Sibling Rivalry - Man of Steel

(278 votes, average 3.71 out of 5)

Spoiler Corner

Facebook Share
Doug's Official Facebook Page

Preorder The Uncanny Valley now!

Comments (353)
  • jonyjon98  - NEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL......
    ".....Patrick Harris was not in this."

    I just died. :D
  • ThisIsScorpio
    avatar
    Neeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiil Patrick Harris should've been Jimmy Olson!!!
  • Elphaba645
    avatar
    I agree with them. Why do so many people like this thing?

    MARTYR MAN!!!!!

    Can you make Martyr Man a returning character, Doug?
  • SatMornRejects
    avatar
    Like Citizen Kane, Bonnie and Clyde, and even shakespeare literature, I'll let history define this movie. I loved the hell out of this movie and think it's a movie Superman deserves. He actually punches something! He has evolved from a campy character to a serious piece of writing, which makes me believe that the puberty of comic books is finally over.

    I've watched this movie 3 times and every audience reaction is raving applause whilst every critic reaction is raving anger. I don't get it, and won't try to.


    Whatever anyone thinks of Man of Steel is cool. People who like it will still enjoy the hell out of it anyway and that's all that matters.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    Well said, good sir.
  • trlkly
    avatar
    Not really. Saying you're not going to try to understand the point of view of others isn't a good thing. It's just another way of announcing that you are closed minded.

    Learn why people hate it, and then figure out if you agree. If you don't, that's fine, but at least then you have formed an actual intelligent opinion.

    But if you must let history decide, I'll point out some trends. People always tend to like movies with explosions and stuff right after they come out, but, over time, start to dislike them. As soon as this movie's special effects seem dated, everyone will say they always hated this movie.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    avatar
    I don't know about that.

    Take the 1970s Superman, or the 1989 Batman. Or Star Trek II: The Wrath of KHAAAAAAAAAAN! All of these movies are dated by way of effects, but there are still plenty of people who love them.

    On the other hand, take Transformers II. I walked out of the theater hating it, and so did many others. The special effects didn't make this crapfest any less crappy.
  • snoofulus
    Um because those movies had more going for them than the effects (and a lot of those still hold up, that helps too).
  • el_lobo_loco
    Yeah, another way to announce that you're closed minded:

    "We went into this movie betting who would be the blandest character".

    Does confirmatory bias mean anything to anyone? I think there's a reason why audience love this movie and critics hate it. If anyone has to explain or qualify that reason then clearly the film is lost to them. Otherwise, for the rest of us, we're looking forward to a sequel.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    I found no one, and I mean NO ONE bland in this movie. Everyone in the Twilight films: bland. Anyone in an M. Night S Shyamalan film: bland.
  • SatMornRejects
    avatar
    Bonnie and Clyde had a gory ending and sexy intro that left everyone with boners and testosterone after they finished the movie. Star Wars had huge space battles and it's still loved and cherished. Special effects itself gets old, it's what you do with it that will matter. Like TragicGuineaPig said, people walked out of the theater hating Transformers 2, so explosions isn't enough even if they are just there.

    And maybe it was poor choice of words on "won't try to understand it." It's more like I see the faults of the movie, that they claim, to be more and more false every time I see the movie. Zach probably trusted his audience to much and tried to do more than he can handle. Then again, who can really handle Superman to his full potential? Story wise, maybe not Zach or Goyer, but I'll be damned if they didn't do a good job showing the scale of which Superman is to the world in terms of impact, scope, and action, as well as his inner turmoil of being an immagrant with godlike powers.

    But I don't want to rant, which I feel like I'm doing, so again: people will enjoy the movie and if you don't that's fine. No 2 sides are exactly the same anyway.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    @SatMornRejects:

    1- That's not character development. That's basically inserting a name into a completly different character.

    2- Really? You consider a "mature character" to be a rip-off of Batman? Even Sandman (the Neil Gaiman's series) had campy characters, and yet they're nothing short of wonderfully written people.

