Rate MAN OF STEEL......once and for all

[DA_Champion]

It wasn't really much of friendship. It was just quiet gratitude for saving him. He still went off with the bullies.

Ummmm ... he did not go off with the bullies. He stayed behind and lent Clark his hand.

 

[Human Torch]

There issue I have with the flashbacks is that almost all of them are depressing. We never see what great and inspirational role models Jonathan and Martha Kent are. We don't even get to see how they function as a family unit. Instead, we're treated to scene after scene of some new misery in Superman's life. If it were up to me, I would have shown Jonathan and Martha having opposing views on raising Clark, with Martha favoring a more optimistic approach.

Basically: If you don't walk away from a Superman movie wishing that you could be a little bit more like Superman, then I think the filmmakers missed the point.

Agreed 1000x

 

[Boy Scout]

Then you aren't paying attention to the actual complaint. Your own even given the post I was responding to.

I thought you responded to a different post, yes. Sorry about that!

Still, though, I don't believe that single instance of comfort holds any weight in comparison to the many instances of misery we were treated to throughout the film.

Doesn't matter, though, because I was incorrect: Martha Kent was indeed shown to be a comforting and inspirational figure.

Sage advice from an elder 'inspires' one to either be better or worse.

That's not an answer. I legitimately don't remember what was said or done and I don't recall any instances of Jonathan being inspiring.

It was?

Yes.

I suppose you too are entitled to your own opinion. But yes, died saving the life of a lesser creature.

Unnecessarily. That isn't inspiring; it's sad. He could've sent Clark or allowed Clark to save him.

Can't say he's all together wrong in his 'non answer'.

And that's where we disagree.

Then again he wasn't being asked if kids should die on some random tuesday or are worth saving all together, but rather weight the lives of a few against the many.

Who is at risk of dying if Clark is discovered?

An exposure that could arguably change our way of live for the worse(which means more death). Fear, panic etc. 'people are afraid of what they don't understand' and all that.

The he should have criticized him for not being more discreet, not for saving their lives in the first place.

I do appreciate how simple you present it though. Here's another simple question for you, for I already now Jon Kent's answer: Should Superman have saved the lives of that family in the train station by taking Zod's life or should he have let them perish?

Killing Zod was the right thing to do in that situation and I've never said otherwise. I suppose we're both guilty of not paying attention.

huh? When was this latter part in the film?

You'll notice I said "likely". It's an assumption I made based on Jonathan's attitude and concern for discretion.

Anyways I cite what I cite because jon specifically mentions that giving those bullies what they clearly deserve would have 'felt good'. Not just for clark but for jon himself. But he says 'then what'.

Then Clark would have been discovered and it would've gone downhill for their family from there. Though, now that I've been reminded of it, I can see how one can interpret the scene differently. So I suppose I can't say that his parents werent shown to be inspirational; just that we didn't see it enough.

 

[The Batman]

It's because optimistic and light hearted is lame.

Cynical and depressing and edgy is cool.

The film makers decided Superman needed a overhaul. They pandered to people who think Superman is lame and corny. Simple as that, really.

Thats one of my biggest problems with this film, really. They turned a wish fufillment character into a guy who basically acts like most 21st Century Film Superheroes

 

[Infinight888]

So, I've decided to fully explain why I disliked MoS in one post.

Parents: Talked to death, I know, but it still needs said. Jonathan Kent's teachings, that Clark should keep his powers secret, even if that means letting people die in the process, seriously damaged his character. The Smallville version of this character worked much better in my opinion. There, we saw a father who showed concern for his son, but also inspired him at the same time. Clark's secret was important, but he never encouraged Clark to put his own needs above those of other people in the same way that the Man of Steel version did.

Martha, meanwhile, was barely in the movie at all.

Humor: When you heap on the darkness, it's always good to have a bit of humor to lighten the mood. You don't want it to leave the audience feeling depressed by the end. No, you do not have to make it an action comedy, like many Marvel movies, but there is a balance to be struck. Even The Dark Knight, in spite of the fact that the general story was darker than Man of Steel's, still had a lighter air due to well-placed jokes and banter between Alfred/Lucious and Bruce. Man of Steel made a couple jokes, even those weren't very funny. And this is a shame, since the Superman series as one very important asset for getting humor on the screen...

