People fail to realize even 13 years later that there was virtually no other way for Clark to defeat Zod. The longer the fight goes on the more Zod adapts to his new abilities. Not to mention to mention he’s a career soldier while Clark is a rookie. There was no other way to subdue a kryptonian at this time. Especially one who was hellbent on killing every human being. Clark begs him to stop but Zod would have never stopped. So he made a choice that clearly affected him mentally and emotionally. But he did to make sure no more innocent lives were taken.
It's a movie, dingus. If you write your character into a position that would make him unlikable by the end, you can just rewrite the plot to have a better conclusion.
Why didn’t he kill him immediately instead of letting him kill thousands? Was he retarded or something? Oh wait it’s a Zack Snyder movie, of course he’s a retard.
Snyder is just a bad writer and he falls victim to a lot of bad writing tropes, one of which is becoming so obsessed with specific scenes or moments that he forces them into the narrative instead of letting them play out organically. Some audiences can't really articulate this very well so they default to simple arguments "Superman would never do that!" The real problem isn't the subversion--tons of popular Superman media has tinkered with the same idea--the problem is it's just a really hamfisted trolley situation jammed in at the end of the movie with a foe that's already vanquished, victims we aren't emotionally invested in, and bizarre cinematography that makes it look even more ridiculous.
>>212777088 (OP)use the codex to lead him away. Solved.
If your script forces Superman to kill for any reason, it's a bad Superman script.
>>212777088 (OP)we get it. I just wanted zod alive and not killing all humans somehow
