Man Of Steel: Ten Years Later - Do You Like It?

I think there is a good two hour version of this film, but Snyder needed a better DP and have someone like Joss Whedon doctor the script to remove all the Goyer clangers.
 
I didn't like it ten years ago. It has not improved with age. Michael Shannon as Zod is the best thing about it.
 
Am I the only one who didn’t think Shannon was very good as Zod? Don’t get me wrong; he is a GREAT actor and possibly the best actor in MoS. I’m currently watching Waco and he’s amazing in it.

But his Zod just felt… flat to me. Like, the scenes where he’s supposed to be all angry and vengeful, he tries a tad too hard and the rest of the time, he just gives dull exposition. Maybe it’s just because I reeeeeaaaalllly didn’t want them to use Zod again but I just found him and the whole character to be kinda meh.
 
flickchick85 said:
It was a Superman movie made by a guy who admits he never got Superman's appeal, and it shows. It also seems to appeal to people with that same viewpoint - Superman for people who don't like Superman.

Unfortunately for me, I love Superman, so this movie is not for me.

Also, it's poorly-written and quite ugly at times.

But that Zimmer score is magnificent.
Click to expand...
I think that you and I are in the same boat for our love of the character. That’s why to me, Man of Steel is infuriating. It is such a missed opportunity to showcase a great character. And it truly does come down to Snyder not respecting the character. With Superman, you don’t dirty him up. You don’t have him moping, and you don’t have him riddled with self-doubt.

In MoS, Superman talks about the shield being a symbol of hope, but the character himself seems hopeless. He lacks the stallwart devotion to doing right. Everything seems to be a burden to him.

I do feel that the film does some things right. I actually found the idea of Superman struggling with sensory processing as a child to be fascinating and a fresh take. I appreciated the idea of showing him leaving home and going on a journey before his outing of himself to the world. But whereas that was one of the highlights of Birthright, it felt like it missed the mark a bit here. A big part of that was the character assassination that was done on Jonathan Kent. I’m convinced that Costner had a great performance in him, but we never got to see it because the film’s Jonathan Kent was in many ways a hurdle that Clark had to overcome in order to become Superman. Jor El was his “real dad” who encouraged him to be reach his potential. Jonathan was a wet blanket holding him back. Personally, as an adoptive father, that offends me.

I appreciate that people like the action in the finale, but I personally hate the idea of a reckless Superman who levels an entire city in his fight with another being. Think of it this way, during that fight, Superman would have heard the faintly beating hearts of bystanders as they were dying. He’d hear the breaths becoming more shallow as lungs collapsing of people being crushed by buildings. But MoS Superman didn’t take any precautions to protect collateral damage. He brought down more than his fair share of buildings on innocents. But he snapped the neck of Zod (unforgivable and lazy writing imho) and that was the only thing that gave him an emotional response.

Based on all of this, the MoS Superman seems more Kryptonian than human. It misses the aspect of the character that Tom King so amazingly displayed in part 8 of Up in the Sky. The chapter called Man and Superman, showed Superman being struck by some space lightning that caused an anomaly whereby the human side of him was stripped from the more powerful Kryptonian aspect. It was the human side of him that endeavored to fight against all odds and persevere in the face of impossible trials. That side of him leaned on the wisdom that his earth parents instilled in him. He was unswervingly undeterred. MoS just misses that take completely and in the course, misses the core of the character.

So yeah, I echo your take.

Deck Rickard said:
Am I the only one who didn’t think Shannon was very good as Zod? Don’t get me wrong; he is a GREAT actor and possibly the best actor in MoS. I’m currently watching Waco and he’s amazing in it.

But his Zod just felt… flat to me. Like, the scenes where he’s supposed to be all angry and vengeful, he tries a tad too hard and the rest of the time, he just gives dull exposition. Maybe it’s just because I reeeeeaaaalllly didn’t want them to use Zod again but I just found him and the whole character to be kinda meh.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree. I usually find Shannon to be a good actor, but I hated his Zod. I know that a lot of people love his monologue before the final fight, but at least in my household we have a running joke whereby we mock his delivery of the “whatever I did I did for the good of my people. But now. I don’t have any peeeepulll” line. We all find it cringey.
 
Love this film. One of the best of the genre for me.

I would have liked to see more of Faora and Zod. That storyline was strong and backed by good acting and dialogue. But the world building would have benefited from more ... Living in that world.
 
