Superman is returning to the big screen with a fresh vision under the new DC Universe (DCU). Yet, it’s impossible to overlook the legacy left by Zack Snyder’s controversial take on the Man of Steel. Snyder’s portrayal sparked passionate debates, with some praising its modern realism and others lamenting its deviation from what made Superman an enduring icon. This article delves into Snyder’s unique interpretation, exploring why his version of Superman struggled to resonate with long-time fans and how it impacted the essence of the character.

Why Superman Matters: The Original Vision

Superman isn’t just another superhero—he’s the superhero. Created during the interwar period, Superman emerged as a beacon of hope, justice, and morality at a time when the world desperately needed such ideals. In the Golden and Silver Ages of comics, Superman embodied optimism. His unwavering moral compass and kindness defined him. He was a guardian of humanity, a champion of truth, justice, and hope.

Superman’s appeal lay in his idealism and his ability to inspire people to be better. He was clear about his purpose, never doubting his responsibility to help humanity. For generations, this clarity and optimism have been the core of his identity. However, Zack Snyder had a different vision for the character, one that challenged these foundational traits.

Snyder’s Modern Deconstruction of Superman

Zack Snyder sought to ground Superman in a modern context, making him more complex and morally ambiguous. In Man of Steel (2013), this deconstruction focused on an identity crisis, portraying Superman as a conflicted figure. Snyder introduced a version of Superman who struggled with the burden of human expectations and questioned his place in the world.

This shift was significant. Traditionally, Superman represents the best of humanity despite his alien origins. But Snyder’s Superman wrestled with self-doubt and existential dread, making him feel less like a symbol of hope and more like an outsider burdened with power. While this modern take had moments of brilliance, it also diluted the essence of Superman for many fans.

Moral Complexity: A Flawed Superman?

In Man of Steel, Snyder’s Superman confronts moral dilemmas rarely seen in the comics. The most notable example is his decision to kill General Zod. This moment was intended to add relatability and realism to the character, highlighting that even Superman can face impossible choices.

However, this realism came at a cost. In the comics, Superman is known for his ability to find a third option—a way to solve problems without compromising his ideals. Snyder’s Superman lacked this resourcefulness and often appeared trapped in moral quandaries. Instead of being an unwavering moral guide, he seemed perpetually conflicted, asking himself whether humanity deserved saving and whether his power made him accountable to the world.

This moral ambiguity undermined Superman’s role as a paragon of virtue. In Snyder’s world, Superman’s struggles blurred his mission, making his essence feel murky and inconsistent.

The Burden of Power and Existential Dread

Snyder’s Superman grappled with the immense weight of his power. The existential dread of being an all-powerful being in a world full of fear and suspicion took center stage. While this added depth to the character, it also strayed from what makes Superman inspiring.

In the comics, Superman doesn’t hesitate about his purpose. His powers are a gift, and his responsibility to help others is clear-cut. Snyder’s approach, while thought-provoking, made Superman’s role less defined. Instead of confidently embracing his duty, he often seemed paralyzed by it. This portrayal added a layer of darkness that, while realistic, was at odds with the optimism fans expect from Superman.

Clark Kent as a Persona: Missing the Humanity

One of the most striking differences between Snyder’s Superman and his comic book counterpart lies in the portrayal of Clark Kent. In the comics, Clark Kent is Superman’s core identity. He may possess god-like powers, but he sees himself as a humble human being. This grounding in humanity is what makes Superman relatable.

In Snyder’s universe, Clark Kent often felt like a secondary aspect of Superman. Once he embraced his powers, the human side of Clark seemed overshadowed. The warmth, humor, and relatability of Clark Kent were largely absent. Instead, Superman’s struggles felt distant and disconnected from humanity, making it harder for audiences to empathize with him. Snyder’s focus on dramatic, slow-motion scenes further emphasized this detachment, sidelining the human touch that defines Superman.

Snyder’s Symbolism: A Messiah Figure?

Zack Snyder’s Superman was steeped in heavy symbolism. Rather than a beacon of hope, Snyder’s Superman often felt like a messianic figure—a savior detached from those he was meant to protect. Scenes in Man of Steel and Batman v Superman are filled with visual references to Jesus Christ. From Superman descending from the sky in crucifix-like poses to Clark Kent questioning his purpose in a church, Snyder leaned heavily into these religious motifs.

While these symbols were visually striking, they distorted Superman’s essence. In the comics, Superman is a friend to humanity, someone who walks among people and inspires them. By turning him into a god-like figure, Snyder created distance between Superman and the people he was meant to uplift. Instead of fostering trust and admiration, Snyder’s Superman elicited fear and suspicion.

Moral Dissonance: Fear vs. Hope

In the comics, Superman’s presence inspires humanity to be better. His goodness motivates people to strive for their best selves. Grant Morrison’s All-Star Superman beautifully encapsulates this aspect, portraying a Superman who uplifts society by his sheer example.

Snyder’s Superman, however, evoked fear and uncertainty. Characters like Lex Luthor, Batman, and government officials distrusted him, viewing him as a potential threat rather than a hero. This moral dissonance detracted from Superman’s role as a symbol of hope. By grounding him too deeply in realism, Snyder eroded the aspirational qualities that make Superman timeless.

Conclusion: Did Snyder Miss the Mark?

Zack Snyder’s take on Superman was bold, ambitious, and undeniably unique. His effort to modernize the character by introducing realism and complexity had its moments of brilliance but also came with significant drawbacks. By focusing on existential dread, moral ambiguity, and heavy symbolism, Snyder distanced Superman from the core traits that have defined him for generations.

Superman is more than just a powerful alien—he’s a symbol of hope, a friend to humanity, and a beacon of moral clarity. While Snyder’s interpretation added nuance, it ultimately strayed too far from these ideals. For many fans, the Superman they know and love felt lost.