Want my reasons? Here you go:
- A director whose previous three films were critical and/or financial disappointments.
- A producer who thinks the realism present in his previous superhero franchise should apply to a superhero who is on (or should be on) the opposite spectrum.
- WB had a perfectly capable actor in Routh, and I feel he could have improved greatly as Superman had a sequel been made. Oh, wait. WB sat on their hands even after confirming a sequel in August 2006.
- The cast. On paper, this is probably the most talented ensemble for a superhero movie in years. Seven Oscar nominations (three for Adams, one each for Crowe, Shannon, Fishburne, and Lane) and two wins (Crowe for acting and Costner for directing) between them. But those golden statuettes don't mean anything if you can't pull off the roles. With the exception of Fishburne and maybe Crowe, none of the actors, in my opinion, fit the bill.
Of course, the film's success (or failure) will be determined by one actor: The one playing Kal-El/Clark Kent. (Can't call him by the S name as he's not even billed as such.)
- The costume. Oh. My. Word. The costume. People complained about SR's suit being 'too dark' and 'too muted.' Yet many of these same people are praising the MOS suit, which is much darker and more muted. I get that the costume is supposed to be of an alien nature, but wearing what appears to be the skin of a navy blue reptilian creature is overkill. And they can't seem to decide what color the suit should be. In some scenes, the colors look like the 'classic' Superman's. In others, it looks like it's been on the oil rigs being discussed as a pivotal scene. And still in others, it looks completely black.
- The visual effects. Zack Snyder has drawn criticism in the past for his 'slo-mo' fights and overuse of CGI. I fear this is exactly what MOS has done.
- The plot. Oh, terrific. Another origin story? Zod as the villain? Already done.
