In Defense of Man of Steel

[DarthDorranceBane]

Okay before anything else, let me be clear that I was one of those who went "WHAT the hell did Snyder to Superman " after I left the theater, and so I will not be the one doing the defense here. It was just that recently, I decided to rewatch the film. Most of the times when I do that to films that I don't like, my dislike for that film will get mellowed, and so the same thing happened with MOS. I still feel like that the action goes on and on and on, too much carnage and destruction that feels like I'm watching a humorless Michael Bay film; however, on this rewatch, there are certain scenes that have become clearer to me, which made me feel like underneath the shoddy direction, there was a certain story that the film failed to deliver across.

For example, for many times in the film, different characters was saying that the world, the humans are not ready for something or someone like Clark. Jonathan didn't trust that humans would not act against his son, and he sacrificed himself for that belief. When Zod threatened Earth, Clark consults a priest who tells him to take a leap of faith, and that the trust part comes later. And so in the scene before Clark goes to Daily Planet, Clark asks the general to trust him that he will not harm the humans and that he is here to help.

What I want for this thread is to give the defenders of the film a place to post their thoughts on what MOS is really about and why it is a good Superman story. I've seen some long good posts in the past but I ignored most of them so maybe you could redirect me there or at least repost it. Don't convert me as if your side was religion, I just want a good read, and maybe in my future re-viewing of MOS, I would appreciate it more and dislike it less.

And to some posters and maybe the mods who think that this thread is better in the MOS section, I posted it here because I think that there is more activity here than in there and that this will get more attention in here.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Why couldn't this be posted in the Man of Steel forum?

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

I see why people need to defend Man of Steel so much.

Because Kal-El won't speak up and talk for himself to defend it.

 

[Rodrigo90]

It was ****, but I will defend it as well

I've watched it 3 times now...and I still can't warm up to it.

 

[Tv's Phil]

Well as long as this thread is going to be here I'll just say I really like it but I'm not going to lay out a big defense. The people who don't like it aren't going to change their minds and I'm not, so...

 

[Citadel30]

I have watched it on my Blu-Ray about 15 times... and everytime i watch it i love it more. And here is the reason: I LOVE THE ACTION!!! When i decide what movie i am going to watch on any given evening, the "amusement" factor is the heaviest factor and MOS by far has the most action of any of my superhero movies. I want to see Superman kicking arse and MOS delivers.

 

[Rodrigo90]

It's not a TERRIBLE film. It has its moments.
But that's all it is - moments.
I thought the film was very cold and uninviting, almost depressing.

 

[bluerayer]

Count me in as one of those who liked it as well. Im not gonna defend it to any great length though, or try to convince others that they are wrong for not liking it. I do however have a hunch that most of those who didnt like MOS will be happy with BvS. Thats just what im feeling so far.(in my bones of course)

 

[Rodrigo90]

I think they'll know now what to do and what not to do.
MOS was almost like an experiment. A first stepping stone.

 

[bluerayer]

I think they'll know now what to do and what not to do.
MOS was almost like an experiment. A first stepping stone.

 

[Tra-El]

I think they'll know now what to do and what not to do.
MOS was almost like an experiment. A first stepping stone.

Agreed

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Oh joy, another well intentioned thread that will ultimately evolve into MOS-bashing thread #647. I'd say it should move to the MOS forum, but it'd be even more redundant there than here.

 

[Tra-El]

Oh joy, another well intentioned thread that will ultimately evolve into MOS-bashing thread #647. I'd say it should move to the MOS forum, but it'd be even more redundant there than here.

Regardless of how Man of Steel is perceived, you can seriously talk about it over....

over and over and over and over and over..


..and over again.

Every time I do watch Man of Steel, things still fascinate me and I think it's going to be one of those movies that people will reflect on and go "Ah, now I get it" when all said and done. Just my honest opinion.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Regardless of how Man of Steel is perceived, you can seriously talk about it over....

over and over and over and over and over..


..and over again.

Every time I do watch Man of Steel, things still fascinate me and I think it's going to be one of those movies that people will reflect on and go "Ah, now I get it" when all said and done. Just my honest opinion.

I love the film, but the problem is that I'm tired of defending it, anyone who can be won over has been won over and no more opinions about the film are going to change on either side. Everything that can be discussed about the film has been discussed, no one has anything left to contribute.