Lois: I once again find myself comparing it to Smallville. In that series, we had a tough, snarky Lois Lane, who you couldn't help but either love or hate. This Lois wasn't that. She wasn't anything, aside from a Superman fangirl. Utilized right, Lois could have been great, but she wasn't. And I'm not saying that I wanted her to be exactly like the Smallville version, but she needed to be SOMETHING.

The Flashbacks: Most of these felt like filler. As others have mentioned, Flashbacks were utilized very well in Batman Begins, where the past storyline affected the current one. I felt like there was a real pay-off. There was a reason for watching the Flashbacks, and they enhanced my overall enjoyment of the movie. While I think the bus flashback was okay, seeing Clark getting picked on by bullies seemed utterly pointless to the narrative.

The Battle: Honestly, not much to say here. This was the first time I ever was bored watching a fight scene. Seeing invincible people punch other invincible people through buildings gets boring real fast. This was the single most monotonous fight scene in history... Until Justice League: War came out.

Characters: None of them were interesting. Jonathan never felt like a real person, Lois was a generic love-interest, and Zod was a fairly average villain. Even Superman, himself, left much to be desired.

Plot: This final criticism is very general, but needs to be said. There wasn't one. There was a backstory, followed by a fight scene. This is not the same thing as a plot. There were no twists or turns, no earth-shattering secrets to uncover. Nothing. Even The Avengers (which is loved for the interaction between the characters far more than the storyline) had more of a plot than this movie did.

 

[EssayM]

As someone who neither loved nor hated it, I think a significant problem is that the movie was clearly intended to be a serious, thoughtful look at Superman, which is fine...except that the second half is trying to be a big, dumb action blockbuster where alien supermen punch each other through buildings and it looks awesome and we don't think about it too much. Because of this, there's a paradox: you can't take the philosophy seriously because of all the explosions and punching, but you can't turn your brain off because the movie so obviously wants to make you to think. It's like watching Schindler's List with the fight scenes from Iron Man 3 spliced in.

 

[HAMMER]

As someone who neither loved nor hated it, I think a significant problem is that the movie was clearly intended to be a serious, thoughtful look at Superman, which is fine...except that the second half is trying to be a big, dumb action blockbuster where alien supermen punch each other through buildings and it looks awesome and we don't think about it too much. Because of this, there's a paradox: you can't take the philosophy seriously because of all the explosions and punching, but you can't turn your brain off because the movie so obviously wants to make you to think. It's like watching Schindler's List with the fight scenes from Iron Man 3 spliced in.

I really like this post, not only because I agree with it, but I also think it pertains to the recent DC films and Dark Knight Rises especially. The cerebral characterizations are taken too seriously and its a jarring contradiction from flying ships, supermen, ridiculous bomb threats, etc.

 

[Infinight888]

As someone who neither loved nor hated it, I think a significant problem is that the movie was clearly intended to be a serious, thoughtful look at Superman, which is fine...except that the second half is trying to be a big, dumb action blockbuster where alien supermen punch each other through buildings and it looks awesome and we don't think about it too much. Because of this, there's a paradox: you can't take the philosophy seriously because of all the explosions and punching, but you can't turn your brain off because the movie so obviously wants to make you to think. It's like watching Schindler's List with the fight scenes from Iron Man 3 spliced in.

I think this is close to the problem, but not quite. The Dark Knight series did something similar, delving into the philosophy of human nature in one scene, while having the Joker shooting people with Grenade Launchers in the next.

And it worked.

The thing is, it mixed the two well. The philosophy was an important part of the movie, and not something just to fill the first hour or so of time until the fight started. Both Harvey Dent's fall and the boat scenes made you feel like there was a point to using your brain in The Dark Knight.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Ummmm ... he did not go off with the bullies. He stayed behind and lent Clark his hand.

