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

[Goshdarn Batman]

I try not to criticize it too much, because some fans of the movie get extremly defensive and angry when we "evil" and "heartless" people say negative stuff about it (one guy removed me from his friend list just because I didn't like it. Come on, that's too childish... that's what six year olds do).

But...It is bad.

 

[BH/HHH]

Mediocre. Henry Cavill is the best part of it. Michael Shannon did not hold a torch to Terence Stamp's General Zod. I did not like Pa Kent in this telling Clark to let people die.

Shannon's Zod and Stamp's Zod are two totally different portrayals. Neither version of the character would work in the other ones movie. They're not comparable.

Pa Kent didn't tell him to let people die, he said maybe, not yes you should have. The lines that follow reflect that, he's conflicted because Clark isn't human and if people find out they may reject him etc. He wants to do what any other Father wants to do protect his son.

 

[Boom]

6/10

Some flashes of greatness, but the movie is overall inconsistent and the bad often outweighs the good.

Plenty of room for improvement.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I gave it a 6/10, so I voted average. It is actually above average, but I felt it was closer to average than very good. I liked it, but it was disappointing at the same time.

Pros:
-Great Action.
-The first 15 minutes on Krypton was amazing.
-Decent villains.
-Jor-El.
-Good supporting performances.
-Plot was pretty interesting.

Cons:
-Henry Cavill was bland and wooden.
-The human element, especially with Clark's backstory and character was done rather poorly.
-Some terrible dialogue.
-Final act drags on too long.

Basically the stuff that deals with Krypton and Zod and that side of the movie, I really liked. The stuff that deals with Earth and Clark's journey to becoming Superman is pretty bad. It is a Superman movie in which Superman himself is the least interesting character and whose actor gives the worst performance (of the important characters) in the film. That's a big problem, no matter how much I liked the rest of it.

It is the opposite of Superman Returns to me, and ultimately ends up at around the same rating. Superman Returns has a good main character, but doesn't have anything interesting for him to do. Man of Steel has lots of interesting stuff happening, but the main character is boring.

 

[The Batman]

That's the thing, I would've welcomed a bit of a filler. Have a chance to simmer down and take everything in, with a little bit of meaningless talk. That brings me to my point of the film being cold. It's a race to the end. That's all it is to me. There to tell its story and end, in such a detached manner. Exposition. Flashback. Expostion. Flashback. Expostion. Flashback. Then - Action. Flashback. Expostion. Action. Expostion. Action. Action. Expostion. Flashback. Expostion within flashbacks. Expostion within action.
Almost every bit of dialogue consists of somebody explaining something to someone. The visuals, while stunning, don't help at all with that cold writing. It flows a little too well in my opinion.
Some may be fine with that, but it's not my cup of tea. It just doesn't fit the Superman image in my eyes.

And I don't think everything fits.

Zod breaks his neck by Superman's hands.
The horror and anguish...
Followed by him breaking a satellite, explaining to Swanwick with a smile on his face, then having a little bit of unnatural humour from the writing's expense, about how he's hot.
Then followed by the Daily Planet, smiles, film ends.

What in the name of great Ceaser's ghost was that?
I barely took any of that in the first time. It's rammed down your throat and before you can say boo to Ceaser's ghost, it goes off course and ends!

See what I mean by its pace? It just wants to explain its way through and end.

This post...

It is the opposite of Superman Returns to me, and ultimately ends up at around the same rating. Superman Returns has a good main character, but doesn't have anything interesting for him to do. Man of Steel has lots of interesting stuff happening, but the main character is boring.

So many MOS fans act like MOS was TDK and SR was Batman and Robin....when its more like SR was "The Hulk" and MOS was like "Incredible Hulk".

 

[Human Torch]

The action in MOS isn't really all that compelling either.A lot of people are impressed with it simply because Superman actually has someone to hit.But,honestly,it's so mindbendingly numbing,I always get to the end of the Smallvile battle and feel like "Wait-that was it?" What was accomplished in that scene?People batting each other around,inanely.There are no winners.No losers.Nothing accomplished apart from a ****ton of property damage.It feels so hollow.

