Man of Steel

→ in
Tools    





I totally agree with everything that you said. This movie had an impressive cast, but none of them were really given significant, interesting roles. Since the movie had little to no character development, I am really surprised that A-list actors like Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne, Kevin Costner, etc. decided to do this movie. Why do you think they chose to do it? After seeing it, I was surprised that this was a movie that all of these respected actors wanted to be in, since their roles were not very interesting and the movie itself was simply not very good.
There's no doubt Costner and Crowe just wanted an easy paycheck. Costner knows a quality script and he had to cringe reading whatever draft he read. Goyer wrote an awful script plain and simple.

Amy Adams said she always wanted to play Lois and that this was her last chance. I like her a lot and hope that they get it right in the sequel for her sake. For me, this is exactly like the Amazing Spider-Man reboot. I didn't like that film either (but it is better than MOS). I'm hoping they get a better script for that cast as well.



Masterman you are clinging by your fingernails to the fact that this movie was good. Just accept that it wasn't.
In few years he will grow up & his opinions will surely change & he'll be embarassed of the fact that he thought this movie was good.

To Zack Snyder, If I wanted to see you play a videogame, I'd have loved to drop by your place.
Or I could just watch my little cousin play with his Xbox.



I've kept away from this thread for now, but now I've seen it I can comment.

I'd have preferred to see more of a battle on Krypton, that led to Kal-El being sent to Earth, then jump to Clark as an adult and have flashbacks of his childhood and show him becoming Superman and getting a job at The Daily Planet...
... then have a cliff-hanger ending when Zod turns up... that would have worked better imho.
But, in another respect, if that was the case, it would be accused of copying the original films.


There are a number of good points going on about the bad side of the film, and I agree, the character writing is poor...

Snyder, Nolan and Goyer have skipped the character writing I think, because those seeing it will already know what these characters should be thinking about each other.
The problem is, it's a fundamental part of the character traits.

I reckon the film is still great though, nothing that will make favourites lists but it's a Superman film that has been missing for a long time.
The action, epic size of destruction and general sense of threat from the antagonists is perfect for the Universe. Action and looks wise, it beats the other Superman films hands down... just the character writing lets it down in the first half. The only real connection is a kiss between the two of them that says "Yep they love each other"... I was like, where did that come from?
Maybe I missed something.


Tbh though, it's about time a Superman film had the guts to go full on with the punches and explosions rather than just relying solely on a love story between Lois and Clark and constantly having Lois in danger before Clark decides to don his blue suit...

The other thing is the torn feelings of Clark between rebuilding his race and saving mankind from a maniac.
Zod himself seems to have a more "humane" side as you can see he is genuinely thinking about what he is doing and seems to even question his actions, even if it is momentarily.

This is a part of the Lore that hasn't been seen in the on screen Superman before... I think the second half writing more than makes up for the first half writing because of these points I've made above.

I also felt that the first half was more of an origins story with all the flashbacks. The tonal change half way through gives me the impression that the filmmakers wanted to get all the stuff we already know out of the way so they can get on with the brawl between Supes and the bad guys.


Chances it'll make a favourites list? Slim.
Being a decent Superman Comicbook film? Absolutely.



Good whiskey make jackrabbit slap de bear.
Zack Snyder isn't one of my favourite directors. He has a striking visual style, which works in several of his films, but when it comes to his adaptations, they always come off as entertaining bits of fluff instead of skilled, respectable adaptations/remakes. I have nothing wrong with entertaining bits of fluff, but when it comes to creating a cinematic vision of a source material I actually care for (Watchmen), I'd rather a good adaptation instead of a cool-looking, but hollow vehicle. I had these fears for Man Of Steel. I feared that Snyder would strip away the fun, light-heartedness of the original films and leave us with a dour, unenjoyable mess that tries too hard to be darker and more modern. Most importantly, I feared it would be missing the spark that would help Superman soar. But I'm happy to say that not only was Man Of Steel better than I expected and certainly Snyder's best work, but also one of the best films of the year and one of the best superhero films I've seen in a long time.

One of the very few problems I have with the original Reeve Superman films is that Superman is never, ever in danger. Even in Superman II, with Zod, Ursula and Non, three supervillains who are supposed to match Superman in every way, it never feels like Superman is ever in trouble. Also, the original films rarely scratch the surface of what makes Superman tick and how he feels about being Earth's saviour. Man Of Steel chooses to focus on Superman's complexities: his relationship with his adoptive father, his feelings about having to hide his true powers, his coming to terms with what he is and what he is capable of. The exploration of these areas provides many great moments, including a few surprisingly emotional ones. It's in these moments where we can see how much Snyder's style has matured over the years, as the material is handled in a mature, serious and ultimately superb way.

Even though it's these character moments that made Man Of Steel such a great experience for me, there's enough dazzling spectacle here to entertain. Despite it being set in a heavily populated city area (which is becoming a pet peeve of mine in modern superhero/alien invasion films), I enjoyed Snyder flaunting his visual style, while thankfully toning down the slo-mo that populates most of his other films.

I had my doubts about unknown Henry Cavill in the iconic role, but he is perfect. He fantastically embodies what Superman is about, while brining a few qualities of his own to the role. The other highlight of the cast is (surprisingly) Kevin Costner. This has to be his best performance in ages. He's given very brief screentime as Jonathan Kent, but in his few moments, he delivers a simple, but highly engaging performance that leads to some of the film's most heartbreaking moments. Michael Shannon is unfortunately the film's weakest link, at times a moustache twirling villain and others a relatable warrior with a noble goal, not very good with either of them.

