In My Humble Opinion: Man of Steel serves as an origin story for the Superman character which provides background for his aversion toward killing. I’ve read so many posts, comments, rants and raves from people about how pissed off they were that in the new Man of Steel movie Superman/Kal-El/Clark Kent ends up (SPOILER) killing General Zod in their final battle. Superman has Zod, excuse me General Zod, in a headlock and is doing his best to keep Zod from killing a human family. Superman is left with no other choice but to break General Zod’s neck in order to save the family. Obviously, after the act has been committed, Superman is pretty upset with what he had to do.
My question to all those people who are upset at how the final battle went down is this. Taking into account that this film reboots the franchise and serves as an origin story; couldn’t this be the moment in Superman’s history in which he establishes/realizes his disdain toward killing? There’s no other part in the movie that discusses the morality or consequences of taking another life (a lot of people know Superman is against killing because of the comics). As a stand-alone movie, which will surely spawn sequels/spin offs and develop the character further, the fact that he killed Zod seems to be in line with the rest of the film. Then again, that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.