Kyle Baker Comments on ‘Man of Steel’ with ‘Mass Murderer of Steel’ Browser Game

Artist Kyle Baker has phrased his review of  Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel film in the form of a browser-based video game. The physics are a little dodgy, but then so are the ethics in the scene he’s lampooning. Simply flick the grappling Superman and General Zod around the screen, devastating the urban landscape and its unwitting populace. Leave the browser open and active with Zimmer’s score humming along in the background and you’ll have a decent sonic recreation of the movie’s third act.



Enjoy high-flying mass destruction as you ignore the hideous death screams of the millians you are pledged to save! Use your super powers to wage a never-ending battle for self-important allegorical bombast! Bludgeon your senses into numbed awe!

TOTALLY safe for work!
Check our website and search for a game that is possibly the most popular type, try it now!

Works best on Firefox and Google Chrome browsers.

Play ‘Mass Murderer of Steel’ at Baker’s website. The game supports most browsers, just not Windows Explorer.


  1. More fun than I’d care to admit.


  2. Wonderful!

  3. It’s pissing and moaning, but in as cool a way as possible. I give it 13 strawberries out of 16.

  4. “Blam this piece of crap, the controls are so damn essie. But I give this 3 out of 5 stars, beacuse, the graphics were pretty ccoooollll.”

  5. What a totally inaccurate and definitely-not-what-happened-for-the-last-hour critique of this film’s jeopardy-vacuum of superhuman destruction and ignored human death-filled third act. I am outraged.

  6. I’m of two minds about this. On the one hand Superman totally obliterated the fuck out of Metropolis with absolutely no regard for the innocent bystanders all around him, and I hated seeing that. That isn’t my Superman.

    But on the other hand, if he hadn’t ignored those people and kept fighting Zod, Zod would’ve killed WAY more people. Zod said explicitly that he was going to kill everyone, and if Superman had let him out of his sight for one second he probably would’ve gone all Kid Miracleman and start killing people by the tens of thousands in a matter of seconds because he’s as powerful as Superman. The only thing standing between Zod and aa much higher bodycount is Superman grappling with him and preventing him from straight up killing absolutely everyone in the city.

    The problem here is that this movie wasn’t written with the intention of placing Superman in a situation where he can be Superman and do the right thing. It was written in the real world about a real person who would’ve made a mistake like this instead of the symbol Superman should be. Goyer’s defense is that Superman is just starting out and making mistakes. Well, I don’t want a Superman that makes mistakes like that. I want THE Superman. Not your gritty, Nolanized version of him.


      Your second point is exactly why I really hate it when people complain about the movie! The threat was so great that it is absolutely clear when you watch the movie without being already in hate mode, that he has NO TIME to do anything else than attack Zod head on! Zod actually says “I will kill every one of them, one at a time!” and every second that Supes would use to get people out of buildings Zod would kill many more. HE HAS NO CHOICE!
      If you say you don’t like a writer writing Supes into a situation like that, thats fine with me, but all that crap about Superman killing so many people really ticks me off. Wen most people die he is on the other side of the planet fighting the world engine to save them all!
      When he comes back he takes out the Kryptonian scout ship and that tears through a few buildings, but without toppling them and most of them are the already destroyed by the gravity beam. Bear in mind that this is still a completely untrained Superman, who never fought before!
      After that he fights Zod and in all those scenes Superman NEVER destroys any building. All the damage is because of Zod.
      Zod punches Kal through buildings, Zod destroys a building with heat vision etc.
      It the same thing with the kill. He has no choice and It is not out of character. He did it in the comics AND in the movies before. At least in MoS, you see that it clearly hurts him to have to do that (however brief they show it in the movie, I am sure its going to be one of the main plot points of the sequel).

      So, yeah. The hate against MoS for homicidal Superman is the same hate thatwashed over TDKR last year about those “plotholes” ( you really wanna know how he got back to Gotham?!?!? He is Abatman for christs sake! He could stealth his way onto a cargo plane or a ship without an problems!).
      I loved Man Of Steel. LOVED. And I love Superman. Since two decades, so I am not someone who doesn’t know the character.

