Man of Steel 2013

This is THE DEFINITIVE Superman movie. With truly spectacular cinematography, a heartwarming coming of age story, enthralling action and perhaps the best superhero movie soundtrack ever from Hans Zimmer, this movie hits every beat for Superman fans new and old.

As a DC comics fan growing up, the critical response to this movie prevented me going to watch it at the theatre. I mean who wants one of their favourite superheroes being "humourless", "too violent", and "not epic enough"??? Well, I can truly sit here now having said "lesson learned". Never again will I allow critical response to prevent me from experiencing something I had waited a lifetime for. I will never get to see Man of Steel in the theatre, and this movie was shot for the big screen. Some of the shots are truly beautiful, especially when he wakes up in the ocean with whales, and when he learns to fly in the snowy mountains.

The story is often criticised for not having the kookiness of the original four movies with Christopher Reeve - and don't misunderstand this for hating on the first few iterations, I have nothing but fond memories of growing up with those films - but I challenge anyone to watch those movies now and claim that they still hold up. A truly great movie as well as standing the test of time, has rewatch value, and Man of Steel is one of the few superhero movies that I have watched time and time again. This requires a great story.

The story of this movie focuses on a boys relationship with his fathers, and his coming of age through those guises. His cautious and protective Earth father who tought him the morality and goodness we expect from our Superman, who sacrificed himself in order to keep his sons secret; and his Kryptonian father who encouraged him to embrace his difference and be the man Earth needs him to be.

A bonus is that the relationship between Lois and Clark doesn't seem forced. You get to see how she is a great investigative reporter and through her reporting she discovers Superman's true identity. By protecting it, you can see Clark's appreciation and the weight of not being able to talk about it to anyone - something that bothers him throughout the great flashback scenes as wonderfully portrayed by Dylan Sprayberry and Cooper Timberline - being lifted.

The character development of the antagonist, General Zod is done in a way other superhero movies can only be envious of. The message that this character, like all other Kryptonians are born with a specific purpose, in this case to protect Krypton at all costs, comes across well. From his perspective he is the superhero of his own story, trying to save his planet and his people, and that is the truest of tests for supervillain development.

And this brings me to the epic and controversial (for some reason) third act. As mentioned earlier, Superman has a strong moral code instilled in him by Jonathan Kent, which is shown throughout the flashbacks. Any observer who doesn't see that Snyders portrayal of Superman has the most morality of any Superman in cinematic history is simply not paying attention. He doesn't spin the Earth backwards to rewind time just to save his girlfriend like in the original, and he doesnt go back to Smallville and hook up with Lana because the love of his life Lois is ignoring him a little bit like in Superman III. That Superman, despite all of his displayed morality (e.g. where he refrains from fighting the bullies) feels he must kill General Zod is one of the most powerful moments in superhero movie history. He repeatedly begs Zod to give up his quest to destroy Earth and humans now that his quest to return Krypton has failed. Zod makes it clear as day that he will NEVER give up, and that he will destroy humanity at all costs as an act of revenge. What was Clark supposed to do? He was left with no choice! Add to this the fact that Zod's laser beams were inches away from killing a whole family, Superman reluctantly had to break his neck. Yet unlike other superheroes he did not gloat in victory, the pain and anguish in that scream that follows is filled with the heartbreak of breaking both his moral code and killing one of the few other fellow Kryptonians in the universe.

Overall, this movie gets better every single time I watch it. If you haven't watched it since it came out and had mixed feelings the first time, please give this movie another try without the immediate negative reviews that were extensively covered in the media at the time of release. It truly deserves it. Man of Steel is THE DEFINITIVE Superman movie.

A complete waste of time.
If you are a comics fan, and for some reason you still haven't seen this one, save a few hours of your life and pick another movie.
In the other hand if you are not a comic fan, but still want to see a nice superhero movie, check out the ones made by Christopher Reeve almost 40 years ago, you wont be disappointed with those.
This movie has an impressive cast, that's the only reason why I seen it completely, I think for respect of them, but i was so close to stop watching it, and be the first one in my life i did not finish, that's how bad it is.
The options were endless for a superman movie, and even more considering this is supposed to be a dark superman, for me he is more like a reckless one, but they decided to put a ton of super mega FX, which are not convincing at all, and have two semi-gods destroying JUST one city while battling with their superpowers and dont have an scratch in their faces or they immaculate customs.

