Why does every single human caught in the destruction have to safely leave before the superheros start fighting? Is it not reasonable to say some people will perish in the process? I don't want superheros in movies saying "Hello citizen, please evacuate," to every person every time before a battle starts.
Snyder even said he wanted mass deaths to symbolize disasters, similar to ancient mythology.
But in lots of mythology, gods didn't seem to give af about human lives. That's kind of the point, as if to explain catastrophic, disastrous events as something gods are going to do regardless of the cost.
Obviously, they realistically aren't going to save every single person from some impending doom, but doesn't it make sense that if they are trying to protect people, that they actually make more of an effort?
Besides the obvious 9/11 imagery that's intentionally invoked, there is the perhaps unintentional allegory of some U.S. foreign relations.
It's like bombing the shit out of Iraq and then standing in front of a sign saying mission accomplished before rolling credits when there are years of nation building necessary after the fact. It's something that's been parodied many times over about superheroes that they come and fight, which causes collateral damage, then they fly away from the wreckage like, "No need to thank me, I'm just doing my job." while every injured innocent bystander applauds. Having people be concerned with the damage before it even happens seems like a reasonable approach to me. Maybe that's just the difference between DC and Marvel, I don't think it's necessarily true, but DC heroes are treated more like gods and Marvel heroes are more like ordinary people who would worry about ordinary things like innocent lives. If that's what people want to see, that's what they want to see.
No, every single person must be saved by our heroes if not it will be deemed a failure even if they win the battle against a threat larger than life that could had wiped out the entire human civilization, and after that the movie will get torn to pieces on the internet because not every single person was saved.
Showing concern for the safety of the people you are trying to protect seems like part of the job. The action scenes in MoS didn't bother me like they seemed to bother many others (I actually liked the movie) but it does seem like a weird disconnect, especially when Superman is turning against his own people in order to save his adopted home while he is the one pushing the Kryptonians into the buildings and causing tons of collateral damage.
I mean, he's basically the one responsible for blowing up that gas station which was probably the only gas station is a small rural town like that and there was a car at the pump which means there had to have been at least one person there getting gas that is now dead. Kal is practically always the one who is throwing the Kryptonians into buildings and not the other way around and yet after all the destruction, he has to kill Zod to save one small family as if it's something that's never occurred to him before that people could be dying. If the cost of a few lives is outweighed by the many, why did he sudden have a change of heart over a random "disposable" family? That scene was supposed to show such a desperate scenario that force Kal to kill, right? If random lives were so important, he should have been trying to kill them as soon as it escalated to the point that it's clear they were willing to wipe out life on the entire planet, yet it seems like he's still trying to plead with Zod up until he's about to laser the family in half. Again, it didn't ruin my enjoyment of the movie, I just took it all for what it was, but it surely stuck out like a sore thumb..