    If you sincereily thinks "emo brooding" = great writting, maybe you should rethink how you view media.
  • ZeroBeatXIII
    avatar
    Wow do people actual do that? I thought it was a joke at Americas expense, I couldnt stand being in a cinema where the audience applauds its so stupid

    I think history will makes MoS large flaws more evident with time, like with other bad films that got alot of praise like DKR
  • SatMornRejects
    avatar
    Differences in culture does not make the opposite stupid.
  • bigtakilla  - Movie Superman deserves. LMAO!!!
    avatar
    Wow, that was incredibly lame.
  • Matthewf0726
    I agree that it was a bland retelling of the Superman story, and I was very disappointed, but I did think it had some good in it. For example, I think the action was among the best I have ever seen. I am not saying this was a great film, but I do think you overlooked some positive elements.
  • Travoltron
    avatar
    To be fair, I'd choose a dog's life over Kevin Costner's too.

    Also, prepare to be called "Donner fanboys". That's what the Nolanites are labeling us infidels.
  • WiiStation360
    avatar
    Don't forget "Marvel fanboys" as well.
  • Solid Mario the Hedgehog
    avatar
    "Also, prepare to be called "Donner fanboys". That's what the Nolanites are labeling us infidels."

    Ahh, I love my hot cup of double-standards in the morning.
  • takineko
    avatar
    I kept hearing this movie wasn't great so I didn't bother to spend 20 bucks to go see it on father's day
  • FusionWarrior  - HI TAKI!
    avatar
    I saw it with my dad for fathers day, but honestly the more I think about it the more I HATE it. I thought it was fun at first, but it is like a festering wart on my brain. Me no likey.
  • starlordx0  - How i hate fanboys.
    avatar
    I like the movie but, Yeah, it have a lot of problems. And when someone have a different from yours, he is the devil himself. Why cant we say : I like it, You dont. How difficult is that?
  • SatMornRejects
    avatar
    Exactly! Every person is different so why should we be reduced of our independence by having the exact same opinion as the other?
  • ZeroBeatXIII
    avatar
    Everyone has thier own opinions, but its childish to cover your ears from others and just go "I dont care what anyone else thinks"
  • SatMornRejects
    avatar
    You're partially right. Covering your ears and enjoying something isn't bad, but covering your ears whilst offending something is not only bad; it's stupid.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    @starlordx0: You sort of lose the right to accuse other people of demonisation when you're the one doing it.
  • Thunderbang
    avatar
    He didn't. He meant that others say that stuff about people who disagree. It was an example.
  • Youngbountygirl
    I was disappointed as much. I put this under the category of "okay for a super hero film." I think the director should've tried to give the characters more character. I also wouldn't have mind a Superman that made mistakes as a kid and learned as he grew to be noble.
  • leikaitsndead
    avatar
    come on!!! another bad review of this amazing movie, what do you want... a erase-kiss memorie, angry joe make a great video about this movie.
  • helix
    avatar
    Maybe cuz Angry Joe is a huge fan boy of Superman. (See the symbol on his shirt? )

    Not that I'm saying his opinion is wrong. Doug and Rob, Brad, Noah and Brain didn't like it, but Angry Joe did. And other people as well. Everyones got an opinion, but not everyones gonna make a vid on it
  • Hardback247
    Did Angry Joe do a Man of Steel review? Where is it?
  • Undertaker91
    avatar
    Check his Youtube channel, he tends to upload stuff there first
  • Wallydee  - VERY DISAPPOINTING!
    Hello,

    Its 4:22 AM here in Holland and i just came home from a very late night viewing in Imax of ''Man of steel''.

    I hate to say this, but i agree with EVERY word both you guys just said!!! Im not a critic, im just an ordinary guy who was looking very forward to this movie and who left the theater very disappointed a couple of hours ago.

    I wanted to like it soooooo bad!! I'm a big fan of both Snyder and Nolan their movies.
    But this movie felt like it was directed by Nolan and i didnt recognize any of Snyder's work or vision in it.
    When Superman sat across the table from Lois in that brightly lit room, it reminded me of the same room in ''the Dark Knight'' when Batman interrogates The Joker, only smaller.

    It irritated me that the movie had this greyish/dark blue colour the entire time.
    It felt outta place, it didnt belong in this movie, and i had no idea the movie was gonna look like this because i honestly avoided every single trailer, i wanted this movie to just surprise me, and it actually did so, but unfortunatly in a bad way.
    I would have liked it better if the movie was way more colourful.

    There are so many things i would like to write about this movie but i feel i lack the knowledge in the English language to do so.
    So im gonna leave it at this.