Lois Lane appears in every single moment with the correct answer or with a brilliant idea of how to stop the bad guys or to be requested in the presence of the powerful entities that came to conquer the world and exterminate the human race to create a new Kripton, but yeah, she needs to be there.
I cannot continue the critiques because I would need to start spoiling the movie and that's something I dont like to do, but i did advice it on the beginning of my review, if you still decide to see this awful movie is on your own mental health risk.

I really hope that Superman vs Batman: Dawn of Justice is not as bad as this one is.

I can appreciate the need to refresh Superman's brand, honestly. The character has been stuck in the '50s since, well, the '50s and the world's gone through a few cultural shifts in that time so an update is overdue. His core principles remain essential, though, and in visiting such dark territory, Zack Snyder's iteration completely whiffs on that.

There's a complete lack of joy, or even optimism, in this grim, sepia-swathed world, least of all in its noble hero. Saddled with guilt by his adoptive father, who adamantly stresses (even to his dying breath) the dangers of revealing his powers to the public, Superman seems defeated even before he takes flight. His biological dad, visited briefly in holographic form, merely points him like a weapon at the bad guys and evaporates. His relationship with Lois Lane is happenstance and hollow, more rendezvous than relationship, with a lack of mystery and next-to-no emotion. It's a drain to watch, a dysfunctional mess just to think about.

The film is technically impressive, though, with a strong talent for emphasizing the magnitude in both the scenery and the inevitable superhuman brawls. I enjoyed the imagination on display during its brief Kryptonian prologue, too, and would welcome a little further exploration on that front, minus the austere gravitas of its impending demise. So the effects work is top-notch, if occasionally shaded by the nagging indulgences that continue to plague CG sporgasbords. Sadly, that's one well it visits too often, and by the climactic closing battle my eyes had glossed over.

Troublesome and messy, this is a grand mismatch. Superman isn't just Batman with heat vision; he's a symbol of hope, of the power of positive thought. A counterpoint to Bruce Wayne's cold, isolated self-reliance. Lacking those nuances, the character is nothing more than a hammer with a red cape. Smotheringly bleak and stressful, I feel like I suffered mild PTSD from this experience.

The movie has a few problems of focus and charisma of some characters such as the poor vilain General Zod and it's motivations, so as the sideckick Faora. But the rise of Superman in this movie is Amazing, such as Snyder's vision of the Man of Steel, the fall of Krypton along with Kal-El's parents and the creation of the Kent family is well done, the young Clark Kent lost among his gift is well-constructed until it's grown.
If you're expecting a homage to Superman's Christopher Reeve, then go watch Superman Returns (2006) because this movie is different from every Superman movie ever done, darker and more serious. The main cast does a great job, Henry Cavill is THE Superman, you can feel it's charisma in it, Amy Adams as Lois Lane is definitely the best version of the character, Russel Crowe as Jor-El is good and so as Kevin Costner and Diane Lane as Jonathan and Martha Kent, Michael Shannon was one of the biggest problems of the film, the acting seems too forced, the menace of General Zod is not believable, is laughable, the reasons of the vilain are not convincing, it's dull such as Terence Stamp portrayal back in Superman I and II.
Now technically the movie is visually striking, full of fights and destruction, the effects of Superman flying is incredible, it's beautiful. It is the first Superman movie without the classic Superman's Theme by John Williams, but Hans Zimmer does a great job on creating a theme to a new man of steel atmosphere. Expecting a sequel. 7/10

My second viewing of "Man of Steel" was better than my first. The action scenes are mammoth and I was awed by just how much was happening. I'd forgotten just how intense the battles are, not just in Metropolis, but in Smallville as well. I also continually thought about how many innocent people must have died as skyscrapers crumbled. It's not an easy thing to get past and I can't say that I wouldn't have appreciated the execution of the "evacuate the city" trope before everything was toppled. I think back to the impact of the city destruction scene in "Independence Day". I didn't even think about the people being killed in that explosion and I contribute that to seeing it before 9/11. Comparatively, it's a larger scale disaster than in "Man of Steel" . The rejection of the Metropolis destruction then, has to stem from much of it being caused (though inadvertently) by Superman.

