Poll: Man of Steel; Why the hatred?

[Seracen]

I enjoyed it on the level of a good popcorn movie, a summer action blockbuster. Of course, that's why it's a disappointment. As a film, it's fine. As a Superman film, it lacks heart and inspiration, which are iconic to the character.

I'd have added 10 minutes of Clark being Clark, and maybe 5 more minutes of him learning to be Superman. Moreover, I'd have cut out that "tentacle robot" scene (plenty of ways to add drama and struggle in that scene). Not only would this have afforded me the time I need for the other cuts, it would have let the other fights shine more.

Fatigue factor sets in when you have that much action without rest. It's why I always use the example of Crank vs Shoot Em Up, where I enjoy both, but feel that Crank was better crafted (well paced downtimes).


I feel that these changes (which aren't that major, in the grand scheme of filmmaking), would have dispelled the critique everyone seems to have. Furthermore, the "Jesus imagery" and killing Zod weren't things that bothered me either, and not something worth noting if the film had no other faults (which is not the case currently).

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.822081-Man-of-Steel-Impressions-possible-spoilers#19873721

Since then, just after having seen it, I've decided it actually wasn't a good movie. Basically, my problems with it are: everything is very cliche and very typical to the point where you have no interesting detail or characterisation, the lens flare is atrocious, regular people are inexplicably wise and badass, there is a significant military fetishism element that results in a number of stupid fuck characters with stupid arcs that don't need to be there, there's no small talk, and (related) the dialogue is horrible. Amongst other things. Which is essentially the opposite of the Avengers, because while both have contrived bullshit plots, the Avengers has really good interplay of characters, which is what in my opinion makes the movie as a whole so good. What I will give you is I'm glad they at least showed Krypton, and the fights and accompanying effects were good. But Zod is unsympathetic bordering on stupid, and everything that took place on Krypton suffers from the exact same problem as the rest of the movie: cliche.

And I don't even like goody-two-shoes Superman or have the sense of betrayal that would no doubt accompany that.

 

[JimB]

My problem with the movie boils down to this: Man of Steel lied to me, and I resent it when people think I'm too stupid to notice that.

The movie bangs on and on and on about hope, but at no point is hope ever displayed in the movie. Kal-El (I will not call him Clark Kent, because if the character chooses to define himself as an alien, then I will do so too) never dares to hope that he will be accepted by humanity, and instead wanders the Earth like Bigfoot. Jonathan Kent never dares to hope that during cover of a tornado, a goddamned superbeing can save him without anyone being sure what happened, so he commits suicide. Perry White never dares to have even the cynical and self-serving hope that reporting about an alien from outer space will make him shitloads of money. The military never dares to hope that an alien whom they have no evidence of having ever done anything wrong* will maybe be a good guy. Kal-El never dares to hope he could maybe just knock out or reason with someone who is very obviously trying to bait him into killing him instead of just, y'know, taking the bait and killing him.

Jor-El says Kal-El can bridge the gap between two worlds. Kal-El then destroys every remaining survivor of that other world he's supposed to be a bridge between.

The movie does everything in its power to convince me that Kal-El is Jesus, and Jesus is a symbol of salvation and redemption. However, Kal-El does goddamned little saving or redeeming, because he's too busy punching CGI hentacles while thousands of people are dying on the other side of the world. Then he kills a dude instead of redeeming him.

The movie keeps saying one thing and doing another. That is the source of my resentment. It does not respect itself and it does not respect me, and I can't tolerate that.

The movie also has a bunch of technical flaws--for instance, it really should be an either/or choice as to whether you're going to show us Krypton's destruction or have the hologram of the ghost of Jor-El tell us about it; pick one and stop wasting my time--but I probably would have forgiven those if I hadn't been pissed off at the movie for lying to me throughout. That is its chiefest sin.