He was at a distance from the group of kids, and they all walked off in the bullies line of direction when one of them pointed at Jonathan.
Pete helped Clark up, but he still went off in their direction.
He was friendly with him, but they weren't implied to be best friends.

 

[I Am The Knight]

As someone who neither loved nor hated it, I think a significant problem is that the movie was clearly intended to be a serious, thoughtful look at Superman, which is fine...except that the second half is trying to be a big, dumb action blockbuster where alien supermen punch each other through buildings and it looks awesome and we don't think about it too much. Because of this, there's a paradox: you can't take the philosophy seriously because of all the explosions and punching, but you can't turn your brain off because the movie so obviously wants to make you to think. It's like watching Schindler's List with the fight scenes from Iron Man 3 spliced in.

Brilliant post. Snyder wanted this movie to be "serious business" but he also wanted to indulge the audience (and himself) in teh Cool. And even in the serious, would be thought provoking bits, Snyder seemed out of his depth.

 

[Human Torch]

Look,I'll come out and say it.Nolan was all wrong in associating himself with this film.They tried to subject Supes to the old Nolan "realism", while hoping Snyder could fold in a measure of the action that people were expecting after SR.

It was not a match made in heaven.

The first half being a dour,depressing character study,the second a mind numbing action film.

They should've let Snyder have full charge,IMO.Trying to adhere to the Nolan style with a character that is clearly not made for it,that's what caused the overall problem.

 

[Tempest]

Brilliant post. Snyder wanted this movie to be "serious business" but he also wanted to indulge the audience (and himself) in teh Cool. And even in the serious, would be thought provoking bits, Snyder seemed out of his depth.

Eh. No, I think it was really well done over all. Like most films, there were a few rough spots, but overall I thought the film was very pretty, and well done. I laughed, and I felt quite happy when I left the theater.

 

[Rodrigo90]

So, I've decided to fully explain why I disliked MoS in one post.

Parents: Talked to death, I know, but it still needs said. Jonathan Kent's teachings, that Clark should keep his powers secret, even if that means letting people die in the process, seriously damaged his character. The Smallville version of this character worked much better in my opinion. There, we saw a father who showed concern for his son, but also inspired him at the same time. Clark's secret was important, but he never encouraged Clark to put his own needs above those of other people in the same way that the Man of Steel version did.

Martha, meanwhile, was barely in the movie at all.

Jonathan was changed to fit the narrative of the film. To explain why Clark was so secretive and evasive, and to further cement the whole
"Acceptance or rejection" angle of the film.
And despite there being a statue of Supes in BvS, I'm hoping that there is rejection from some of the population...and that falls onto Lex to be the leader of that posse of people. Hopefully it shows that Jonathan was right in that regard, and hopefully it shows him to be right that Clark will change the world.

Humor: When you heap on the darkness, it's always good to have a bit of humor to lighten the mood. You don't want it to leave the audience feeling depressed by the end. No, you do not have to make it an action comedy, like many Marvel movies, but there is a balance to be struck. Even The Dark Knight, in spite of the fact that the general story was darker than Man of Steel's, still had a lighter air due to well-placed jokes and banter between Alfred/Lucious and Bruce. Man of Steel made a couple jokes, even those weren't very funny. And this is a shame, since the Superman series as one very important asset for getting humor on the screen...

Agreed. The film was a bit miserable without good humour. Everything was too serious and when a bit of humor was introduced...it came just after Supes killed Zod and everyone was more or less still reeling from that.

Lois: I once again find myself comparing it to Smallville. In that series, we had a tough, snarky Lois Lane, who you couldn't help but either love or hate. This Lois wasn't that. She wasn't anything, aside from a Superman fangirl. Utilized right, Lois could have been great, but she wasn't. And I'm not saying that I wanted her to be exactly like the Smallville version, but she needed to be SOMETHING.