 

[Tra-El]

I love the film, but the problem is that I'm tired of defending it, anyone who can be won over has been won over and no more opinions about the film are going to change on either side. Everything that can be discussed about the film has been discussed, no one has anything left to contribute.

No doubt about it.

 

[HaplessHenchman]

I love the film, but the problem is that I'm tired of defending it, anyone who can be won over has been won over and no more opinions about the film are going to change on either side. Everything that can be discussed about the film has been discussed, no one has anything left to contribute.

Exactly! No one could have said it better. I feel the exact same way.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

I liked it, don't understand the level of hate. Sure the action became a bit like white noise after a point but other than that it was great.

Best score we've had in years too

 

[Rodrigo90]

I'm not going to ever bash the film. I love all the actors. I thought they all did fantastic jobs. Henry was brilliant as Superman. You worry and you think, are we ever going to get somebody that tops Chris Reeve? Chris was amazing. What was he? 24-25? And he had the presence of a pro and a hero in just the first film. He wasn't nervous at all.
Henry held it together and with a little more work in BvS, I can see him, quite easily, reaching the level of Chris. But even with this, he did a fantastic job.

And Amy Adams is quite easily one of the best actresses out there, I'm pretty taken aback how she hasn't won an Oscar yet.
Lois has always been upfront, brash and brazen. Sometimes it can come off as juvenile and obnoxious, but that's Lois anyway in the comics and that's fine. In live action however, you want to find the right person that convey that in a way that doesn't make you dislike the character.
Amy as Lois is probably my most favourite take in live action. You could see she had spunk, but with Amy's natural sweetness, you could easily see why Superman would fall in love with her instantly, because we easily could. Margot Kidder, Kate Bosworth, Teri Hatcher and at times, Erica Durnace, could come off as too *****y and you'd think - "what does Superman see in this woman? She's not his type"
Lois in this movie was acted and written in one of the best ways I've seen the character portrayed.

The movie was interesting and at times, quite complex. It pushed you into thinking, "What are the complications of being a hero and trying to do the right thing by everyone?"
And I'm so glad they attempted to show this. They had balls and fans complain about that. Why?
I think with a little less action and further pressing of the films main issue, it could've been something better. I blame our insatiable appetite for action and destruction in films...only when they did it here, we complained about it more than fans complained about Keaton as Batman back in the 80's. We want action, we got it. We got it, and we *****ed about it.
But this movie deliberately gave us more destruction that we wanted because it wanted to demonstrate the imperfections of heroism...Superman can't save everyone from such destruction. We couldn't save everybody in 9/11...but Hollywood likes movies that show the opposite to that. Giving us something to feel optimistic about.
Superman is the pinnacle of optimism and heroism...we were expecting him to save everybody and put the villain away safely behind bars...like the happy ending of the origin Superman movie. I'm so glad we didn't get that. I'm so glad the team decided to take a huge risk and break away from the tradition of optimism and heroics. Because MOS gave us something different and unique and I commend it for its balls.

I think the film is a lot better than what people give credit to it for.
It's not perfect, but it has the biggest balls of any superhero film and I'm respecting it for doing that.

 

[Citadel30]

I'm not going to ever bash the film. I love all the actors. I thought they all did fantastic jobs. Henry was brilliant as Superman. You worry and you think, are we ever going to get somebody that tops Chris Reeve? Chris was amazing. What was he? 24-25? And he had the presence of a pro and a hero in just the first film. He wasn't nervous at all.
Henry held it together and with a little more work in BvS, I can see him, quite easily, reaching the level of Chris. But even with this, he did a fantastic job.

And Amy Adams is quite easily one of the best actresses out there, I'm pretty taken aback how she hasn't won an Oscar yet.
Lois has always been upfront, brash and brazen. Sometimes it can come off as juvenile and obnoxious, but that's Lois anyway in the comics and that's fine. In live action however, you want to find the right person that convey that in a way that doesn't make you dislike the character.
Amy as Lois is probably my most favourite take in live action. You could see she had spunk, but with Amy's natural sweetness, you could easily see why Superman would fall in love with her instantly, because we easily could. Margot Kidder, Kate Bosworth, Teri Hatcher and at times, Erica Durnace, could come off as too *****y and you'd think - "what does Superman see in this woman? She's not his type"
Lois in this movie was acted and written in one of the best ways I've seen the character portrayed.