Yes, I still have trouble with how powerful Superman is. But it's a flaw of the comic book character and not something that developed in this movie. Because he is so powerful, he's aloof and he's portrayed that way in "Man of Steel". It's a wise choice that doesn't turn this movie into another deep character study or a soap opera. The Superman character is too massive for that.

It's time to make a concerted effort not to say the same things as everyone else has about "Man Of Steel". Although the movie was mostly enjoyable, it's strange that my favorite parts of it were small character moments played by a very strong cast.

I went in expecting some colossal fights that would be grand in scale and they were delivered. The CGI was amazing, but there was just so much of it. I never thought I'd clamor for fewer action scenes, but "Man Of Steel" could have done with fewer explosions. There were some stunning effects, not to mention plenty of skyscrapers falling (which aren't getting any easier to watch twelve years removed from 9/11).

The fighting between Superman, General Zod and his crew was often intense and exhausting. I really liked the "weight" and impact that the fights carried. The scale of the battles were huge at times but things were happening so fast and at such volumes that it was often hard to determine just what was going on. The scenes that featured the terra-formers and the gravity effects that they had on surrounding buildings, cars, people, etc. was very original. Snyder's visuals were, as usual, amazing.

There were some blatant attempts using some ham-fisted imagery to equate Superman as savior of the world to Jesus himself. In fact, Snyder went so far as to have Clark/Kal-El visit a church to get advice from a Pastor. As Kal-El is talking with him, a stained glass window featuring Jesus is framed over Kal-El's shoulder. If it's an attempt to be clever, it wasn't. Jesus delivered the promise of eternal life while Superman is just hoping he can help us all get along with each other and save the occasional persons in peril. I don't see the parallels.

Another problem with Superman is he's so powerful there's never any threat he can be stopped. I guess others could die while his ability to rescue them is slowed, but that never translates to a feeling of danger. This problem isn't exclusive to this movie. Superman's indestructibility has always been a problem with the character. I mean, why do you need Batman in the Justice League? To stop petty theft? Just have Superman spin the Earth backwards every time we have a problem. But enough with my picking of nits.

Overall, "Man Of Steel" was about as good as I expected. It offered too much of a good thing with its mind-blowing action sets, but was well acted and a treat to look at.

Pros:
- I always thought it was an odd call to make a Superman film this grim. You’re kinda writing yourself into a corner, as it means the film now has to work on a dramatic level instead of just a comedic/entertainment level, which is hard for a character like Superman. However, I’m also of the opinion that you should give filmmakers the creative leeway in order to put their spin on the material. Thankfully, the central conflict of the plot (which is represented by Superman’s dads) is actually very well done, and it makes the film stand out from other superhero films, while still capturing the essence of Superman.
- I like how they push the character of Superman and test his ideals. If you’re going to put Superman in a more realistic world, it makes sense that he faces situations where he has no choice but to kill someone. To me, that doesn’t break the character, it actually makes him more interesting. The movie walks a fine line in that regard. I know that it makes the film inaccessible for some people. And I certainly get the issue people have with it, as I have the same problem with Batman v Superman. The difference is that I feel like Man of Steel still understands what its central character represents, despite pushing him to the limit.
- The action is great, even though the scene with the tentacles should’ve been removed.
- The acting is overall solid. Kevin Costner, Russell Crowe, Diane Lane and Michael Shannon do most of the heavy lifting. Henry Cavill and Amy Adams are okay.
- The characters are pretty well developed. Zod is one of the most underrated villains in comic book films.
- Some little moments in it are just awesome (first flight, Jor-El and Lois on the ship).

Cons:
- Visually ugly. There are some beautiful moments in it, but the colour grading (which almost looks like a bunch of Instagram filters) overall just isn’t pleasing to the eye. There’s also a little too much handheld in it. If you want to make a more realistic film, I don’t understand why the choice was made to go with this stylized/green screen look.
- The direction is kinda overblown, and there’s way too much destruction porn in the third act.
- There’s a lack of narrative flow in the first act. I don’t know if it’s the editing or the writing, but it’s a bit choppy.
- It’s quite obvious that they wanted to give Lois a big and proactive role, but that they didn’t exactly know how to integrate her into the plot.