    I do have to say that i always KINDA liked Bryan Singer's ''Superman Returns'' even though it had a lot of flaws etc etc etc

    BUT at least that movie made me feel like i was watching a Superman movie, this one felt like some random SCIENCE FICTION movie....
  • AKAtheDirector
    avatar
    I agreed with a lot of what you said. I personally thought that Snyder was trying to copy Nolan's storytelling style and Spielberg's "spotlight fetish" as one of your characters described and what he gave us was two halves of two movies put together into one. I'm surprised you didn't mention the pointless zoom ins and outs. The only thing good about Man of Steel was that it was better than Superman Returns, which isn't that hard. I plan to start a video reviewing inspired by Nostalgia Critic videos sometime and plan to cover a lot of what you talked about
  • robheisel
    avatar
    I thought the movie was ok.
  • cupquake1616
    I just saw this with my friend, and we both enjoyed it and liked it but thought it wasn't by any means a good movie or a good Superman movie. It was entertaining, some of the over the top stuff was funny in a bad way and it had some good action. I agree that there was too much shaky cam and too many explosions. But I enjoyed watching it even though my inner Superman geek was cringing...


    I guess SPOILER that the two worst things were: 1) superman destroying everything when I feel like the character we are supposed to have should have tried to get the fights out of Metropolis/Smallville and into a place with less people and 2) that Lois finds out who he is? What? COME ON.
  • daftendirekt9
    This movie was terrible, yet everyone loves it. Shame.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    Everyone has their reasons for liking or hating it. I love it because they took this classic character, and gave him an origin story that takes place during the present day (a time of post-9/11, the internet, satilites, spy drones, and our paranoia on what we don't know), while keeping intact everything that makes Superman the character that put the word "super" in "superhero."
  • trlkly
    avatar
    No it didn't, because he's not the same character. The TV show Smallville does what you are describing.

    Your superhero killed 250,000 people or so. Not because he couldn't stop it, but because he didn't care. He only cared when he could see the deaths right in front of him.

    There are some people that think that all opinions are valid. I am not one of them. If your opinion is contradictory or not backed up, then it isn't a valid opinion. If you think there was anything heroic about what I described above, your opinion is wrong.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    It's called "opinion." Look it up.
  • snoofulus
    You might wanna look it up yourself - an opinion can contain / be based on objective elements.
  • AbsoluteVirtue
    avatar
    Opinion - a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

    It seems 'trlkly' doesn't know what an opinion is.
  • AbsoluteVirtue  - You're a hypocrite
    avatar
    Wow, it's not everyday you see someone openly proclaim themselves as a hypocrite. All opinions are invalid unless you agree with them, huh? What are you a fascist?
  • snoofulus
    A fascist is someone who wants to OUTLAW dissent - not merely say the dissent is wrong.
    I might as well call you an Orwellian or something for strawmanning the guy above - did he cite "agreeing with him" as a reason for what you're saying anywhere?
  • AbsoluteVirtue  - snoofulus
    avatar
    He (trlkly) implies it. What are you, a high school guidance counselor?
  • Dreadjaws
    avatar
    "Your superhero killed 250,000 people or so. Not because he couldn't stop it, but because he didn't care"

    You know what I hate? This bullshit crap. If you want to hate a movie, do it for something the movie actually did.

    I respect people who say they didn't like the movie because they felt the pacing was wrong, or because they didn't like the characters, or because they thought it borrowed too much from other sources, etc.

    But I can't feel any ounce of respect from people who scream in rage because they DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE DAMN FILM.

    I swear to God, people are so spoiled by simple films these days.
  • Thunderbang
    avatar
    Agree 100% I mean, I don't HATE people that don't pay attention, but it can get pretty annoying, especially in reviews.
  • Thunderbang
    avatar
    Dude! Calm down. And he said "super," not hero. As in someone with superpowers... I assume.

    And how do you know he didn't care? He was conflicted. There is a difference. I'm not defending it, I'm just my nature someone that strives to correct everyone and make sense of e everything (everything in real life, not fiction :P) Sorry if I am annoying. That's just who I am.
  • yoshmaster5  - The tornado scene...
    If there is one scene in this that just...ugh, frustrates me to no end, it is the tornado scene.

