Even though Man of Steel debuted over two months ago, fans are still debating aspects of the movie. Some fans, like Renegade Cinema’s own Aidan, hail the film as a masterpiece, but others have criticized the film for various different reasons.
One of the biggest complaints that many fans broached about the film was the possible death toll during General Zod’s devastation of Metropolis and Smallville. Taking the city-spanning battles with Superman into account, it seems rather far-fetched to believe the idea that there were no casualties resulting from that duel. Considering that no bodies of civilians are shown in the film, many fans have theorized that the city was evacuated during the aftermath of Zod’s message to the Earth. However, that in itself is a rather large leap in logic.
“I wanted the movie to have a mythological feeling. In ancient mythology, mass deaths are used to symbolize disasters. In other countries like Greece and Japan, myths were recounted through the generations, partly to answer unanswerable questions about death and violence. In America, we don’t have that legacy of ancient mythology. Superman (who first appeared in ‘Action Comics’ in 1938) is probably the closest we get. It’s a way of recounting the myth.”
I must admit that I’m a little bit shocked that Snyder would say something like this. It’s a pretty dumb idea on multiple levels. Firstly, mass deaths aren’t meant to merely symbolize disasters, because they actually are disasters. Secondly, mass death does not automatically provide “a mythological feeling” to a story. It certainly can, if it’s handled correctly; but if it’s done poorly, it can end up looking like cheap schlock. Thirdly, how is Man of Steel addressing those “unanswerable questions about death and violence?” Is it at all?
What do you think about Snyder’s opinion? Do you think that he’s right for trying to add so much death to a Superman film? Why don’t you just tell us what you think in the comments below?
Source: Badass Digest