--

*Never mind that we, the audience, have plenty of proof of him doing things wrong. "A guy spilled beer on me? Fuck him! I'll inflict eighty thousand dollars of property damage to the vehicle by which he supports himself and his life, and in the process inflict a few thousand dollars of property damage on the parking lot of the establishment that bears no responsibility for the indignity I suffered all because I wasn't willing to duck or step aside or grab his hand before he could splash me!"

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

My problem with the movie boils down to this: Man of Steel lied to me, and I resent it when people think I'm too stupid to notice that.

The movie bangs on and on and on about hope, but at no point is hope ever displayed in the movie. Kal-El (I will not call him Clark Kent, because if the character chooses to define himself as an alien, then I will do so too) never dares to hope that he will be accepted by humanity, and instead wanders the Earth like Bigfoot. Jonathan Kent never dares to hope that during cover of a tornado, a goddamned superbeing can save him without anyone being sure what happened, so he commits suicide. Perry White never dares to have even the cynical and self-serving hope that reporting about an alien from outer space will make him shitloads of money. The military never dares to hope that an alien whom they have no evidence of having ever done anything wrong* will maybe be a good guy. Kal-El never dares to hope he could maybe just knock out or reason with someone who is very obviously trying to bait him into killing him instead of just, y'know, taking the bait and killing him.

Jor-El says Kal-El can bridge the gap between two worlds. Kal-El then destroys every remaining survivor of that other world he's supposed to be a bridge between.

The movie does everything in its power to convince me that Kal-El is Jesus, and Jesus is a symbol of salvation and redemption. However, Kal-El does goddamned little saving or redeeming, because he's too busy punching CGI hentacles while thousands of people are dying on the other side of the world. Then he kills a dude instead of redeeming him.

The movie keeps saying one thing and doing another. That is the source of my resentment. It does not respect itself and it does not respect me, and I can't tolerate that.

The movie also has a bunch of technical flaws--for instance, it really should be an either/or choice as to whether you're going to show us Krypton's destruction or have the hologram of the ghost of Jor-El tell us about it; pick one and stop wasting my time--but I probably would have forgiven those if I hadn't been pissed off at the movie for lying to me throughout. That is its chiefest sin.


--

*Never mind that we, the audience, have plenty of proof of him doing things wrong. "A guy spilled beer on me? Fuck him! I'll inflict eighty thousand dollars of property damage to the vehicle by which he supports himself and his life, and in the process inflict a few thousand dollars of property damage on the parking lot of the establishment that bears no responsibility for the indignity I suffered all because I wasn't willing to duck or step aside or grab his hand before he could splash me!"

Pretty much this. If you want to see the quintessential Superman on the screen then watch Superman vs. The Elite. It tackles the issues of Superman in the modern, everything-has-to-be-gritty-world and shows why Superman should never be like that while Superman is actually a symbol of hope in that movie.

 

[Henkie36]

I didn't like this movie very much, and all of it is directly relatable to the characters, or more specifically, the dialogue. Nothing of what they say sound like what or how an actual human being would say it (the most infamous is Kevin Costner's ''Maybe you should have let them die''). There is too much overblown action scenes, the strong emotinal moments feel like they are playing on fast forward and many of the subplots don't end up really mattering that much. The Jesus comparisons didn't bother me that much (it's not like everything else Superman related doesn't do the exact same thing) and I actually thought the infamous neck-breaking scene worked. On top of that, the action scenes are cool, if dramatically uninvolving the production design (especially the parts set on Krypton and the ships) are gorgeous and it had a fantastic score by Hans Zimmerman. Where does that leave it for me? At the same heap as Transformers, The Rock, The Transporter movies etc. The reason it is truely hated, I think, is that we were led to believe it would be a Dark Knight level good movie and it wasn't. It was just mediocre, which they could have gotten away with if this wasn't Superman.