(Oh,that's right.The feds trust Superman now.)

 

[Visualiza]

This thread again. How many different ways can the same question be asked? There's dozens of this very topic on the MoS boards alone.

First, it was simply, "Rate/Review MoS", which then became "What's up with all the hate? This movie is AWESOME", leading to "MoS 6 months later, has your opinion changed?", "Will MoS be remembered fondly if BvS is any good?", and my personal favorite - "This movie will be recognized as a classic in 10 to 20 years."

For as often as this is brought up, this thread doesn't bring any more finality to the table than those that came before it. My answer? It's still as awful as the day I saw it.

 

[The Question]

The action in MOS isn't really all that compelling either.A lot of people are impressed with it simply because Superman actually has someone to hit.But,honestly,it's so mindbendingly numbing,I always get to the end of the Smallvile battle and feel like "Wait-that was it?" What was accomplished in that scene?People batting each other around,inanely.There are no winners.No losers.Nothing accomplished apart from a ****ton of property damage.It feels so hollow.

(Oh,that's right.The feds trust Superman now.)

I was genuinely impressed by the way that they used super speed. I thought that was pretty creative and well executed. That is the only nice thing I have to say about the action in Man of Steel.

 

[Cain]

It was painfully average. Which in my opinion makes it worse than just being bad.

 

[kguillou]

This thread again. How many different ways can the same question be asked? There's dozens of this very topic on the MoS boards alone.

First, it was simply, "Rate/Review MoS", which then became "What's up with all the hate? This movie is AWESOME", leading to "MoS 6 months later, has your opinion changed?", "Will MoS be remembered fondly if BvS is any good?", and my personal favorite - "This movie will be recognized as a classic in 10 to 20 years."

For as often as this is brought up, this thread doesn't bring any more finality to the table than those that came before it. My answer? It's still as awful as the day I saw it.

See, to me, this just proves to me that, a year and a half later, MoS, love it or hate it had a powerful impact on people. In this day and age of this increasing amount of Superhero and big budget blockbuster films, if your movie is not exceptional or doesn't stand out in some way it will just be forgotten. I think this continued passionate discussion about it a year and a half later shows that the film truly left a lasting on impression on people, whether it be good or bad, whereas Superman Returns kind of just got forgotten not long after it came out.

To me that's the sign of an exceptional movie. t:

 

[The Batman]

^ Um...what? People complain about SR to this day.

 

[Visualiza]

See, to me, this just proves to me that, a year and a half later, MoS, love it or hate it had a powerful impact on people. In this day and age of this increasing amount of Superhero and big budget blockbuster films, if your movie is not exceptional or doesn't stand out in some way it will just be forgotten. I think this continued passionate discussion about it a year and a half later shows that the film truly left a lasting on impression on people, whether it be good or bad, whereas Superman Returns kind of just got forgotten not long after it came out.

To me that's the sign of an exceptional movie. t:

That sounds like a lot of spin to me. Personally, I think it has more to do with denial and disbelief than anything, not to mention the fact that it's Superman, as well as genre flicks being en vogue these days.

 

[Cain]

^ Um...what? People complain about SR to this day.

Yep and you even see it in some posts in this very thread.

Personally I didn't like SR. It's a competently made movie but in many ways it's also pretty bad. My biggest issue with it is that Lois' fiancee Richard reminded me a lot more of Superman than Superman himself ever did in that movie. That's a cardinal sin. Even more so than "Superman is a baby daddy" or "Lex wants to lease an island of rocks". At the same time at least I'm still able to remember that much many years later.

I for the life of me can't remember a thing from Man of Steel. Which just goes to show as I stated earlier that it's worse to be a painfully average movie than a bad one. At least SR was an interesting failure in the sense that a lot of it is still fresh on my mind what? 8 years after I last saw it. Mind you I saw it twice in theaters because I had to make sure I wasn't tripping after the first view but still. 1 year later and nothing from MOS resonated.

