Originally Posted by J.Howlett
Because the action in the 2nd half of Man of Steel is unrelenting. That film, as much as I love that damn thing to death, is a tale of two halves. With no real balance of levity within the second half of that picture, plus people's problems with the depiction of said action and the character of Superman, you can see why Man of Steel got the worse reviews.
I think Man of Steel is easily a better picture than The Dark World but it doesn't surprise me it's getting better reviewed. Marvel has the ball rolling and people like the tone of the Marvel films. They are family films. Pure entertainment.
I don't have any problems seeing why those that dislike TDW do, but for me I think it's a more consistent film even when judged against smaller parts of MoS. I think TDW managed to be what it wanted to be, while I don't think MoS does, which is why I have the opposite opinion when it comes to which is the better film.
For example, I feel that the entire Krypton segment is an exercise in self-contradiction. I also think it unintentionally paints Superman in a bad light at several key stages (and I'm fine with him killing Zod). I don't think TDW has such stability problems. The odd part about MoS was that I went in with several specific worries but all of them turned out to be good things and instead it was the rest that didn't work for me.
Even though I really like TDW I'm still surprised it has worked as well as it has with the critics this far (the US is likely to sink it a bit, like they usually do) because basically mixing Norse mythology, LotR and Star Wars is a very bold thing to sell to the public. When you analyze it like that it seems extremely tough to pull off, while MoS does something much more conservative with something that is already established with the public.