Man Of Steel won't please everyone, but it definitely pleased me, offering up a view of the complexities of being the world's biggest outcast with more than enough grit and emotion while adding a heavy dose of action and pyrotechnics. It may not work 100% of the time, but when it does work, it's magical. There isn't quite enough to make Superman soar, but there's more than enough to get him off the ground.

__________________
"George, this is a little too much for me. Escaped convicts, fugitive sex... I've got a cockfight to focus on."



Friends Don't Let Friends Pay Movie Prices for Rentals
I fully enjoyed Man of Steel. I really liked Snyder did to develop the character unlike Superman Returns.

Sure, the spectacle of Superman fighting Zod was amazing. But the scenes I enjoyed were the ones between Clark and his father. The tornado scene is gut wrenching as well. It really helps to deliver the punch in the final moment between Superman and Zod. I thought all the actors did a fantastic job. Maybe Amy Adams as Lois Lane was the weakest, but still worked none-the-less.
__________________
Want to know if it's worth seeing a movie at a theater? Check out www.filmigos.com



Good movie.

I did feel that the fight sequences were redundant after awhile, but I found this Superman to be more compelling than previous efforts. I'm also glad we get to see Superman fight someone at his level and see the destruction it causes. That might seem like a conflict with my previous point, but it's a wash.




2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
Just got back from seeing Man of Steel finally, and I must say that I was very impressed.

Don't laugh at me but I thought the highlight of the film was Amy Adams. She did a terrible job with the role she was given. Overall just a highly enjoyable movie with a great cast. The plot may have had some holes that obviously could have made the film a bigger hit with others but other than that it was entertaining from point A to point B. The beginning of the film kept me attached to the movie, and not knowing much about Superman's background story I was able to figure it out easily

8.5/10 from me.



☆☆ I Promise ☆☆
Man Of Steel was amazing



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Don't laugh at me but I thought the highlight of the film was Amy Adams. She did a terrible job with the role she was given
What does this mean???
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



On the outside looking in.
It's better than SUPERMAN RETURNS but that's not saying much. Cavill makes a decent Clark/Kal-El ("Superman" isn't acknowledged in the end titles), and Diane Lane acquits herself nicely as Martha Kent, but Amy Adams is an awful Lois (Lois Lame might be a more appropriate name for her character), and Laurence Fishburne's Perry White (complete with earring! ) is more Frank Langella than Jackie Cooper. The one casting choice I had high hopes for was Michael Shannon as Zod, and while he brings a great deal of menace to the proceedings, he lacks the calm, cool confidence of Terence Stamp's interpretation. Perhaps modern audiences expect their villains to be over-the-top bad asses with no shades of grey, and if that's the case, then this new Zod delivers. Christoper Meloni, one of my favourite LAW & ORDER actors, has a nice supporting role as an army officer.

But my main quibble with the film is the way it approaches the action sequences. Perhaps I'm out of step with the times, but I don't see the point in making a SUPERMAN movie where it's painfully obvious all the actors are standing in front of a green screen and the "epic" digital action is out of focus and cut with attention deficit sufferers in mind. When Christopher Reeve played Superman, you could actually see his derring-do whereas in MAN OF STEEL the action is cut so quickly you have to guess. Also, the Kryptonian architects were most definitely inspired by H.R. Giger this time out, so it's little wonder Jor-El and the Missus had no interest in raising a child in such a dark and uninviting environment. One last note: I'm glad they didn't try to tack the Williams SUPERMAN theme onto this as it wouldn't have worked, but Hans Zimmer completely misses the mark with his score for MAN OF STEEL.

**.5 / ****



adam-dvddaily's Avatar
Registered User
I thought that Man Of Steel was a very interesting movie. Interesting is the best word i can use to describe it because of all the things going on is this movie. Although i enjoyed the fact they didn't do the complete back story of Superman in chronological order i think it may be a bit hard to follow if you don't already know Superman's past. As for the events that take place during the story i found that they tried to cram a lot in over the 143 minutes, it seems as though they concentrated too much on setting up possible sequels than giving us a captivating story.

Henry Cavill played the role extremely well so i cant fault him for anything. I loved how Russell Crowe got involved in this movie, in my opinion he made the film all the better. I also must tip my hat to Kevin Costner who once again brought much to the movie and helped get the sensitivity of a young Clark Kent struggling to come to terms with his talents come across to the audience.

All in all a generous 7/10 from me.

I dont want to spoil the ending of the movie so i wont say how i felt about that but if anyone does want my opinion you can always PM me.

If you feel differently or think i have given a fair assessment of Man Of Steel lets discuss.
__________________
Officialadamn



I dont want to spoil the ending of the movie so i wont say how i felt about that but if anyone does want my opinion you can always PM me.
You can hide information in a Spoilers Tag. You can learn how to do that here
__________________
Stallone is my hero!



A fantastic modern adaptation of Superman.
WARNING: "spoiler" spoilers below
Some mild unrealistic scenes, like Lois being rescued unscathed out of the space pod.. There was so much debris and exploding..
This is a pretty common flaw in most super hero movies. The CG seemed video gamey at times, which is not good in cinema. And there seemed to be some Metal Gear Solid influence in the design of the Kryptonian spacesuits, which is not a bad thing. It felt like a cross between Dragon Ball Z, Metal Gear Solid 4, and The Matrix at times. So fitting that Laurence Fishburne has a role. The story is awesome. Supreme logic is a term I first used to describe the mindstates of Kevin Smith's characters in Clerks. Again there is a form of supreme logic being followed by Superman and the other Kryptonians. I am definitely hungry for more back and future story of this universe.

8/10
__________________
UNCRITICALLY ACCLAIMED (A UNIQUE COLLECTION OF FILMS)
MY MOVIE RANKINGS