Here are the "reviews" and how I feel they rank in reputability.
Ybnormal's spoilers: Probably false
Nick Jones Jr's tweets: Highly questionable due to lack of details
Joblo's nameless "source": Warmer, but still missing details. Also suspiciously glowing.
Poni_boy of Dailyblam: Since it has some criticisms, I would actually think that's a good sign in validity, since adding negative elements risks losing validity, against the other glowing reception. However, he said that critics attended a "family and friends screening." Right
Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:
Hearing a good variety of reactions to Man of Steel. Lots of praise for Micheal Shannon & Russell Crowe. Action is plentiful.
Out of the people I've spoken to only one is a pro critic (her reaction was the most negative). Also heard the Zimmer score isn't done yet.
Read more: http://www.nolanfans.com/forums/view...#ixzz2NHu70zHS
Neogaf's review: Still rather vague, but gives an overall idea of what he claimed the film was like. However his reputability was "broken" when he failed to quote a supposedly quotable villain.
It really does feel like the first time Superman has been done justice in live action.
Gamefaqs: This is the only one I've come close to trusting. The reviewer is critical of Zack Snyder and Superman himself, praises Shannon and Cavill, and provides scene details. The thread's closed unfortunately, so we don't know how he would have answered the final questions. However, the fact that it isn't shut down pretty much is a sign in the negative direction.
Assim Assad's twitter: https://twitter.com/asimaahmad
I am actually sure he watched it. He has a twitpic of the screening room and was a stunt coordinator on TDK. He even had a minor role in Inception. That would explain why he refuses to compare TDK to MOS, in case he wants another job with Nolan. He said Cavill was the best Superman since Reeve, and the movie made him pretty much weep.
This has been lengthy, but I want to hear your thoughts.