A lot has been said about the Man of Steel this past week. We’ve had a couple of reviews (both text and video), and featured a place where you could share your thoughts on the movie. Online there is also a lot of talk about the pros and cons of the film, with some absolutely loving it, and others loathing it. We’ve heard all the good and all the bad, but today, it’s about your fellow movie goer.
[poll id=”289″]
Stephen Schleicher
Stephen Schleicher began his career writing for the Digital Media Online community of sites, including Digital Producer and Creative Mac covering all aspects of the digital content creation industry. He then moved on to consumer technology, and began the Coolness Roundup podcast. A writing fool, Stephen has freelanced for Sci-Fi Channel's Technology Blog, and Gizmodo. Still longing for the good ol' days, Stephen launched Major Spoilers in July 2006, because he is a glutton for punishment. You can follow him on Twitter @MajorSpoilers and tell him your darkest secrets...
28 Comments
I haven’t seen it, don’t intend to see it, so can’t recommend it. I haven’t liked any Superman movie or comic yet, so I doubt this one would change my mind. The only DC character I can deal with is Batman.
Clarity to be fair–I haven’t liked any Superman movie or comic that I’ve seen or read. I have not read every Superman comic by any means. I just don’t like the character.
There are enough alternate versions and reboots that you should find one you like. Have you read the early Action Comics?
A couple of them. The ones I read seemed really one dimensional. I’m sure my son would love them. I guess it isn’t even that they were one dimensional, but that the one dimension wasn’t to my taste because to be fair. I take to street level characters–Gambit, Kitty Pryde, Moon Knight, Batman–but have never liked any cosmic or extremely powerful characters–Superman, Silver Surfer, Sentry (apparently anyone whose name starts with “s”)
The original Superman was a street level character. He fought for social justice and his powers hadn’t evolved beyond all semblance of reality. He couldn’t fly, artillery shells could penetrate his skin, etc. Not arguing with you (his stories were one dimensional)
I voted no, because I just didn’t care for the film on multiple levels. The script needed a lot of work to improve dialogue, pacing, and character development. The main issue is that the film goes against so much of what I love about Superman. He always just does what others tell him to, even the controversial act at the end was him following a command from the villain. Superman wasn’t smart or creative enough to prove the villain wrong. He lacked the compassion that makes him Superman. I also felt that the film made Jonathon Kent out to be a weak man ruled by fear and paranoia, which is truly sad.
It seems to be a sad trend since the 70s to bring heroes down to our level. They don’t fight evil because it’s the right thing to do, they have to have a personal reason (true, that’s how Batman and Spider-man started but their personal losses inspired them to help others). They don’t win by outsmarting the villain, just by being meaner and tougher. Superman vs Zod in this movie seems like a grudge match especially as neither one showed any concern for the destruction they wrought. I blogged a little on this on my Dec 17 blog. At least the Marvel movies have got it right.
I really enjoyed the movie. Most of the complaints I have heard stems from it being different from the Christopher Reeve Superman, but I don’t think that is a bad thing. I love those movies and will continue to watch them, but this is a wonderful update to the Man of Steel and brings the story into the 21st century in a very cool way.
Yes it was different from Christopher Reeve’s. Also from the whole spirit of Superman. (1)Hiding is more important than helping people and (2) no concern for the mass destruction and carnage his battles created. He wasn’t fighting to save the world, just an enemy who threatened him
Fair enough point about hiding, but I felt that was just not the version of Johnathan Kent I wanted and that was a shame because no one makes a better mid-west farmer than Kevin Cosner. I also don’t know that I would go so far as to say there was no concern about the collateral damage, but bear in mind that this is brand new Superman who is still learning how to be a hero and also that the Kryptonian forces declared genocide to be on their agenda and that was foremost on his mind. They had to be stopped, and stopped right now, or the planet died. He did not save everyone, but he did save most of the entire planet, and on that scale I call it a win.
Wrong, he was helping people the whole time. He was just being as covert about it as possible. Hence the comment in the cemetery from Lois that she knew he wasn’t going to stop helping.
I have have never liked Superman, but for some reason I keep trying and being disappointed. This time was no different.
Despite the flaws and foibles in Man of Steel I would say it was a good movie as long as you don’t go looking for a deep physiological drama, which it is not. Sure the Krypton scenes at the beginning were a bit more than may have been needed, but they looked really cool.I know that characters outside of Superman, Lois and the parents didn’t get development, but then again I didn’t really know that the editor, or that scientist should have had character until I looked them up on Wikipedia.
