This film has been around for 5 years or so, I won't bother not spoiling the twist ending where Superman kills Zod.
I understand the point about Batman willingly killing in Batman v Superman as being not true to the comic book character's roots and therefore a negative criticism of the film, whether or not I agree with those arguments...
But what about Superman's killing of Zod and his indirect involvement in causing mass destruction? All these were forced onto him - Superman was not willing to do all that carnage and death. Its a tough decision that reflects that in real life we have to make tough choices as opposed to comics Superman's idealism. Henry Cavill's Superman is still true to the comic book character's roots, isn't it? **So is it still valid to make his destructive actions a negative criticism of the film?**