The movie was interesting and at times, quite complex. It pushed you into thinking, "What are the complications of being a hero and trying to do the right thing by everyone?"
And I'm so glad they attempted to show this. They had balls and fans complain about that. Why?
I think with a little less action and further pressing of the films main issue, it could've been something better. I blame our insatiable appetite for action and destruction in films...only when they did it here, we complained about it more than fans complained about Keaton as Batman back in the 80's. We want action, we got it. We got it, and we *****ed about it.
But this movie deliberately gave us more destruction that we wanted because it wanted to demonstrate the imperfections of heroism...Superman can't save everyone from such destruction. We couldn't save everybody in 9/11...but Hollywood likes movies that show the opposite to that. Giving us something to feel optimistic about.
Superman is the pinnacle of optimism and heroism...we were expecting him to save everybody and put the villain away safely behind bars...like the happy ending of the origin Superman movie. I'm so glad we didn't get that. I'm so glad the team decided to take a huge risk and break away from the tradition of optimism and heroics. Because MOS gave us something different and unique and I commend it for its balls.

I think the film is a lot better than what people give credit to it for.
It's not perfect, but it has the biggest balls of any superhero film and I'm respecting it for doing that.

 

[Gu3ree]

I can understand some people's concerns. I've watched Returns more than 7 times, and still haven't warmed up to it.

While I enjoyed MOS more than others and almost as much as to those that loved it. The massive action and destruction still bothers me, it wouldn't unless it was a little less and if Superman was perceived as a hero who was very concerned about the people who might get hurt if he fought in a town or city with all those buildings. Every time I watch, I just hope assuming that Superman believes it's safe to throw a mega punch at Zod in front of a building as most people have evacuated. Better if we had a scene where Superman hovers through the city and tells everyone to clear the area, then that would have worked.

In Superman II, a few people managed to get hurt during the battle with Zod, Ursa and Nun. We knew Superman was concerned about all the people in Metropolis, and saving them was his main priority.

In the Smallville battle in MOS, I can't stand how when Superman saves one soldier who falls from the helicopter, but Nemek killed one a few minutes earlier, and after Superman saves the soldier and then Colonel Hardy, the next scene, two or three more soldiers die from the blasted mini missles. There is no point in that scene where Superman saves the soldier falling from the helicopter if another person dies in the next scene. Superman is supposed to be good at saving people, albeit, that doesn't mean he can save everyone. But letting those people die in the story, especially, the 10,000 people in Metropolis is just terrible. 10,000.

It's hard to accept that.

Despite this, I like the epic tone of the final battle. I don't think Superman's conclusion with Zod was the worst problem of the film. Superman doesn't kill. That's true, but I think if the situation was impossible enough, that he had no choice in order to protect the people, then I think he should make his choice. I know a lot of people had a problem with this scene but it didn't bother me that much, however, for me, the situation they put Superman in was not 'impossible' enough for Superman to go ahead and kill Zod. The last possible option he could have done was put his hand over Zod's eyes. It's pretty idiotic. More impossible, saying Superman has his arm around Zod's neck trying to restraign him, with Superman on his back, Zod is flying him around a inside a tornado, with a family being spun around, and Superman, has just seconds to warn Zod, Zod refuses, Superman panicks and angrily snaps Zod's neck, and quickly speeds to catch the family falling from the sky as Zod's body falls from the sky.

 

[Gu3ree]

The film also did not seem that inviting to me, nor felt like they were trying to invite you to like Superman as much of the focus was taken on the military fighting the black ship. Superman is not too present.

 

[BatmanVSuperman]

Los Pollos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[roach]

I was watching Captain America: Winter Soldier the other day with my roommate and we get to the scene where Cap puts Bucky to sleep in a choke hold. My roommate mentions...See Superman could have done that to Zod.
I mentioned that Bucky can be imprisoned by conventional means....deactivate his arm, put him in a regular max security prison.
When Zod wakes up there is no prison on earth that can hold him. There's no phantom zone to chuck him in.
His response is "He's Superman...he could have found away"

 

[Rodrigo90]

Yeah...he could have depowerd him (somehow) and threw him down a chasm somewhere

 

[SofNascimento]

His response is "He's Superman...he could have found away"

And isn't that the essence of the character?

Anyway, I'm dissapointed with this thread, I thought it would be like this:

In Denfese of Man of Steel