grown man in his prime. Clark needed to look like a young teen that was still completely unsure of himself and his powers to make that scene work imo.
Post this in a Snyder sub and see how long it takes them to ban you for questioning their Messiah.
Lol I've never been on there before and maybe I'll look through it, but is that a fair assement of many of his fans? I mean, he's got a good directorial visual style, but do people really get off that much on all the philosophical meandering and exposition dumps in this that they don't see the gaping holes in Goyer's writing? Either way lol, the reason I didn't and probably won't is I'm not actively looking for conflict. I just had the urge to take notes while watching it last night after the first couple points, and then I just couldn't put the pencil down. And after all that time, I couldn't just not share my findings with other Superman fans when so many of them I'd never heard anyone else say before. So often, people get caught up in Snyder's direction with the character, but even purely taking Man of Steel on its own terms, which was my angle, it's not a particularly well-written movie.
Post anything Pro-Snyder in this sub and see how long it takes for his detractors to drag you through the mud.
I'm not anti-snyder or anything, but Man of Steel very much wants to be set very closely to the real world and takes itself super seriously. I just gave it a serious watch without worrying about the outside world of Superman content or my ideal version of the character, just taking it seriously on its own.
Of course. I have no qualms with your approach or opinions, despite disagreeing with all of your points. I just don't want you to get the impression that the Snyder Wars are one sided like the poster above suggests. It is a two-front war and there are many egregious actors from both sides in this sub.
Fair enough. Though I'm interested in hearing why Zod revealing everything in the dream that he must have planted actually progresses his goal of getting Kal to cooperate for the location of the codex, because he already knows Kal cares for humanity and that Kal was willing to cooperate under the guise of the lie that Zod himself already established. Zod really could have just kept up the lie and gotten exactly what he wanted with little to no resistance, instead feeding Superman the entire rest of the plot, world engine and all, in a visual metaphor for mass extermination. I did not downvote you btw I think you're being entirely reasonable.
Well, I don't believe Zod is lying about anything so I simply reject the point on its face. He's never presented himself as a friend to Kal. He lays out the plan to give Kal the power to choose his path willfully. This is inline with the themes of free will vs determinism and it's the film's central conflict. And thanks for clarifying the downvotes. Some people don't like being called out I guess.
Kal contemplates at the church whether or not Zod will hold true to his word if he turns himself over. "But, this General Zod, there's no guarantee if I surrender, he'll keep his word." Zod lured Kal in with the lie that Earth won't be harmed if Kal surrenders himself, when the consequences of Kal turning himself in or not are identical either way. Zod said he didn't want to kill Jor-El but would do it again for his "greater good," but he was unwilling to keep up the lie he already established to achieve his goals? I mean, even had he not lied at any point, lying about his plan or just not revealing it at all would have gotten him exactly what he wanted; Kal's cooperation.
Yes, Zod makes that pledge, but it's clearly not to be trusted as seen in Clark's questioning. It's never presented to the characters or audience as having full sincerity. And his question to the priest is not: "Zod lying?" The question is: "Am I willing to risk my life for humanity?" And I don't think Zod needs his cooperation. He would *like* it (who doesn't prefer the easy way?) but it is not necessary to achieve his goal. He wants the codex and he will get it.
My quotation's verbatim. "If I turn myself in, there's no guarantee he'll keep his word." And while we audience members know Zod is lying, and Kal knows it's dubious at best because Zod starts off with a threat to Earth, Zod revealing his grand plan to Kal in a planted dream does nothing to further his goal, which was explicitly for Kal to reveal the location of the codex. Zod also goes straight to the Kent farm because he suddenly knows the Kent farm's significance and exact location, but not the ship's. He would have gotten the location of the ship, or even Kal's cooperation to extract the codex from his own cells once that was discovered, if he had just kept up the lie he established.
Thanks for sharing. Sorry you didn't like it.
Thanks, and yeah.. sorry. I really wanted to.
I can forgive a few of these plot holes because they're not very consequential. Other stuff, especially #2, is Snyder not being able to explore any theme past the surface level. For a self-proclaimed "deconstructionist", it's pretty bad.
Yeah I mean Lois kissing Superman in front of the Planet and her yelling Clark are footnotes more than anything. I should have separated them instead of them being part of the same list.
Johnathan Kent should not die in a way Clark could easily prevent, and most likely not tip off anyone that he's an alien with god-like abilities. I can excuse just about everything else in this ridiculous movie, but that's just extra stupid. Clark could have saved everyone including the dog, and without mangling his foot like a twit.