The ending of Man of Steel continues to spark thought, discussion and disagreement among fans. I gave my review here but after watching another great CBM, The Dark Knight, I was inspired to do this article. Problems with the ending was largely why I gave MOS 4/5 stars, and TDK 4.5/5 stars. From the first time I watched it, I remember hating the let's-frame-Batman plot; Batman takes the blame for Two-face and runs away, to hobble around Wayne Manor in sadness for 8 years? GTFO!!! The 12 year-old me says Batman doesn’t quit… just like Superman doesn't kill! It’s one of those unspoken rules usually not breached in the Annals of Iterations. As a storyteller, you have to be really careful when treading upon those rules. I can believe Batman would sacrifice himself for the greater good, but not in such a way as to leave Gotham without a defender.
Back to Man of Steel: after his plans for gravity-boning the earth were frustrated, Zod was driven insane by his genetic programming. The last hope for Krypton is gone, and Zod will now destroy the world in vengeance (translation: death by Superman). I get it; it’s an airtight case for The Big Blue Boy-scout to make the decision to use lethal force. It’s also understood that he is not even Superman yet; this is us watching Kal-El being forged in the great fire of Metropolis. He has yet to earn the title and is unaccustomed to some of his powers, no less to cutting loose on someone who can really take it! Still, there was a failure in keeping the audience with you. That is to say, these decisions resulted in the film-makers getting it from both sides!
Comic book fans will say it’s unrealistic to their established core of the Superman character. The early days of Superman disposing of his enemies without serious psychic consequences to himself are far gone, and largely lost to cultural memory. So even approaching that line in a Superman movie is automatically a big deal!
On the other hand, if your plan is to tell a realistic story of Superman from dying Krypton, then you expect the general audience to take it seriously as well. When you put on a spectacle strangely reminiscent of the 9-11 attacks pumped up to an exponential level, it’s already going to be intense for film audiences to watch! The Donner fans want a Superman who can save everyone, as do those who go to other disasters in those moments. The general audience identifies with the Metropolitans and wants Superman to save them, by extension.
Add to that the, ahem, "twist" at the end of Zod’s death by Superman, and it does take the disaster movie into the territory of Greek mythology: tragic, violent and very powerful. The scene itself is effective. However, the path to our arriving at this point (not to mention the payoff) is seriously lacking.
The effects of these world-changing event are not explored, atleast in this movie. It is my hope that they continue to deal with the consequences of MOS in the sequel. How all of this affects geopolitics, Superman, Luthor and other heroes would be a dream come true to watch! And since reality is all about cause and effect, it would help fill in a lot missing in action from the end of this movie. There is this moment when Kal-El cries out at the injustice of being used as a destroyer in this way, and Lois comes, Madonna-like, to comfort him. That scene was able to say a lot without saying anything. The strongest Man on Earth has killed the evil from his home-world and embraced humanity. It was well-handled. It was not enough. I don’t want a Return of the King ending that carries on for 45 minutes after the climax, but throw me a bone here! I only wish they did not try to pretend like nothing happened afterwards.
When does the Daily Planet get rebuilt? What are the consequences of the battle, and how it ended, on everyone? A scene of Superman and more Lexcorp and Wayne Enterprises people rescuing people, rebuilding, etc. would have gone a long way. Don't get me wrong: the next scene is great. Superman shoots a US drone out of the sky right in front of the general, pushing back against military incursion into the Superzone. Message received: Kal-El is his own man…which he shall now prove by promptly spilling his state of residence to the general. “Sure, just ask around, General! If you hear-tell of the boy who could single-handedly lift a school bus, then you know you’re getting warm!” Add to that the joke about him being hot, and the whole scene plays a little “off” after all the destruction we just witnessed.
Anyway, SOMEBODY has rebuilt the DP, so it’s back to business as usual in the dying industry of print media. And here comes a cute and ironic introduction of Lois and Clark! It’s a good, reassuring note to go out on, and sets the Superman mythos into neutral, tooled up and ready to go for the sequel. A nice way to go out, but fundamentally leaving many of the groups who would potentially go see this movie in the cold. Like Krypton, the ending had no core. The fights and mayhem have their place, but if you don't use them in the right place, they will not have the right effect.
In films especially, how you end determines to a large part how people will talk about you; it’s the last thing audiences see and the first thing they discuss when the movie’s over. In this instance, the end-tone was just right but unfortunately, the lead-up did skip a few beats, resulting in a disjointed ending overall.
Next time: The Man of Steel sequel! I have 3 villains in mind that would make for a great story and allow you to introduce other heroes into the DCCU as well. Any guesses??? Comment below!