Just to counter some other posts, I am a big Superman fan and love the character. And ten years later I still love MOS. Is the movie perfect? Not at all, but I watched it again recently and the majority of the movie still holds up really well to me. Damn shame we never got a MOS2.
 
With MOS, I really got on board with the vision. Applying that verisimilitude to the symbology of Superman is what really made the character resonate with me, and I think it was the case for a lot of people (just watch the reactions to that third trailer, the one that debuts Zimmer's uplifting score).

But the actual story did not end up fully capitalising on that vision. Despite a lot of intriguing, well-executed pieces to the story (Clark being burdened with "the hard choices"), in the third act, there's verrrrrry little depth to what's happening. The action sequences are not interesting enough from a character level, nor on a simple action movie standpoint (how are they gonna get out of this one?). We are simply watching Clark hit things, catch Lois (who we know will be fine) a couple times, and yell a lot, in very dull environments at that. They don't do enough homework to make "Krypton had its chance" nor the killing of Zod mean very much, which ultimately squanders whatever character work was there in the first two acts.

So ultimately I think the part of me that really likes this movie simply likes the overall vision rather than the actual story told in the end. To illustrate this, sometimes when I think of MOS, I think of that uplifting Superman theme from that third trailer, when in reality that triumphant music never plays until the end credits.
 
Last edited:
I've really grown to dislike this movie as time has gone on.

It feels like it was made with the mindset of "Superman is too powerful, unrelatable and irrelevant and the only way to fix him is to give him the Batman treatment". On top of that, It's also just a really mediocre movie in general with bland acting, terrible writing, and empty excessive action.

For a good modern Superman origin movie, check out the animated movie, Superman Man of Tomorrow. It really is the movie MOS should have been.
 
This for me is still one of my favorite superhero movies. This movie completely knocked my socks off and made me a Superman fan. Yes, it 100% TOTALLY get why its divisive and i see and acknowledge the flaws of the movie. The tone is somber, Snyder's Clark is introverted and we dont really get in his head much (and that continues in BvS and JL), the action can be overbearing at times and yes, the neck snap wasn't 100% necessary. I get it, but I also kind of appreciate the conversation and discourse that emerged from this movie about what Superman is and why he is who he is. I think that was always Snyder's intent, was to get people talking by being a bit controversial in the creative decisions and take a different swing with Superman than we're used to.

But I dont know, the movie resonates with me, I relate to this Superman. The few small, tender moments we did get with Clark and his mom really connected with me emotionally. I liked how protective he was of her. The cinematography in this movie is gorgeous in every frame, Zimmer's score is incredible and one of my favorite movie scores and the action is, in my opinion, some of the best cbm action we've seen to this day. I know some will scoff at it but as someone who grew up with anime seeing Superman engage in Dragonball Z like battles with Zod and the kryptonians was immaculate. I never thought we'd ever see that kind of action realized in live action up until that point and it knocked my socks off.

So, yeah I absolutely love this movie still. Should it have been the start of a whole universe? no, probably not but as a standalone Superman movie it works very well for me. I just wish Snyder gave Cavill the chance to really spread his wings in the role, he really didnt get a fair shake at it.
 
Last edited:
Still sucks. Good score, credit to some hard working effects people; but it's flawed from conception. In hindsight, Nolan/Goyer/Snyder are like the holy trinity of people who shouldn't touch Superman. They're a total tonal mismatch. Oh and Snyder is a bad storyteller. His films are always filled with terrible characters and/or terrible people. I can't tell if it's deliberate and just repulsive to my tastes, or if Snyder is just genuinely a stupid person.
 
kguillou said:
This for me is still one of my favorite superhero movies. This movie completely knocked my socks off and made me a Superman fan. Yes, it 100% TOTALLY get why its divisive and i see and acknowledge the flaws of the movie. The tone is somber, Snyder's Clark is introverted and we dont really get in his head much (and that continues in BvS and JL), the action can be overbearing at times and yes, the neck snap wasn't 100% necessary. I get it, but I also kind of appreciate the conversation and discourse that emerged from this movie about what Superman is and why he is who he is. I think that was always Snyder's intent, was to get people talking by being a bit controversial in the creative decisions and take a different swing with Superman than we're used to.