I think that this is a very fun movie and as many have said the first time you really feel the impact and level of strength that Superman has. This movie was a great way to bring Superman back into mass audience and at whatever large number of million dollars it has earned now it obviously has.
I Vote YES,
This is a Good movie, only because of some of my personal issues with it, but it is a Must See. I love that they had the Krypton Tech and not just some crystals and all the time they spent at the start of the move on Krypton was needed. Then BAM you are on a boat with 33 year old Clark. I really enjoyed the way the movie flowed back and forth with the flashbacks (just like Arrow is doing), it worked very well. All the action (a lot of action) was done well. As well as the acting, I cannot tell you how much I enjoyed Russell Crow as Jor-EL What I liked most is that it Clark did not get the job at the Daily Planet until the end of the film. And yes there is the whole messiah thing but come on its SUPERMAN. This is a great start for more Superman movies to come.
Also the score was outstanding, reminded me of Tron Legacy.
My personal issues I have with the Man Of Steel:
1- DUDE PUT THE CAMERA ON A TRIPOD to much camera movement we no action was going on, felt like I was on a boat the whole movie
2 – STOP BREAKING THE WHOLE TOWN too much stuff blowing up and being thrown thru buildings
3 – NO TEASER AT THE END OF THE CREDITS, it would of been cool if Clark walked up to Wayne Enterprises front desks and said “Yes, my name is Clark Kent and I’m here to interview Mr. Wayne” ;) Justice League tie in!
4 – STOP KILLING OFF PA KENT
Bottom Line – Go out and see it!
I loved the movie. I thought the plot was believable. There weren’t any blaring plot holes. Superman was challenged without being nerfed. There was no kryptonite or Lex Luthor .
I really don’t understand why so many people are complaining about the movie.
I said yes, but I would recommend it only as an action movie. As a Superman movie, I think it fails to capture what makes Superman great.
I would say yes. Superman is probably one of my favorite characters for many of the reasons why others dislike him. I want a hero that is a “boyscout” or “lawful good”. I want somebody to bring hope and to encourage others to do good. I realize there were a lot of plot holes and the **Spoilers** big beefs that many have with the collateral damage risking civilians and superman killing zod. I know their is a precedence for killing Zod however I am not sure it should have happened in the first movie. It was interesting reading an article that said the original script had Zod going back to the phantom zone and that it was Zack Snyder that said no Superman needs to kill Zod because where else does his aversion to killing come from. While I can kind of see that point another part of me takes issue with someone needed to kill someone to never want to kill again.
I have hope that they will build upon that death in the next movie as repercussions, I remember an issue of superman where he was at a psychologists office and talking about the time he killed the other Zod.
In closing I loved everything from when he first put on the suit and flew and the where lois comes and finds him at home, and his interactions with the military. The mega destruction battles and superman’s recklessness or killing I did have some issues with but I want to see the man improve and become the hero I know he is.
(on a side note having read some articles on man of steel and sexism I am curious what other’s think, being a straight white male I am trying to learn more and identify sexism when I see it so i can try to keep myself from causing it, but I saw two different articles/commenters one written by a female that said Man of Steel was awesome for it’s portrayal of women as not being naked sex objects (into darkness), having lois actually investigate and faora kicking and punching with the rest. Yet I saw another that bemoaned how all the women were horrible representations).
Have you heard of the Bechdel test? A work passes the test if it features (1) at least two women (2) who talk to each other (3) about something other than a man. There’s a list of films which passed or failed at http://bechdeltest.com/
I guess I have a problem with a Superman film where Superman let 100,000 people die. But its ok because they were collateral damage. Those poor people at the Smallville Gas Station to name a few.
I’m kind of on the fence about this one, though I did answer ‘yes’. It’s not a bad movie by any means, just not a great movie.
The fight scenes were really dynamic and one of the places where the movie shines–for once we get to see Superman really fight. A standout here is Antje Traue as Faroa, who kicks some ass and look good doing it. On the other hand, while I enjoyed the overall story, we don’t get to see Superman as the driving force behind the resolution–other people come up with the plans and he just acts as the brute force to do it.
While I don’t think he did a bad job, Henry Cavil is mostly forgettable as Superman and there’s no chemistry between him and Amy Adams as Lois Lane. In the end they kiss–mostly because he’s Clark Kent and she’s Lois Lane and that’s just what happens. I did enjoy Amy Adams as Lois and for once we get to see her as the star reporter she’s supposed to be, actually tracking down Clark before he even becomes Superman.