 

[Something Amyss]

"The fights in the third act are too long"

Oddly enough, my complaint about the fights is that they can't hold a camera angle for more than 2 seconds, like they're desperately afraid we'll notice just how shallow they are if we have more than a second to process it. And while they are shallow, I found them to be enjoyable. More enjoyable than most of the rest of the movie.

I'm not going to do a full critique of the movie, so I'll just focus on the thing that seems to piss people off the most:

Superman kills Zod.

Personally, I don't care if Superman kills. I think the idea of holding that as sacred is ridiculous. Superman has changed with the cultural zeitgeist. What bugs me is that the scene is just stupid and poor. Superman has just endangered thousands or millions of people as a willing accomplice to Zod's rampage, but the choice between a couple of people and Zod is this horrific, soul-tearing concept. Superman angsting about killing has no established purpose and comes abruptly out of nowhere. It is then forgotten. It seems this happens a lot with the movie: they ignore their established ideas, pop something out of nowhere, and then forget about it. It's a Big-lipped alligator moment, but not as fun.

The Avengers comparison is one that is probably worth talking about. The Avengers had some incongruities and the like, but I was having too much fun with the movie to notice. Man of Steel was not on that level. I mean, that's sort of my criteria. I consider a movie or show good if it keeps me involved enough to not notice or at least not care about logical inconsistencies or flaws. Avengers? Good. Batman Begins? Good. Transformers? Bad (And honestly, how do you screw up big stompy robots fighting other big stompy robots?). Man of Steel? Ehhhh...Not that good. I don't think it was bad, but I certainly didn't like the overall package.

 

[Ashley Blalock]

I hated the film because while they might have thrown in the Superman powers and the stupid New 52 look still has some classic elements there just wasn't the little things that make Superman the greatest hero instead of just the most powerful hero.

To me Superman is more than just a cool set of powers. Superman is the greatest because where other heroes couldn't find a way to save everyone Superman does. If you were attempting to be a moral person then what would Superman do used to be a good question for finding the morally correct answer. He's the sort of hero can move mountains but still finds the time to get a cat out of a tree or keep some poor guy on street from getting squished by part of a falling building during the big fights.

In the past the Kents have been salt of the Earth sort of people. Several stories have explored what if Superman had different adopted parents and it keeps coming back that Superman is the most morally upright hero because the Kents were always about the very best of humanity. To have Pa Kent even suggest Clark should have let the kids die just so out of character it's mind blowing. A stupid line like that made it seem like no one in the production team knew anything about Superman beyond his list of powers.

Then the lack of screen chemistry between Lois and Superman.

Ouch and the scenes on Krypton were trying so hard to be like Star Wars I imagine if you put some Star Wars music into the background people would have thought it was part of the Star Wars prequel films. Krypton felt too much like it was coping other films than feeling like a fresh take on the planet and it's people.

As other people have said there also wasn't that feeling of hope. Superman the Animated Series and Justice League had Superman question himself and had Superman struggle with issues but hope was always there.

Doesn't really help that I'm over the dark and gritty stuff with every damn film that comes out just because Batman sold a boatload of tickets. Yea fine make a dark and gritty Batman but I don't need characters like Superman and Optimus Prime attempting to be Batman. The only thing holding Man of Steel Superman back from being Batman was that he never said to a villain "I'm Superman".

 

[F'Angus]

Never been a big superman fan but I did like this film. But mostly what I was thinking while watching was that this is what the Dragonball Z movie should've been like.

 

[Nathaniel Grey]

I liked it. I walked out of the movie theater feeling so excited and awe struck. I believe everyone is mixing their personal feelings about how Superman "Should be" with how he was represented in the movie. Personally I believe that when you make an adaptation of something, that there should be changes. Basically I enjoy an imperfect Superman. The idea that Superman was "Perfect" to begin with always struck an eerie cord with me. As it does with Lex Luthor and Batman in the comics. Superman often comes off as perfect but there are so many things that prove to the contrary and there always have been. I'm pretty sure we could find contradictions in every superman ever put on screen. Many of the complaints seem very nit-picky.