Hell a friend of mine actually brought it up a couple of days ago talking about "I can't believe Superman's biggest obstacle was a bad cough" and I was just like "wait! hold up! Superman coughed?!?" lol

 

[jmc]

See, to me, this just proves to me that, a year and a half later, MoS, love it or hate it had a powerful impact on people. In this day and age of this increasing amount of Superhero and big budget blockbuster films, if your movie is not exceptional or doesn't stand out in some way it will just be forgotten. I think this continued passionate discussion about it a year and a half later shows that the film truly left a lasting on impression on people, whether it be good or bad, whereas Superman Returns kind of just got forgotten not long after it came out.

To me that's the sign of an exceptional movie. t:

This isn't a case of a high concept film that's ambitious in size, scope and story being open to interpretation with people trying to decipher its meaning, we're talking about a pretty straight forward hero story with some pretty glaringly obvious flaws. The thing is the discussion comes from about the negatives of the film, what's wrong with the film not what's memorable from it. The 'powerful impact' is nothing more than a discussion among a passionate fan base wanting what's best for a character they like with many feeling as if the wrong choices were made. The big issue is the film was divisive, and the last thing a Superman film needed after SR was a film that divided fans. The thing to remember is what you're talking about is discussion between us fans, the vast majority of the moviegoers have moved on from MoS. An impact would have been if it was universally loved because it would have signalled a return to form for the character, it would have said 'Superman is back', instead it was more a case of 'Eh, s'ok'.

 

[4thWallBreaker]

Average. It was just ok. Kind of fun. More fun with the Easter eggs.

 

[Doc Ock]

Yikes I didn't want to vote average, but I didn't want to bad either. I defaulted for bad but MOS is one of the most disappointing comic book movies I've ever seen (disappointing as my excitement didn't pay off at all).

The actors in this film are great, but the material they were given were not.

I don't like this "realistic" first contact story at all. I didn't like a neck-snapping Superman. I didn't like "hey the city is destroyed but let's make out" Clois. I didn't like a "let the school kids and myself die" Jonathan Kent. I didn't like this muted colored world. I didn't like the Metropolis destruction happening while Superman was in a mostly civilian less part of the world. I could keep going with this movie, so many fixed feelings. I get more nitpicky every time it's on HBO. I keep trying to watch it in hope that I'm going to like it more, it doesn't happen and its frustrating as a Superman fan.

I did like Henry Cavill at times and think he has potential to be great. The last 10 minutes of the film are fantastic and give me goosebumps (wish more of the movie felt like that). Faora was fantastic (and much more menacing than Zod), I wouldn't mind seeing her again. Russel Crowe as Jor-El was great and the Krypton introduction stuff was just as great. I liked Martha too.

I hope Batman v Superman gives us something better, I'm skeptical but will have some hope.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Still a 9/10, still amazing, it gets better with every re-watch for me, the 1st hour sets up the heart and emotion, I LOVE the young Clark scenes, then once he becomes Superman it moves onto mostly action. I just think as a modern Superman movie its great.

 

[Keehar]

Shannon's Zod and Stamp's Zod are two totally different portrayals. Neither version of the character would work in the other ones movie. They're not comparable.

They're both playing the same character, and I think Stamp's portrayal was more memorable and menacing.

Pa Kent didn't tell him to let people die, he said maybe, not yes you should have. The lines that follow reflect that, he's conflicted because Clark isn't human and if people find out they may reject him etc. He wants to do what any other Father wants to do protect his son.

Saying maybe is the same as saying it's ok to let people die. That is probably why there was no mention of the casualties of the big destructive battle with Zod in Metropolis. Because in this movie it's ok.

 

[Flint Marko]

They're both playing the same character, and I think Stamp's portrayal was more memorable and menacing.



Saying maybe is the same as saying it's ok to let people die. That is probably why there was no mention of the casualties of the big destructive battle with Zod in Metropolis. Because in this movie it's ok.

