Man of Steel

Watching the responses to “Man of Steel” has solidified in my mind a growing trend that I’ve witnessed over the past couple of years.  The pathological insistence on what I call critique porn.  I first noticed it when “The Dark Knight Rises” was released.  I personally loved the movie.  Was it as good as “The Dark Knight?”  No, but it was a fitting end to the trilogy.  It kept me at the edge of my seat and even though one of the big twists was spoiled because of the transparency of a film-set (Talia Al’Goul) I still really enjoyed myself, but if you only paid attention to what was said on the internet you would think the whole movie equates to a load of Taco Bell vomit, which might be the worst.  It doesn’t.  The problem was everyone on the internet that we trust to give us an unbiased opinion was, as far as I can guess, finding the tiniest matters to complain about to…what?  Amuse people, I guess? Maybe they were disappointed that the movie didn’t exceed “The Dark Knight?”  I don’t know, I can’t read their minds, but most of their critiques didn’t even make sense if you watched the movie, and the others could be generally explained.  I’ve seen it happen since, but I wasn’t ready to call it a trend yet.  Now I’m ready.  After a year of seeing it happen to almost every big tent-pole movie I’m convinced.  The internet’s fascination with critique porn is a trend that I don’t like so in the spirit of giving a fair trial to “Man of Steel” I’m going to give you guys a fair, unbiased critique.  You may like the film, you may not, but one thing is for sure this might be the most emotionally driven superhero film yet.  I won’t lie to you, I shed a tear or two…which I’ve never said after a superhero movie.

My first viewing of “Man of Steel” I wasn’t quite sold, I’ll admit.  I thought the exposition was too long, and there was a long sequence when Clark gets his suit and gives himself up to the government that I thought was too long and didn’t challenge the character enough.  Then, on my second viewing something strange happened.  Normally, when a movie feels slow in a part or has bad exposition, the second viewing brings those problems out, but today the movie was seamless.  I think the main problem was expectations.  I heard David Goyer was writing and Christopher Nolan helped break the story and my mind went, of course, to The Dark Knight.  That movie had crisp dialogue, it ran at a mile a minute and barely gave you time to breathe.  “Man of Steel,” on the other hand, gives you time to comprehend what’s going on for many good reasons.  Even though we know the origins of Superman, there are some complicated ideas to follow.  At least I assume there are.  I followed along easily, but the people writing some of the reviews I read obviously didn’t understand so much.  My point being, I was expecting one pace and got another, giving me the illusion of a boring pace.  I’ve seen similar problems.  Critics complain that there was no joy compared to the Donner movies.  That is their main problem, they are comparing it.  There is plenty of comedy in “Man of Steel,” but it is a dry humor. 

Another complaint I read was there was too much destruction in the third act and Superman didn’t do enough to save citizens of Metropolis.  I hate to point out obvious facts here, but let us look at what is going on in the movie in the third act.  Obviously spoilers follow so if you haven’t seen the movie yet I suggest you do.  In the third act General Zod, brilliantly played by Michael Shannon, deploys his “World Engine” and begins to terraform the Earth using Gravity passing through the core to build the mass of the earth and also raising debris around the “World Engine” to start changing the atmosphere.  Now, to break this situation down, we have an advanced alien technology that uses two points on opposite sides of the Earth to work its horrific science.  Superman goes to the engine opposite Metropolis to destroy that while Lois Lane (Amy Adams) puts a plan in motion that will send Zod and comrades back to the Phantom Zone.  During this time the city, which is the other end of the World Engine, is being completely destroyed.  Buildings are crushed, cars thrown about, people crushed.  Pure pandemonium…which is what would happen if an advanced alien race attacked Earth.   As to the other point, Superman isn’t saving anybody because he’s not in Metropolis, duh.  After he dispatches with the other engine and flies back to Metropolis he finds Zod flying the spaceship that takes the place of his Fortress of Solitude attacking the airplane with Lois in it, and Lois is with the spacecraft that Clark came to Earth in which is key to their plan.  He obviously attacks the spaceship with Zod in it destroys it so Zod can’t recreate Krypton.  The spaceship crashes to the ground, but Superman was busy saving Lois from being sucked into a black hole so he couldn’t save the innocents of Metropolis from that.  Then Zod comes back and attacks Superman, throwing him around the city and causing chaos.  He even explains that his point is to kill everyone he can to make Superman pay for destroying his soul (which was to protect Krypton because that’s what he was genetically engineered to do).  Superman could have avoided buildings if Zod wasn’t throwing him into them and the times that is was his fault he was fighting, leave the guy alone.  Plus, I think the level of destruction at the end of “Man of Steel” is going to be important for the growth of Superman.  This was his lesson.

Well, now I’ve rambled on about the things that anger me.  I have simple explanations and counters for all of the complaints I have seen so far. 

I definitely recommend “Man of Steel” to anybody who likes a good story.  Don’t expect the old corny Superman.  And don’t expect Superman to act how he normally does.  He’s still young, he’s still learning.  This movie has a lot of heart, even if most critics couldn’t see it (which I don’t know how), Kevin Costner and Russell Crowe do an amazing job as Clark’s two fathers, each tempering him on what it takes to be a hero.  Amy Adams is a strong, smart Lois Lane.  I did enjoy how she played a big role in this movie, other than being a damsel in distress (which she did a couple of times).  And of course, Henry Cavill, he did an amazing job at bringing Superman to life.  I’ve heard people say that Superman was an empty suit in this movie and I couldn’t disagree more.  You can see his struggle to contain himself before he finds a Kryptonian spaceship and his meaning in life.  You can see his pain when his own mother can’t enjoy the news of him finding out about his past.  The most powerful moments were when he learns to fly, the elation on his face makes you smile, and when he is forced to push himself to his limit, his face contorting with the effort.  I don’t know how you don’t feel anything when you watch that.

5/5  

This is THE Superman movie.  I'm convinced.  I'll watch the old Donner ones again, but they aren't as good as "Man of Steel."

What did you think?  Does it bother you that Superman killed Zod? Why? Do you disagree with me? Agree? Let me know in the comments below.

If you have any questions about the movie I will try my best to explain to you what happened and why it made sense.