Man of Steel

Remove all ads!

I was curious what everyone thought about the latest superhero popcorn muncher.

I for one loved it. Enjoyed it more than any superhero movie in quite some time.

But to my surprise - especially among my FB friends - there's lots of nerd butthurt over it, with phrases like "they mythos has been utterly destroyed" and "this is the Jar Jar Binks of Superman movies" being thrown about.

Some of my friends are complete tools. But I digress.

What did y'allz think?

 

Ha ha, dmc, I thought it was so-so!

Good performances all around, kinda helped reel in some of the things from the Superman mythology that didn't make any sense (like the glasses thing!). Good special effects, the fight between Superman and Zod at the end was eye-opening in the utter destruction it wrecked on New Y--I mean, Metropolis. It definitely humanized Superman more than any of the other movies and the shows I've seen, not that I watched that many shows (I've probably only seen a half-dozen episodes of "Smallville," for instance).

I thought it seemed kinda long, and frankly I was bored at times. Russell Crowe had a lot of screen-time, and I was past ready to see Jor-El go by the time he finally left the film; conversely, somehow I thought there would have been more of Pa Kent and Lois Lane.

 

I am a huge fan of superhero movies and see just about all of them. I would rate this one around a B. I enjoyed the movie very much, but there were just a couple of things that bothered me.

Spoiler

1. The movie was too long with obvious things that they could have cut such as.

2. The fight scenes were too long.

3. Every scene involving the Daily Planet could and should have been cut from the movie with the exception of the scene at the end of the movie. As a for instance the scene in which Perry and some guy who I'm not even sure if they ever identified were trying to save some girl (who we also never found out who she was) who is trapped under some rebar and concrete. Did any of these scenes need to be in the movie.

4. Did you happen to notice that there were at least a couple of scenes in the movie when the camera paused on random people who were staring at something. Once again, are we supposed to know who these people are and care at their reactions to whatever they are looking at?

5. I liked the actor who played Superman. The women in the theater seemed to have a chemical reaction to him (if you know what I mean)

6. I like Amy Adams, but she could have dyed her hair to match Lois. I'm not sure I would have cast her as Lois, but I also don't have a suitable replacement actress.

7. A black Perry White didn't bother me. What did bother me was that Perry is supposed to be more curmudgeonly.

8. Michael Shannon was great as Zod.

9. Kevin Kostner, Russell Crow and the guy from Law and Order who played the Colonel were fine, although the movie probably didn't need the Law and Order guy. Most of his scenes didn't really need a star, and are we supposed to be believe he is a soldier who also knows how to pilot a C130?

 

I pretty much agree with that comment. Some did seem pretty long.

I would have disagreed with you until I thought about it. Yeah, I'm not sure what the point of several of them was, either.

I thought he was good, too. Plus the writers did a good job of making his motivations at least comprehensible.

He wasn't a soldier. He was pretty clearly an Air Force officer, in the Air Force. He wore an Air Force uniform. He was a colonel in the Air Force.

 

Good points, all. I agree, and dogsoldier's counterpoints are spot on.

The only thing I could say about #3 was that they - I guess - needed some familiar human element in their to show the up-close destruction going on, to emphasize the danger people on the ground were in. I'm just not sure how effective it was at doing that.

I guess I just didn't notice #4. Hmm.

I have more comments, but I'm curious to hear from a few more people (plus I gotta get back to work).

 

Not seen it yet, for some reason they thought it would be a good idea, 2013, to not release the movie at the same time all over the world.

 

I can understand why that can happen though. I'm not really a fan of the Superman series, so I probably won't be bothered by it. Because of my son's love of Iron Man, I did get into the Iron Man canonical elements, which is why I was bothered by the portrayal of Mandarin in the film, although most people were very positive of the movie overall - probably because they aren't Iron Man nerds like my son and I.

Yes, the Air Force uses the same ranks as the Army. Furthermore, the C-130 (if that is in fact what it was) has been a mainstay of the Air Force transport system for around 50 years now. The original C-130s debuted during Vietnam, and have seen heavy use ever since, owing to their capability of carrying both troops and vehicles. (Although not an Abrams tank - you need a C-5 for that, and even the Galaxy can only take two at a time.) So yeah, just about anyone in the AF should be able to fly one.

 

I guess I'm not up on my DC lore -- when did Krypton become a Huxley-esque Brave New World? I mean, Kal-El has always been a Christ/Messiah figure, but this film gave a whole new meaning to the term "Only Begotten Son" with the altered backstory.

 

I thought the movie was ok too and didn't mind seeing it.

It wasn't the best movie but it wasn't the worst.

I thought the glasses were long part of Superman's disguise as Clark Kent (I thought this was pretty clear in the old Superman movies from years ago.)

One thing it do show was a lot more of was Krypton.

You may agree or disagree with it but this is the most you got to see of its society in any of the films.

I think the reason the planet was destroyed changed-wasn't it an exploding star before (not self induced) and now it was because of how they got their energy (very self induced.. gee.. any comparisons with humans of modern times here?)

I noticed that Kryton's technology became a lot more metalic and organic rather than crystal (which had been a common theme of earlier superman films).

The whole doing anything other than genetic engineering is heresy was totally new.


But I don't think it was a bad movie nor do I think it destroyed Superman. Sure there were some changes but they weren't story killing.

 

Pasted from the blockbuster thread:

Watched Man of Steel and it again confirmed my opinion that Superman as a character doesn't work. You can't build a really entertaining story around him. He is too strong, too powerful, too much of everything. Even if he faces an opponent of equal power. Never any real suspense except for the kryptonite parts and those are getting real old. Very well done movie, doubt they could do it much better but it is still about Superman.