      You know… my only complaint about the whole destruction in the movie is the following… why does Superman does not react to the destruction caused be the world engine?!?!? After catching Lois and kissing her,he stands in that wasteland what once was Metropolis. He should be shocked by this! He should look around in horror and THEN face Zod!
      But thats a small nitpick in my eyes.

    • Well, after the “Man of Steel” Superman helps to kill hundreds of thousands of humans while leveling Smallville and Metropolis without showing one dram of concern for these humans until Zod points his laser eyes at four of them? This Clark/Superman then picks himself up from his five second yell of obligatory despair and then immediately gets all jokey and happy with everyone from army generals to the Daily Planet staff. So, no – I see no evidence that this mass death and carnage has had any healthy effect on our Man of 100% Steel and 0% Compassion.

      (P.S. I’m sorry for calling him Superman in the above paragraph; I know that name embarrasses the filmmakers of “Man of Steel” as it reminds them that they are telling a story about a lowly comic book superhero character and not a character from “The Deer Hunter.”)

    • Did they even call Batman “batman” in “Batman Begins”? Besides the point.

      Superman didn’t level Smallville or Metropolis. If anything the military caused as much damage as the Kryptonians with their missiles and airstrikes. Plus the buildings they fought in were empty, or people were leaving when the fight started (which didn’t used to happen in the comics BTW, in “Death of Superman” dozens of reporters are standing 10 feet away from Supes and Doomsday fighting!!!). Plus if Superman goes to the other side of the Planet, sees what the World Engine did to that side, then flies to Metropolis, why would he be surprised? 2 locations, same result. Plus I can name numerous times when Superman just had a huge brawl in Metropolis instead of grabbing the vilain and taking them to the Grand Canyon or whatever (like Mark Waid’s “Birthright”).

      Also, why would you want a Superhero that never makes mistakes, or never has to learn anything when starting out? Sounds like a boring character to me.

    • @IthoSapien: “Did they even call Batman ‘batman’ in ‘Batman Begins’? Besides the point.”


      “Also, why would you want a Superhero that never makes mistakes, or never has to learn anything when starting out?”

      Because he’s an ideal to strive towards.

      “Sounds like a boring character to me.”

      Which is why they made MAN OF STEEL they way they did, unfortunately.

    • @Conor, you can be an ideal or inspiration but still have flaws. It makes for interesting characters. Even real life human people that are idealized have flaws, doesn’t mean people can’t look up to them. And I disagree that this iteration of Kal El is boring. One that never makes mistakes, has no problems, and solves everything immdiately does sound boring though. That’s just my opinion, maybe that’s you and other want. Different strokes.

    • And this plays into a bigger problem of why people don’t care as much about DC characters (besides Batman). They say they’re unrelatible, that they have no flaws (Joss Whedon). Which is false, every single good character in fiction should have a fault, unless they’re a static character maybe. DC characters, IMHO, all have faults which make them relatible. Even Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Aquaman (give me a minute on him), and Flash (…Barry Allen?… Gonna need a few more minutes for him).

  7. Bottom line…I enjoyed MAN of STEEL and my attraction for the movie only solidifies when you have obnoxious moralizing critics who insist that you hate it too by parading their ‘holier than thou’ efforts to “whisper-campaign” this movie to death.

    Okay, we get it…You DIDN’T LIKE MAN OF STEEL!

    In a case like this, my greatest reward is that I truly enjoyed MAN of STEEL and you, the “hatin’ is hip” crowd did not!

    • From Angry Joe’s MoS review: “Superman Returns had 70-75 percent rating from the critics, 60% ratings from audiences. MoS has 50% from critics, and 80% from audiences. Dude, the critics are wrong!”.

    • How much of an solipsistic egotist do you have to be to believe that people hate a movie because it’s hip to do so, and not for…oh, I dunno… actual reasons? Do you sincerely believe that you and the people who like this movie are the only ones capable of rational thought while the people who didn’t like this movie simply aren’t?

