One of most controversial things that has ever happened in Comic Book Movie history was the moment where Superman decided to snap the neck of General Zod. Man Of Steel writer David Goyer was on with the Nerdist podcast and he finally spoke on the killing:
“The way I work, the way Chris [Nolan] works, is you do what’s right for the story.” That exists entirely separately from what fans should or shouldn’t think of that character. You have to do what’s right for the story. In that instance, this was a Superman who had only been Superman for like, a week. He wasn’t Superman as we think of him in the DC Comics… or even in a world that conceived of Superman existing. He’d only flown for the first time a few days before that. He’d never fought anyone that had super powers before. And so he’s going up against a guy who’s not only super-powered, but has been training since birth to use those super powers, who exists as a super-human killing machine, who stated, “I will never stop until I destroy all of humanity.” If you take Superman out of it, what’s the right way to tell that story? I think the right way to tell that story is if you take this powered alien who says, “you can have your race back, you have to kill your adopted race,” the moral, horrible situation to be in is to actually be forced to kill, not wanting to, the only other person from your race. Take Superman aside, I think that’s the right way to tell that story.”
Now, to me, it caught me off guard, cause I read Superman comics since I was very young (I’m now 36), and even saw the older Superman movies. I liked the movie and so did my kids. But what do you think of the situation with Superman killing off General Zod???