You might call it mass slaughter, but Zack Snyder calls it good old-fashioned myth-making.
One of the more contentious elements, if not the most contentious element, of Snyder's Man of Steel is the level of absolute destruction the citizens of Metropolis and Smallville must suffer through as Superman battles Zod and his soldiers. There's not a lot of blood onscreen, but all you have to do is take one look at the ragged Metropolis skyline at the end of the film to know that many, many lives were lost as a result of the superbattle. Many fans argued that Superman, even in his early years, would've fought harder to reduce civilian casualties, and others complained that Superman's largely family-friendly nature was tainted by all that collateral damage.
While promoting the film in Japan, Snyder answered for the destruction by pointing out that many ancient myths all over the world feature a very high body count. According to him, all that death was a way of injecting more gravity into the Man of Steel story.
“I wanted the movie to have a mythological feeling," Snyer said. "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.”
Well, Snyder certainly did his job when it came to portraying a disaster, but is that kind of storytelling fitting for a Superman movie? What do you think? Is Snyder's reasoning sound?