But I dont know, the movie resonates with me, I relate to this Superman. The few small, tender moments we did get with Clark and his mom really connected with me emotionally. I liked how protective he was of her. The cinematography in this movie is gorgeous in every frame, Zimmer's score is incredible and one of my favorite movie scores and the action is, in my opinion, some of the best cbm action we've seen to this day. I know some will scoff at it but as someone who grew up with anime seeing Superman engage in Dragonball Z like battles with Zod and the kryptonians was immaculate. I never thought we'd ever see that kind of action realized in live action up until that point and it knocked my socks off.

So, yeah I absolutely love this movie still. Should it have been the start of a whole universe? no, probably not but as a standalone Superman movie it works very well for me. I just wish Snyder gave Cavill the chance to really spread his wings in the role, he really didnt get a fair shake at it.
Click to expand...

In my opinion, A good Superhero origin story should give the audience an understanding of the hero's morals and values.

Man of Steel did none of that. It never actually tells us anything about Clark as a character beyond "Had a hard childhood" and "might be a hero".
 
There is stuff in Man of Steel I like, but there are also absurdly stupid choices. So in the end, it's fine. There's a lot of people who really love or hate Snyder's DC Films, and I am just here like meh. Not worth the energy and I don't have a strong opinion of them either way
 
Awest66 said:
In my opinion, A good Superhero origin story should give the audience an understanding of the hero's morals and values.

Man of Steel did none of that. It never actually tells us anything about Clark as a character beyond "Had a hard childhood" and "might be a hero".
Click to expand...
It tells us he has morally bankrupt fathers.
 
All I know, all the stuff people praise did nothing for me and I checked out of the movie the moment Clark let his dad die, after his dad saying he didn't need to save everyone.

Not as bad as "letting yourself get raped, but take away their power as they do it", but up there. Can't wait for his combining of morals with Star Wars.
 
Sithborg said:
All I know, all the stuff people praise did nothing for me and I checked out of the movie the moment Clark let his dad die, after his dad saying he didn't need to save everyone.

Not as bad as "letting yourself get raped, but take away their power as they do it", but up there. Can't wait for his combining of morals with Star Wars.
Click to expand...
Not even the score, SB?

 
It didn't stick with me when I watched the movie, so no.
 
I liked it upon release but I was in a very different place in my life when it came out. Like most of Snyders films, it.gets worse upon repeat viewings. It's become a punching bag for me these days for being blatant edgelord garbage. The Jonathan Kent stuff is just painfully stupid. If you watch Snyders Watchmen, you can see the all problems with Snyders mainline DC films manifest there too. This guy made a panel for panel adaptation and still managed to completely miss the point of the story. Why they chose to give him the keys to the DCU is beyond me but luckily Snyders been relegated to ripping off James Cameron on Netflix.
 
Last edited:
It’s clear if you watch the Snyder trilogy he really sees Superman as Doctor Manhattan. Hence why Lois is the “da Key”. He becomes a tyrant without Lois in the alternate future just as Manhattan was theorized to become one without Silk Spectre.

His whole morality hinges on earthly booty. such an insulting take on the character.
 
I love the film's artistic direction (visuals, atmosphere, music), which makes for some great scenes (the first flight), but ever since my very first viewing, I've been bothered by what I think is subpar writing and, more particularly, the lack of development of the main character.
When leaving the theater, I remember telling a friend how I felt like I still didn't know this Superman. The meatier parts of the role were played by the younger actors, and Cavill was left with like 10 lines. On paper, the guy had charm, but I honestly don't think it ever really translated to the screen...

It's a frustrating film because there were some really promising seeds here. But there's something missing, and it was enough for me to be taken out of the movie too often.
I can watch it if it's on TV, but I never really come back to it on my own...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kevin Roegele
Disney's Hercules beat Bryan Singer to it
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
Manic
Manic
BH/HHH
Top Ten Favourite DCEU Moments
Replies
17
Views
3K
Osiris-Rex
Osiris-Rex
BH/HHH
Your Top Ten Comic Book Movies as of right now?
8 9 10
Replies
239
Views
52K
King23DC
K
Sundancer
LotR -- 9 years later
5 6 7
Replies
159
Views
11K
Kane52630
Kane52630
DA_Champion
BvS "The Dissolve" does "Man of Steel: One Year Later"
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
sf2
sf2

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,419 (members: 33, guests: 1,386)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,303
Members
45,598
Latest member
Otewe2001

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"