 

[Ieyke]

It was a decent movie, but a terrible Superman movie.
Lots of things in the movie just didn't make any sense.
Superman doesn't act at all like Superman. Doesn't save his father, kills Zod, lets thousands of people die as he fights in Metropolis, etc etc etc
This stuff is of ABSOLUTE importance to any Superman movie.
Superman doesn't really have any technical weaknesses aside from Kryptonite. Superman's actual weakness is his unbending need to save EVERYONE. His weaknesses is that even though he's Superman he CAN'T save everyone. When he fails it wrecks him.

Superman is DC's shining symbol of hope. That movie failed to come close to representing that. The closest it got was "eh...I guess we'll trust this guy, because we don't really have a choice"

I personally liked it from the perspective of the shear spectacle of it, but by any other metric it was almost as stupid as The Dark Knight Rises.

The movie's one big accomplishment was figuring out how to make a live-action Dragon Ball Z movie.

 

[King Aragorn]

Papa Kent didn't suggest he had to let the kids die, it was just hs way of saying that he doesn't know what to do, that he's conflicted and it's also a moment of acknowledgement that he can't keep the secret silenced for long. I really don't think he meant drown all of them.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

Simply put, the movie breaks the cardinal rule of storytelling: Show, don't tell.

The more I think about it, the more I think that this is one of the "against" that people have brought up that I do agree with and I'm kind of surprised I didn't notice it. I was a Film Minor in school so a lot of the movie things that normies don't notice wave their hands and yell "LOOK AT MEEEEE!" in my face during the movie. I don't know if it was since I was watching it at home (I was making chili for ze Superbowl so I paused the movie repeatedly) or what but I get where that's coming from.

The poll is looking neat and partially confirms what I thought (or at least my bias allowed me to say that it confirms what I thought )

The vote seems to be pretty much split like and hate but the people that liked it thought it was good to alright but the people who don't like it really really don't like it (therefore are much more likely to speak up).

Off topic here, but that reminds me of why I consider myself a terrible person to see movies with. I've became quite the critical bastard during the past three years, so I often end up Captain Buzzkill when some asks about my opinion about a movie that we just watched and they enjoyed, since more often than not I didn't and even when I do enjoy said movie I'll point out problems that no one else notices or cares about.

In other words: WOOHOO FOR THE CYNIC CLUB!!!!!! XD

 

[Parasondox]

I liked it. I walked out of the movie theater feeling so excited and awe struck. I believe everyone is mixing their personal feelings about how Superman "Should be" with how he was represented in the movie. Personally I believe that when you make an adaptation of something, that there should be changes. Basically I enjoy an imperfect Superman. The idea that Superman was "Perfect" to begin with always struck an eerie cord with me. As it does with Lex Luthor and Batman in the comics. Superman often comes off as perfect but there are so many things that prove to the contrary and there always have been. I'm pretty sure we could find contradictions in every superman ever put on screen. Many of the complaints seem very nit-picky.

I really think this video explains why all the hate and nitpicking happens.

Marvel is more of a soap opera where you can change a characters story and motive each week or month for drama and readers wouldn't dwell on it too much. But DC itself, they made there characters more grounded with a moral code they stick by and don't change. Would you image the hate if Nolan decided to do a bait and switch with the Joker and make him "Gary"? Fans of Batman will be OUTRAGED.

I agree it's gotten to a personal level with those who like those DC character which is why I always ask, how come Marvel fans don't have such an outrage (apart from Iron Man 3) when several changes are made? I don't mind you take the movie personal that's fine because I would be the same if a movie I was really hyped about seeing, turned into a massive shit box because they missed out so much. MovieBob took the movie way way waaaaaaay to personally even before it came out and many times said the same thing, "I wanted this, I wanted that and so forth".

Yes I may add the Jesus thing was a bit much but then again, Superman was portrayed as that since it's first creation so I guess that didn't change.