That's the thing also. Lois is caring and compassionate, her ballsy attitude can make her a *****. Erica Durance was the perfect embodiment of those qualities. Amy...I've said from the beginning, she's a fantastic actress, but she wasn't right for Lois and nothing in this movie convinced me otherwise. Durance, Bosworth, Hatcher and even Kidder could have wiped the floor with this Lois. Honestly, if she wasn't thrown into the movie with the most convenient ways, she would have been forgettable.
I know a lot of these characters over the top personalities were played down to fit the more serious tone, but Lois suffered through it and it was a waste to Amy's talent. That said, I still liked this Lois...She wasn't the comicbook character, but I liked her, actually for being played down. She felt more real and less obnoxious than comicbook Lois...but still, I really wanted more of the ballsy character.

The Flashbacks: Most of these felt like filler. As others have mentioned, Flashbacks were utilized very well in Batman Begins, where the past storyline affected the current one. I felt like there was a real pay-off. There was a reason for watching the Flashbacks, and they enhanced my overall enjoyment of the movie. While I think the bus flashback was okay, seeing Clark getting picked on by bullies seemed utterly pointless to the narrative.

The bullying had a point; to demonstrate how Clark's powers affected his relationship with others. He kept himself to himself because of them and that caused friction with the other kids and he became a target...also explaining why he was constantly on the move and why he wouldn't stand up for himself in confrontations, like that guy in the bar. So at least Jonathan's misery lessons kept him grounded

The Battle: Honestly, not much to say here. This was the first time I ever was bored watching a fight scene. Seeing invincible people punch other invincible people through buildings gets boring real fast. This was the single most monotonous fight scene in history... Until Justice League: War came out.

Yeah, invincible people battering eachother, in an overlong and overblown fight, wasn't as exciting as I would've imagined. The Smallville fight was way better, because it felt like nobody was invincible in that scene.

Characters: None of them were interesting. Jonathan never felt like a real person, Lois was a generic love-interest, and Zod was a fairly average villain. Even Superman, himself, left much to be desired.

I'll always say, if the Kryptonians didn't have lives mapped out for them, then none of them would follow a general like Zod if given the choice.

And with Cavill, give him more to do and say in BvS and he'll be golden.

Plot: This final criticism is very general, but needs to be said. There wasn't one. There was a backstory, followed by a fight scene. This is not the same thing as a plot. There were no twists or turns, no earth-shattering secrets to uncover. Nothing. Even The Avengers (which is loved for the interaction between the characters far more than the storyline) had more of a plot than this movie did.

It was a pretty basic film...set up Superman for one hour and have him fight for the other.
But it was what it was...at least it wasn't overstuffed like TASM2 though

 

[I Am The Knight]

Eh. No, I think it was really well done over all. Like most films, there were a few rough spots, but overall I thought the film was very pretty, and well done. I laughed, and I felt quite happy when I left the theater.

Well thank you for letting me know

 

[Tempest]

Well thank you for letting me know

You're welcome. I just like to add in a little sunshine since everyone is so unhappy. Do you want a cookie?

 

[Rodrigo90]

 

[I Am The Knight]

You're welcome. I just like to add in a little sunshine since everyone is so unhappy. Do you want a cookie?

Actually, yes

 

[Tempest]

Don't worry, I have plenty of cookies to share.

 

[Rodrigo90]

...I wouldn't eat them, they look to nice to spoil

 

[Tempest]

...I wouldn't eat them, they look to nice to spoil

You will eat the cookie and you will like it!

 

[Rodrigo90]

 

[Tempest]

 

[Decepticonus]

I voted very good, otherwise I would have given it excellent but didn't because

-At first the Johnathan Kent death frankly didn't bother me that. Mainly because I do not fully follow Superman or am a Superman fan. In time, this scene is well dumb. It looks silly with his hand up like that going back to save the ****ing dog. I would argue Clark here could pull the speed force crap out from Smallville, stop time run over to get dad run back and the crowd was none the wiser. Plus, after further reading he COULD save him here. The idea of Pa dying from something that Clark has no control of just adds more weight.
-The god damn color palate. Never in my life I ever used the term "color palate" not even in a high school art class. But here it bothered me. I don't mind the design, I like suit, I like Zod and their looks but seriously getting some lighting or something. If someone told me Superman's color are black and red... I'd buy it.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Delete

 

[Rodrigo90]