Rate Man of Steel

Maybe one day we could set something like that up. Definitely need one for Marvel.

I think it's atrocious as an interpretation of the Superman character; Mr. Snyder appears unable to understand exactly that it is heroism that makes a superhero a superhero. The character is fundamentally non-modern; he is in the Jimmy Stewart-mode, the aw-shucks young fella who genuinely believes in truth, justice, and the American way not a series of clichés but as concrete certainties that he reifies in his heroic actions.

He is old-fashioned in a world of moderns; he represents (as I phrased it elsewhere) the better angels of our nature, the qualities to which we all ought to aspire. That is what I find so appealing about superhero films; that is why I enjoy them, and am disappointed when they, of all things, preach the tiresome modern doctrine that we are all dull and damned as well as damned dull. As Leslie Charteris put it:
I too am mad [i.e., crazy, not angry, though perhaps both are applicable] enough to believe in romance, and chivalry, and honor, and all the concepts that we are told do not exist any more. Superhero films can and do remind of us it; when they simply repeat the dullness of the daily grind, and turn a fun character into a brooding Hamlet (the Son of Krypton is not the Prince of Denmark; actually, now that I think of it, the Bard included more comedy in that most serious of plays than Mr. Synder does in the entirety of Man of Steel), then what's the point? If Superman is just another brooding loner--an example of a sophomoric, sophistic existentialism that does not bother with philosophic depth but utilizes it to sell tickets--then why watch him? The hero has become a bore.

But I've gone on too much before about this; Man of Steel was not a terribly-made film, and several of the special effects were decent, as were the performances for how the actors were directed. I liked Laurence Fishburne's Perry White quite a bit, and though Amy Adams would never have been my first choice for Lois, she does a fine job. For what they're given to work with, Messrs. Cavill and Costner are very good indeed.

In sooth, 'tis true the movie disappoints (to continue in duly Shakespearean iambic pentameter), though for me it has to do with the fatal and fundamental misinterpretation of the central character, the darkness of the mise en scène, and the ceaseless explosions and battle sequences.

I unapologetically loved Superman Returns, and--as you may guess--I see this character as iconic, and seminal. Would that Mr. Snyder et al. agree, but for that I suppose we'd have to start with the culture.

I gave it a 4/10 here, whatever that means. On another day I could have easily given it a 5, a 6, or a 3--I don't think that the number matters, exactly.

6. I really wanted to like it. But I couldn’t. The Krypton scenes were pointless and then on Earth I wanted the old costume and the John Williams’ theme. There’s no point in not using it.

I decided I'd give it another chance a few days ago, since I liked things about it looking back, and I don't utterly hate Zack Snyder anymore.

Zod was better than I remembered, but other than that, it didn't improve much. The aimless, nonlinear structure does the movie zero favors. The characters, minus the non-Superman Kryptonians, are dull as dirt. You have those lines Snyder probably thought sounded deep but are nonsensical (Faora's "evolution always wins" speech). I like ideas in the film, like it being a more realistic take on the mythos (though if you're gonna do that, how are you gonna leave in that his disguise is a pair of glasses?), and with a better script I'd have enjoyed it. I'll give it a generous 5/10.

7 is about right for me.

Liked most of it until the final act of disaster porn.

7.5 but I scored it up to 8 for the poll, I really love this film I hated it on first watching it however but my opinion has greatly shifted in the years since, a lot of the issues I get though some imo are blown out of proportion at the same time.

I get the immediate Superman doesn't kill reaction, Pa Kent wouldn't tell Clark to let kids die, Pa Kent just letting the tornado kill him is dumb, Superman doesn't save people enough, I get those but I now see it differently, Superman I don't think was wrong too kill though I wish they had done more to stop Zod before finally giving in, such as trying to block the heat vision ffs, but Superman killing Zod to save innocents I don't have an issue with in principal, Jonathan didn't actually tell Clark to let kids die, in that scene he says maybe but the way he says it you can tell the conflict in his voice, he doesn't encourage selfish behaviour in Clark but his default is simple and it's to protect Clark, not other people, the tornado thing is like the Zod thing I get but I disliked how they did it, imo Jonathan should have been blocked from getting to shelter and he talks Clark out of saving him reassuring Clark it'll be ok and he loves him until the tornado takes him and it goes silent, Clark has super hearing use that and show the conviction in Jonathans desire to protect Clark, it would have worked much better imo then him just willingly standing there waiting to die, and yeah Superman should have done some more saving people but a lot of people point out he's not Superman yet, this is his first day on the job and he's facing superior fighters with no remorse so cut him some slack.

It has a bunch of faults through out it no question but I think it's a really good film that had it had someone with a better sense of how people do/should act it would have been a great film, a lot of the flaws comes from the nuances of how they happen as opposed to the overall point or intent of them.