 

[Ieyke]

I liked it. I walked out of the movie theater feeling so excited and awe struck. I believe everyone is mixing their personal feelings about how Superman "Should be" with how he was represented in the movie. Personally I believe that when you make an adaptation of something, that there should be changes. Basically I enjoy an imperfect Superman. The idea that Superman was "Perfect" to begin with always struck an eerie cord with me. As it does with Lex Luthor and Batman in the comics. Superman often comes off as perfect but there are so many things that prove to the contrary and there always have been. I'm pretty sure we could find contradictions in every superman ever put on screen. Many of the complaints seem very nit-picky.

I really think this video explains why all the hate and nitpicking happens.

Marvel is more of a soap opera where you can change a characters story and motive each week or month for drama and readers wouldn't dwell on it too much. But DC itself, they made there characters more grounded with a moral code they stick by and don't change. Would you image the hate if Nolan decided to do a bait and switch with the Joker and make him "Gary"? Fans of Batman will be OUTRAGED.

I agree it's gotten to a personal level with those who like those DC character which is why I always ask, how come Marvel fans don't have such an outrage (apart from Iron Man 3) when several changes are made? I don't mind you take the movie personal that's fine because I would be the same if a movie I was really hyped about seeing, turned into a massive shit box because they missed out so much. MovieBob took the movie way way waaaaaaay to personally even before it came out and many times said the same thing, "I wanted this, I wanted that and so forth".

Yes I may add the Jesus thing was a bit much but then again, Superman was portrayed as that since it's first creation so I guess that didn't change.

Because Marvel's changes aren't stupid.
Even the Mandarin is a 50:50 case.
It was brilliant, but I see why people were mad....but it's possible he IS actually the Mandarin after all.

DC's decisions in both comics and movies are just frequently stupid.
DC animated, the Arkham games and Arrow are just about the only things DC gets right.

 

[King Aragorn]

The Mandarin killed a movie bordering on mediocre and made it flat out bad. Making Iron-Man a stupid comedy made it feel more like a parody of what Iron-Man movie should be over an actual Iron-Man movie.
Also so far in the live action universe, Batman was pretty faithful to it's source material and MoS was more of a catalyst than anything. Batman vs Supes seems to be going all the wrong directions though.

 

[DoPo]

I believe everyone is mixing their personal feelings about how Superman "Should be" with how he was represented in the movie.

Seriously?

Because all the "die hard" fans thought it wasn't what Superman should be.

That and Man of Steel seem to be on most of the people of this forums worst movies of 2013. They're not bad movies (even IM3. Even thought I just can't stand RDJ). All the "fans" are just butthurt because it wasn't exactly what they wanted.

Funny - I am not really a fan of Superman and I still didn't find it appealing. I've watched...let's see - Superman 2 and...some animated episodes when I was, like 8 or so. I don't think this would make me anywhere near a die hard fan. Yet, I still didn't like big portions of it. Vausch mentioned some, I'd just like to reiterate:
- the flashbacks were awkward, weird and felt out of place
- people are stupid. Yes, especially Clark's father

Spoiler

His death was completely and utterly unnecessary in the context. It felt forced and contrived. Logic fails when one tries to describe it. Due to that, I didn't really feel any impact and the only thought in my head after the end was "so...what about the people under the bridge? How did they survive?" since it seems to me that bridge wasn't really tornado-proof.

- the Kryptonians were...baffling. Zod complained about taking them years to adjust, yet it seems they needed more like minutes. And they seemed fine in the suits, too. Not to mention the new Kryptonians would begenetically engineered so it's not too much of a stretch to assume it's possible to pre-adjust them anyway.
- I still don't understand why Zod and co were let out in the first place. Sure, Krypton blows up and...what? That triggers the "release all prisoners" signal? Why?
- JesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesus. Probably the thing that made me lose interest in the movie about halfway and just passively observe and analyse it for the rest of the time.