6/10

Initial comment after watching it for the first time:

Christopher Reeve will always be the the original Superman for me but this was the best Superman movie I've seen.
Had my doubts about it at first but they were literally blown away while watching. And while I wouldn't go as far as saying this will become a legendary movie it is great and entertaining. I hope they can build on this and deliver a equally good sequel.

Second time watching:

When I watch a movie for the second time, more often than not, I really discover how good or bad it really is. This is even better than I remembered. Or it is the fact that a lot of the last superhero flicks where a dissapointment for me and that makes this one stand out even more. It's intense, emotional and besides the action a great character story. The cast from top to bottom is great. Even on the second watch the movie blew me away. It is a slow build up than culminates into a big finale. Amazing sound effects and the musical score is as great as the pictures. It is a little bit regretfull that the actual fight between Superman and Zod became a bit of an appendix. Especially, considering that he killed Zod, how important it is.
As I said the first time: a really entertaining movie. And, who knows, maybe even on it's way to become a bit legendary.
Updated my rating from 8 up to 9.

O "Man Of Steel" não é um filme perfeito.
Não esteve à altura da magnificência do seu trailer.
Deixa muitos mixed-feelings nalguns e noutros até o consideram como mau (ou do pior que já se apresentou do género nos últimos anos).

É um filme que divide sim.
Ficam aqui mais alguns pensamentos/desabafo sobre o filme (que foram comentados noutro sitio)... neste caso sobre a estrutura do argumento e não só.

Narrativamente, a estrutura não-linear deste novo filme, foi uma boa opção para servir mais a personagem do que propriamente servir o cinema. Quando se aplica uma estrutura linear e se conta uma origem, fica automaticamente como que encerrada. O que se fez no "Man Of Steel" foi compreender que poderiam dar sempre mais ao desenvolvimento de um novo cânone cinematográfico a Superman, podendo ao longo dos vários filmes seguintes ir acrescentando uma infinidade de flashbacks que podem estar constantemente a sustentar o antes e depois deste Superman.
Digo tudo isto porque estando a ler diferentes BDs com o Superman, noto que seguem em direcções diferentes com total liberdade. No mundo do cinema, essa liberdade não existe e só pode existir a continuidade de uma só linhagem para a personagem. O pecado do "Superman Returns" foi estar amarrado de propósito em seguir a linhagem temporal do Christopher Reeve mas isso já o impedia em muitos aspectos de poder seguir para outras vias (mas mesmo assim o Synger fez um excelente serviço com todos os dilemas que lhe cairam em cima).

É preciso perceber que recentemente assistimos com outra personagem, o Batman do Nolan, a ser levado para onde não deveria: que é a via da adaptação pessoal e em ruptura com muitas facetas da personagem na BD (sendo a mais importante a inacreditável negação da sua realidade num universo DC expandido - é por essa situação que não pode haver mais nenhum Batman do Nolan). Digamos que este Batman, se existisse em BD seria uma história standalone numa graphic novell especial. Ou seja, bebe do cânone do Batman mas não encaixa nele (e dizendo isto, não quer dizer que não o influencie noutros aspectos).

Um novo filme de Superman, teria de ser mais "aberto" com toda uma série de encargos. Nisso tudo, o "Man Of Steel" cumpre magestosamente.
Falha para mim, na maneira como nos faz sentir alienados de tanta irrealidade destrutivo-acelerada na última parte do filme... pois até aí ia bastante bem, apesar do tom sisudo e excessivamente sério (de todo o filme, só me recordo de uma graçola na cena final - cena que nem lá está a fazer nada sequer pois parece um extra).
A verdade é que, não é todos os anos que um filme de superheróis questiona-se a si mesmo, avançando e recuando, com um estilo visual por vezes à Terrence Malick...

"They will race behind you, they will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun, Kal. In time, you will help them accomplish wonders."

