It's been seven years since Man of Steel was released, but fans still debate that shocking ending which saw Superman forced to break General Zod's neck (killing him) in order to stop the villain for good. While Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice brought the villain's body back - to transform him into Doomsday - not much was said about Kal-El being forced to dole out some lethal justice.
During an interview with Collider, Man of Steel writer David S. Goyer explained that Superman being forced to kill Zod was meant to show that he was backed into a corner which he simply could not get out of. Explaining that this was a Superman who had only just taken flight, the filmmaker made it clear that the hero hadn't established a set of rules yet (unlike his comic book counterpart).
"He’s not aware of the extent of his powers at all," Goyer said. "He’s finding somebody who’s said, ‘I won’t stop,’ who’s said, ‘You can’t put me in a prison I won’t ever stop’. We wanted to put him in a stalemate." As controversial as that may have been, Zod's death was supposed to mean Superman would never kill again. "He was in this terrible position and then afterwards he vowed that he could never do it again. It didn’t come out of anger – he was forced into it – but that was the one."
For those of you still unhappy with that, Goyer did go on to reveal a scrapped, alternate ending.
"The idea was that Superman would – there was one of those sort of cryopods on the ship that ends up becoming the Fortress of Solitude that he’s able to put Zod back into and then throw out into space," he noted. "We did talk about it and maybe some people would’ve been happier with that, but it felt like a cop out for the story that we were telling."
That honestly doesn't sound great, and it is surprising that Man of Steel's ending continues to be so divisive, especially when the hero was put in a position where that really was his only choice.
What do you guys think?