In fact, the Nostalgia critic [http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/41449-man-of-steel] has a better, more in depth and better expressed view that happens to mostly coincide with my observations after watching The Man of Steel.

I am sorry I am bringing up my non-existent preconceptions about the movie here, and I know my "butthurtness", expressed in the fact I found the movie uninteresting and unappealing, as well as slightly jarring causes, you a great deal of discomfort. But I humbly ask you to forgive me.

I am being a butthurt fan again? Well, not in those words, of course, but you pretty much said the same thing. Would you mind elaborating on how exactly I thought Superman should be like? Go ahead - you seem pretty good at reading my thoughts without even bothering to read the thread, so please - indulge me. What else am I a fan and not a fan of, I wander - I seem to be unaware myself.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I was bored, frustrated or just angry during my viewing.

There's almost no levity, character development starts half-way in one scene and then abruptly cuts to something completely different. Which meant there's no "burn in" time for the consequences of character actions. Probably because they had to make more room for those ridiculously over-long CGI action scenes.

The closest moments we get to ANY of the actors being able to give an actual performance in this hastily cut ADD clipshow, is the talk between Louis and Clark, some of Jor-El's bits, and...nothing else.

Spoiler: And then there's the Idiot Super Duo of Papa Kent and Zod. WARNING: LONG

Spoiler: Of Pa Kent and Tornados

First, Kent Sr's morals were disjointed, while his attitude bipolar. One scene he's talking about how Clark is going to change the world, and the next he's telling him to NEVER do so. I get that he's scared and confused. He knows the problem is out of his league. Fear of the unknown is supposed to be a major theme of the film....But it wasn't until his FANTASTICALLY RETARDED DEATH that I actively started hating Man of Steel.

The Infamous Tornado Scene.
This scene; more than any other, made me cringe. It made me want to leave the goddamn theater, drive to California and kick the writer so hard in the balls that he'd be choking on his own sperm for the next week.

I'm a meteorologist and storm chaser; and everything in that scene was just fucking wrong and stupid. From the reasons Pa Kent died, to the directions he gave to "save" people from the tornado.

For DECADES here in the states, the National Weather Service has asserted to the public:

DO NOT, *EVER* HIDE UNDER AN OVERPASS WHEN YOU'RE NEAR A TORNADO.

Why?

Because unlike downpours/downdrafts pouring over a bridge which have primarily vertical components of motion, rotating tornadic winds always have a strong horizontal component. Squeeze that component into a narrow horizontal corridor, however briefly, and it will speed up greatly; just like sticking your thumb on a garden hose (it's Bernoulli Force).

Not only does the already fastest-winds-on-the-planet get faster, they attain a focused direction and nearly all tornadoes are throwing debris around. Imagine one of those cars getting slung under the pass at 250 MPH; human salsa.

And that assumes the tornado doesn't just collide with the overpass and collapse it right on top of the stupid hicks.

So everyone bailing out of their cars to pile under the overpass? That would probably cause severe injury or death in real life, unless the tornado double-backed (which is possible). The best place to go would be in the ditch.

And then there's Pa Kent's contributions to the scene...
One: He died saving a dog. Two: SOLELY to prove a very stupid point to his son. Three: HE FAILED TO PROVE HIS POINT.
Or maybe that *was* the point: That papa Kent was trying to tell his son that he's just a complete fucking idiot.

Spoiler: Zod is a fucking moron and so is the writer

OK. I get Zod. He's pragmatic to a fault.

But why does he choose to remake Earth into New Krypton, other than "Because we need a plot where Supes saves the Earth"?
Krypton is established as a highly advanced space-faring civilization with colonies and Kryptonian-Terraformers.
(Nevermind the whole issue for why all the Kryptonians moved back to Krypton and instituted population control)
Y'know, THE SAME TERRAFORMERS ZOD IS USING ON THE EARTH. Once Zod has the the Kryptonian Legacy ship, he has ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO MURDER BILLIONS OF HUMANS except "Because plot. Because evil."