The thing that most detracts from the movie to me though is the relationship between Clark and the Kents. Kevin Costner does a really strong performance as Jonathan Kent, it just wasn’t a version of the character I would have wanted to see. The Kents have always been where Superman gets his morals and his heart, but here Ma and Pa are more concerned about keeping his secret than with helping others. But isn’t doing the right thing what Superman is all about?
Oh, and Superman forgot to wear his underwear. His mom is going to be so embarrased if he gets in an accident.
You need another option for those of us who haven’t seen it yet or have no intention of seeing it.
Yes and no. If you like superman, or couldn’t care less, there’s nothing here to change your mind either way. It’s all super, and no man.
Superman is not about Krypton and Jor-El. It’s about a guy names Clark Kent from Kansas, who puts on a cape and saves people. Batman (and Matthew may hate me) may be the identity, and Bruce the mask, but with Superman it’s the opposite. He’s not a krypton in trying to fit in on Earth- he’s far more compelling as an earth man coming to terms with his enormous power.
Superman is about becoming a good man, and being a good man is about sacrifice. They came close to it in the movie, but didn’t quite hit it. Every second Superman refrains from jumping in a solving all the worlds problems is a sacrifice.
I don’t know what the comics and movies have against Clark Kent as a character, but he was nowhere to be seen in this movie. Superman is a cape and an ideal; which, by itself, is reactive and boring.
This movie had one plot that drove relentlessly forward, with no deviation. It was more about Jorel and Zod than Superman. There was no character development, no establishing of a status quo, just a story the way a ten year old would tell it: “then this happens, then this happens, then this blows up, then they fight.” Except a ten year old could have written better dialogue than Zods or kid Clark.
Also major problem? Superman doesn’t kill. Ever. He better swear some vow early in the next movie, cause I checked out right there.
So again, if you like superman, it’s fun to see him fly and fight. If you don’t like superman, or don’t care, then there is nothing here to persuade you differently. I liked it, but couldn’t stop noticing major issues that could have been easily fixed.
Much like Iron Man 3 after hearing and reading about it here I no longer have any interest in seen it.
Mandarin change is like having the Joker be Falkon’s patsy in Dark Knight and turning into comic relief after getting arrested…
Superman killing Zod is like Optimus killing Megatron in Explodformers 3, a deal breaker.
Definitely.
It’s not high art, it’s a comic book movie. It promotes the medium to a spectrum of people who don’t typically immerse themselves in it. If it’s going to get just one of my friends buying an issue of Superman or anything else for that matter then it’s done it’s job. Nolan’s ruined things a bit with his Batman trilogy that seems almost ashamed of the funny pages heritage it has, so until Avengers came along, everyone wanted their superhero films disguised as something else. We need more films like Man of Steel for the comics in general to continue and thrive.
I wasn’t happy about the ultimate fate of Zod – why do these superhero movie producers feel the need to kill of the best villains by the end of the movie? First Doc Ock, now Zod? As for the collateral damage and the innocent victims – for goodness sakes, Superman was facing a whole ship full of superpower Kryptonians on his first outing as Superman – I doubt he had the time or opportunity to trim the verge and spruce up the lawn and rescue kittens in the middle of battle! I did recommend this movie to friends and family. All problems aside, it’s simply the best Superman movie ever made!
@zookningel It wouldn’t let me reply up above. Apparently it thinks we have conversed enough. I have seen some old cartoons and read a couple of old comics where Superman actually did just leap tall buildings in a single bound, as opposed to fly. His powers seemed like they were based on a change in gravity instead of heaven knows what (not that it really matters all that much–I’m not crying out for it all to make perfect sense). Those are the closest to a Superman I could get behind. The problem for me is that I don’t tend to enjoy older comics that much. The writing style tends to annoy me. I have read plenty of the thought bubbles that tell exactly what is about to happen on panel, but I prefer not to. So I could say there is in fact a Superman that I do like, but not one I would read about because of when he was written the way I like the character, it was done in a style I don’t like.
Yes. While it is not a perfect movie, it succeeds in doing what it needed to do. Rebooting a relevant Superman into a franchise. It has also made friends of mine and my 11 year old little brother love and think Superman is awesome; when before the movie they did not care about the man of steel. So in that respect, the movie is a win, and I would recommend it.