Do you want Superman to be in Shazam!

All that "Snider's Superman is Ayn Rand character" drivel (including the absurd "he could have used his hands to block Zod beams" claim) comes from an uninformed Snider hate-article people like to senslessly parrot.

To bring some enlightenment:

1. Snyder's Superman is clearly not in line with Rand-ian hero ideals (which de facto corresponds with Nietsche's Übermensch concept): This is because Snyder's SM/Clark is blatantly tormenting himself with his self-imposed DUTY to help others (without asking reward); sldo bc of his conflict of heeding his father's advise that using his powers could make matters worse - which he finally resolved by splitting up into Superman and becoming an idealistic reporter. An argument could be made that the Superman II movie character was Rand-ian - as he selfishly gives up his SM-vocation for love and needlessly mursers people. But even here it's nonsensical a claim.

2. The "snapping Zod's neck" argument is as as clumsy as it is stupid. In the much beloved SM II classic Supes (and Lois) murder the humanized and helpless Zod (and friends) by sadistically crushing his hand (smiling) and then killing him - multiple murder in the fortress of solitude. Snyder's solution on the other hand would legally not even constitute murder as Supes kills a murderer to prevent him from killing a familiy. Zod was literally "too dangerous to be kept alive" and there was no other way without endangering millions, Zod was a venegeful rabid dog begging to be put down. The irony of it is that this failed anti-MoS argument also ignores the (legacy/culture) point and character development that these actions involve.

In the end, these arguments reveal much more about the person making them than about the subject they are defaming.