Actually no, it's even more stupid than that.
Consider this: Superman not only adapted to but benefited greatly from living on Earth, WHY CHANGE EARTH INTO KRYPTON AT ALL??? Earth is even BETTER for the Kryptonian species than Krypton was! They have incredible powers and nearly endless endurance on Earth which. Zod adapts to Earth in a matter of HOURS.

And don't tell me Zod was rigidly adhering to Kryptonian tradition or his orders to preserve Krypton or some crap because Zod ALSO embraces and utilizes his greatly enhanced abilities on Earth.

Oh, and the goddamn product placement in what I assumed was a fully-funded summer action film done by a reknowned studio.

Hollywood: If you're going to try to create a movie that's meant to be taken seriously both as a story and as a work, don't cop a play out of Michael Bay's book because that's exactly what the product placement in the action scenes reminded me of; a shitty Michael Bay film.
When you advertise to me in a film I already PAID to see, you cheapen my experience; you cheapen my ticket.
I make it a point to avoid engaging businesses whose goods/services were placed in a movie for exactly that.

And it was a LOOOONG ass sit. Holy fuck was it BAD.
I just remember standing outside our cars with the group I saw it with (about 9 others), and NOBODY had anything good to say about it. (mix of comic fans and non-comic fans) We just ranted about the trainwreck for a good 25 minutes.

Fuck Man of Steel. What a fucking polished turd...

 

[Eamar]

It was ok.

Full disclosure: I love comics, but I've never read any Superman because frankly I find the whole concept of the character boring. I've seen most of the older movies at one point or another in my childhood and didn't like them much for the same reason.

So basically, I have no investment in the character/universe and went in expecting to be bored to tears. I wouldn't have bothered seeing it, but it was for a date so I just went along with it.

[sub][sub]In case anyone's wondering, the movie was the best thing about the date. There wasn't a second one [/sub][/sub]

For those reasons, I was massively pleasantly surprised when it turned out to be a decent-looking, big dumb action movie. It wasn't a particularly good film, but it held my attention and I had fun watching it. It made me slightly curious about future Superman movies, even.

But as I said, my expectations and levels of apathy could not have been much lower going into it, so I'm probably not the best person to ask. Or perhaps I am, if you're looking for an "outside" perspective

 

[Roggen Bread]

I came out of that movie being incredibly happy that I had finally seen an awesome live-action Dragonball Z movie.

As a superman movie?! Nah.

Dark. Grim. No heart. Going for the obvious cliches and so on... Some fighting scenes got a bit repetitive, plot holes, aaaah it was just a mess.

 

[Ardure]

It was bad on so many levels... gaping plot holes and a lack of dialogue being the two biggest ones. You could probably put the entire movie's dialogue in a 10 min video. Dialogue in movies is usually the primary way we (the audience) gets to know the characters and CARE about them. I didn't care about any of the characters, I know this was supposed to be a story about Superman and his discovery (at least it was portrayed that way) but things just happened and then Superman was supposed to know who he was. I feel there was a lot of assumption going on, Superman is a big pop culture character and everyone really knows what he is about, so they just threw some nice looking CGI in there and let us tell the story from our cultural knowledge. Why should I care about Superman, or Louis Lane, or even hate Zod for that matter?

Pretty much all the dialogue was designed to spell something out for the audience, most of which seemed awkward in it's verbally silent landscape.

As for plot holes... there are a ton of them. The easiest one to spot though is to track that little decal in the shape of the Superman symbol. Keep track of that throughout the film, you will find it in several different places at once, which completely undercuts its importance (and logic).

Super hero movies don't need a super in depth plot, but having a plot with motives that make sense is needed. Man of Steel looked nice, but that is all it is, a nice set of special effects.