I have no problem with over-the-top destruction and mayhem presented in the third act, even if it is a little indulgent for my taste. What I take issue with is the fact that at no point in the movie is this ever addressed; right after he kills Zod it cuts to a scene with him in the desert smarting off to a general. Such an awkward, callous transition.

 

[BH/HHH]

They're both playing the same character, and I think Stamp's portrayal was more memorable and menacing.

They're playing characters with the same name but they are not the same character, ther motivations are different for one. Stamp's Zod just wants to be ruler of all and he clearly doesn't give a crap about Krypton. Whereas Shannon's Zod wants to bring back the Kryptonian race because he feels he is preserving Krypton. Stamp's Zod shows no reluctance in harming Kal El whereas Shannon's Zod does and wants to get him on side. He even has regret for killing Jor El. These are not the same character.

Saying maybe is the same as saying it's ok to let people die. That is probably why there was no mention of the casualties of the big destructive battle with Zod in Metropolis. Because in this movie it's ok.

Thats ******** it is not the same thing at all. If I says maybe I should have done this that's not me saying I should have done that. It's weighing up the options. yes means yes you should, no means no you shouldn't have and maybe means you possibly should have.

There's no mention of the casualties becaus it wasn't needed for the end of this movie. People going on about that sort of stuff is just boring. There will be a mention of it in the sequel I'm sure and I'm sure it will be part of the reason Batman will go after Superman he will probably (and wrongly) blame Superman for it.

 

[BH/HHH]

Still a 9/10, still amazing, it gets better with every re-watch for me, the 1st hour sets up the heart and emotion, I LOVE the young Clark scenes, then once he becomes Superman it moves onto mostly action. I just think as a modern Superman movie its great.

I'm watching it right now, I think the film is like a perfectly adapted comic book. I could really picture this as a comic book, it flows amazingly well.

 

[Keehar]

They're playing characters with the same name but they are not the same character, ther motivations are different for one. Stamp's Zod just wants to be ruler of all and he clearly doesn't give a crap about Krypton. Whereas Shannon's Zod wants to bring back the Kryptonian race because he feels he is preserving Krypton. Stamp's Zod shows no reluctance in harming Kal El whereas Shannon's Zod does and wants to get him on side. He even has regret for killing Jor El. These are not the same character.

They are playing the same character, just playing it differently, and the Stamp one is superior. You didn't need to explain to me the different character motives, it's still the same character.

Thats ******** it is not the same thing at all. If I says maybe I should have done this that's not me saying I should have done that. It's weighing up the options. yes means yes you should, no means no you shouldn't have and maybe means you possibly should have.

There's no mention of the casualties becaus it wasn't needed for the end of this movie. People going on about that sort of stuff is just boring. There will be a mention of it in the sequel I'm sure and I'm sure it will be part of the reason Batman will go after Superman he will probably (and wrongly) blame Superman for it.

Saying maybe you should have done anything means you're saying it's ok to do that if it was a possible option to you in the first place.

There's no mention of casualties because the movie glosses over the repercussions of it. Like what Flint Marko says, it just cuts to Superman smart mouthing an Army general.

 

[Flint Marko]

See, to me, this just proves to me that, a year and a half later, MoS, love it or hate it had a powerful impact on people. In this day and age of this increasing amount of Superhero and big budget blockbuster films, if your movie is not exceptional or doesn't stand out in some way it will just be forgotten. I think this continued passionate discussion about it a year and a half later shows that the film truly left a lasting on impression on people, whether it be good or bad, whereas Superman Returns kind of just got forgotten not long after it came out.

To me that's the sign of an exceptional movie. t:

People are still talking about it because it's the only film so far in the DCCU. Once BvS comes out, discussions about MoS will dramatically decrease.

 

[WBwins]

The poll results show Man of steel to be the very definition of Divisive.

 

[Boy Scout]

People are still talking about it because it's the only film so far in the DCCU. Once BvS comes out, discussions about MoS will dramatically decrease.

It's also one of the only two Superman movies that have been released in decades.