    • mcguffin: +1

      Alas, criticism of most things is as you describe in your well-written post above.

    • @mcguffin stated, “…How much of an solipsistic egotist do you have to be to believe that people hate a movie because it’s hip to do so, and not for…oh, I dunno… actual reasons?”

      “Hating” MAN of STEEL in of itself is not “hip”…the collective “piling on” by the “haters” creates an in-group mentality among the fanbase that bucks the trend of the majority (ie. audience who enjoyed it).

      @mcguffin stated, “… Do you sincerely believe that you and the people who like this movie are the only ones capable of rational thought while the people who didn’t like this movie simply aren’t?”

      I never made that claim. This is a straw-man argument. My comment wasn’t about who is smarter or dumber, it’s about the incessant drumbeat of joyless loathing by the “squeaky wheels” of the community who act as if they have a monopoly on “who Superman is”.

      I’m just a guy who likes Superman and enjoyed MAN of STEEL and have spent almost two-weeks reading and listening to the fanbase being so dramatic about their distaste of this film. But, as the old saying goes, “Misery loves company”.

    • How do you tell the difference between the “incessant drumbeat of joyless loathing” and people who dislike the movie for what they perceive to be valid reasons?

  8. Fantastic. I do enjoy Kyle Baker for things like this.

    The utter mad-on that people who liked Man of Steel have for any critique of the film is perplexing.


    • @PraxJarvin – It’s not the difference in critique that causes the reaction, it’s the relentless, “in-your-face” dislike opinion mob in the community that becomes the bore for those of us who enjoyed Man of Steel. Perhaps the common retort by those who hated it would say, “I’m glad you liked it, but I hated it”. That’s fair, but, as someone who liked the movie, I return the reply and say, “I’m glad you hated it, but I liked it”.

      @RessectionFlan – I love the misspellings – Such a nice, indirect way of calling people idiots with whom you disagree and yet skirt the forum censors. Like a pro my friend!

  9. One thing I liked about MoS that sort of bugged me about the Avengers:
    During the alien invasion of NYC one of the police officers says that the National Guard was over an hour away. Why didn’t SHIELD or anyone from the Avengers, you know like Captain America who served in the military, call the National Guard when they first found out NYC was going to be attacked? Because the USMC would have stolen their thunder by taking out those sky cycles with a few AT-4s? Maybe …
    Superman however did not share the “We are the only ones that can handle this” attitude and worked with the Air Force et al to stop the alien invasion. Even though the aliens in MoS were way tougher then the ones following Loki.

    I mean, we can sit around and nit pick every movie from MoS back to Citizen Kane (who was there to hear him say ‘Rosebud’?) or we can just enjoy them for the entertainment value. I still liked Iron Man 3 even though it had a huge gaping plot hole the size of a SHIELD Helicarrier.

    • @CharlieRock says: “…I mean, we can sit around and nit pick every movie from MoS back to Citizen Kane (who was there to hear him say ‘Rosebud’?) or we can just enjoy them for the entertainment value. I still liked Iron Man 3 even though it had a huge gaping plot hole the size of a SHIELD Helicarrier.”

      Props for cutting through the hype and hatred. It really is that simple.

    • +1.

    • But.. but… this is the internet.

  10. Mark Waid’s out-of-body experience thoughts on the ending pretty much sum-up what I felt (spoilers):

    Have to agree with him on Jonathan Kent, as well. All the quiet, father-son scenes with Kevin Costner were my favourites in the film (he was the difference between me liking it and not liking it overall), so it’s not surprising that the loud, crashy, bangy, thumpy-thumpy-explodey, who-cares-about-the-deathy ending wasn’t for me. I didn’t hate it, I didn’t even not-like it, it just lost me a bit in the last 45 minutes, and that game up there is why.

  11. I haven’t seen the film, but it looks like they made a Superman movie for Wolverine fans.