Man of Steel is somewhat of a mess. The film opens with the destruction of Krypton, the death of Jor-El (Russell Crowe), the banishment of Zod (Michael Shannon) and his squad to the Phantom Zone, and of course the launch of Kal-El to Earth. Instantly after this, the film skips ahead thirty or so years and cuts to Clark Kent wandering Earth in search of his true Kryptonian parents. During this time, he steals clothes, looks depressed as hell, meets Lois Lane coincidentally, and does end up finding a Kryptonian spacecraft where he learns where he is from. In between the aforementioned scenes, there are also minor flashbacks back to Clark as a kid and how he learns to control his powers, thanks to his Earth father, Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner). Now that is the first half of the film and believe it or not, that's the more enjoyable part.

Zack Snyder has no idea how to tell a story but I guess lucky for him, there's really not much story in this film to be told. The second half of the film can be described in one sentence: Zod comes to Earth and Superman has to save the world from imminent destruction. That is not a story. That is not how you set up an entire franchise.

Now do not get me wrong because I actually do enjoy some aspects of the film. First of all, the dark and gritty tone of the movie is not something I dislike but instead understand what they were trying to go for and for the most part, the "storytelling" in the film did go with the tone and flow. And the fact that Superman here isn't so happy-go-lucky is fine as well because the DCEU is trying its best to compete with the MCU and I feel as if this is a great way to do so. Superman can't be so cheery all the time, especially when there is so much destruction and deaths being caused due to the events that unfold in the film. Now if The Flash film that is set to release in 2017 tries to go for a dark and gritty tone, that's a whole different story.

The second half of this film is just jam packed with action. Good looking action? Yes. Does it still get tedious and somewhat boring? Oh, yes.

There is one scene in this film when the Phantom Zone is reopened for a bit on Earth, there is debris flying towards it along with Zod's army of Kryptonians. Now the part that is infuriating to me here is how all of those things seemed to be attracted to the Phantom Zone portal but Lois Lane is obviously the one who isn't at all and instead is falling the opposite direction of the portal. And to make matters even more stupider and nonsensical, when Superman does save her from falling, even he struggles to resist the forces of the Phantom Zone from pulling him in. Am I missing something here?

And the "consciousness" of Jor-El. I understand that Kryptonian technology is all futuristic and what not but this seriously just makes no sense. How does he know who Lois is? Why did he only make a consciousness of himself? How is he able to control the ship doors but not the ship itself?

The controversial final scene of this movie where Superman is forced to kill Zod to save a couple humans is one that I actually liked. Sure, its unlike Superman but once again, it goes with the tone of the film. Superman chooses Earth over Krypton; there's actually some symbolism to be found if you read hard between the lines. And seriously, if Superman did capture Zod alive, how would there be any way on Earth at that time to even contain him?

Either way, I think there is some enjoyment that can be had with Man of Steel, mostly in the first half, and its worth a watch to anyone who enjoys big blockbuster or disaster films. However, if you are an avid comic book fan, do not expect this film to follow any source material.

Whilst Superman Returns remains an enjoyable film and a suitable coda to the original Reeve films (forming an almost cohesive trilogy if the debacles that are III and IV are ignored) a reboot was clearly necessary. Despite initial concerns, Snyder's decision to ignore the iconic elements of the previous film (the music being an obvious one) was wise and allows this film to stand or fall on its own merits without the need to constantly compare (although given the status of the original films perhaps some comparison is inevitable). The film is at its strongest in its depiction of Clark as a boy and young man as he struggles to deal with his powers and Costner is especially strong here. The decision to use these scenes as a flashback however is a poor one and seem to suggest a desire to rush the introduction of Superman, but they do resonate throughout and allow for that important connection with the character amidst all the mayhem. Indeed, the film as a whole seems in a rush to get to the inevitable confrontation between Zod and Superman and when it does arrive, the destruction does become a little relentless. The special effects are convincing yet Snyder forgets his characters and it all starts to become a little wearying by the end. A strong score from Zimmer allows you to forget (for a while) the Williams' classic, but this film is no Batman Begins. However, some excellent casting (Cavill is excellent) and a strong first half will hopefully lead to even better films for the sequels. For now, this has broken the connection with the Reeve films and resulted in a reasonable film.