    I am coming into this as a meteorologist--I study the weather. I am also aware of the risks posed by tornadoes, and how to take cover with them. The overpass thing came up back in the late 1990s, where a family hid under the overpass from a tornado and survived.

    They hid under an overpass that was not completely filled in--there was a packet of space for them to hide in. That is not common. What would have happened otherwise, is they would have died horribly. There is this thing called wind tunneling, where wind forced through a smaller area (i.e., an overpass) will speed up to account for conservation of mass. Look up the Bernoulli equation if you are interested. Needless to say, going under an overpass puts you at greater risk because the winds are increased, but also parts of the overpass could be ripped off and hit you.

    tl;dr

    Going under an overpass during a tornado increases your chance of death. Considerably. This was debunked over and over again by scientists in the media, and now that myth of "This is where it's safe" is going to spread. Again. And people are going to die.
    In other words, this movie may indirectly kill people because of that scene. Good work writers/producers/whoever came up with that scene, you may have committed manslaughter.
  • trlkly
    avatar
    So does pretty much every movie about tornadoes. You are nitpicking. Normally I wouldn't mind, but this film has significant problems, and nitpicking just makes your dislike seem petty.
  • snoofulus
    "In other words, this movie may indirectly kill people because of that scene. Good work writers/producers/whoever came up with that scene, you may have committed manslaughter."

    That's merely one aspect of movies representing things inaccurately; another is that entertainment movies constantly bend reality to their whim (making countless things look safer than they would actually be, for instance), sometimes for dramatic effect and sometimes pointlessly, but a lot of viewers are "in on it" and come to see them partially for that reason.
    Storming in here and proclaiming them to be super killers because they showed something inaccurate in a movie that might lead to people doing something dangerous... if they buy what they see in this kind of movie... is being slightly shortsighted.
  • mangakallector
    I found this movie SO bland and the action scenes went on forever! Christopher Nolan focuses more on story while Zack Snyder is more action and less story. A good story is good but there was NO CHARACTER! It was basically trying to be the Dark Knight without being the Dark Knight.

    I am not even a critic and I didn't like this movie that much. There were some scenes that were visually interesting like when Superman was first flying and when he broke out the handcuffs and walked towards the people and said "It is because you cannot control me" I got shudders as well as after he defeated Zod....but that is really the only scenes I really like. And I go gaga over the cape flowing in the wind. I love capes xD.

    Is it just me? Or did Lois Lanes and Superman have a thing? There was no growing with their relationship. Which is why I was mad when they kissed at the end.

    And they were right about the speech thing...more of the idea of Superman than an actual character.

    And Zod basically had the same agenda as Sentinal in Transformers 3. He betrayed Optimus in order to bring Cybertron back and in order to do that he had to sacrifice Earth in the process. It is pretty much a Nolan version of Transformers 3. Well that is my two cents :)
  • Hardback247
    So some people have criticized Superman Returns for having too little action, and now Man of Steel is criticized for having too much action? Make up your minds!
  • AlucardsQuest
    avatar
    That's such an oversimplification and missing the entire point of people's criticism.
  • justmark55  - Thank you Walker Brothers
    Thank you Walker Brothers it's nice to know i was not the only one that thought this movie was Dumb, Dumb-Dumb-Dumb-Duuuumb, DUMB! DUMB! DUUUUUMB!
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    Don't push it, please.
  • Vedli
    avatar
    Or what? You can't go whining every five minutes about having your opinion and then yell (or seemingly threaten) everyone who disagrees with you.
  • phoebus67  - Donner Delusion
    So, my main problem with your review/take on the film is that you're looking at it through the rest of the films/adaptations. I'm not gonna say that this is a great movie, but it is GOOD.

    This film wasn't about the same thing as the others. It was about the isolation that Clark/Kal feels from being raised as the only alien on Earth. The reason he is so mopey and "emo" is that there's no one on earth he can talk to.

    Complaining about the characters not being the same as in previous adaptations, is just a silly thing to argue about. This is a new Superman that's not meant for the same thing as the old Superman.

    I will admit that the action sequences were too long and too dry, but if you look at Superman Returns of 2006, they had to compensate.

    On the idea of Superman not killing: You did see the film yes? You realize that the film centered around his first day/event of being "Superman" It's obvious that he's going to make mistakes. I think Supes killing Zod at the end fit PERFECTLY. Zod clearly displayed that he was too dangerous and that he wouldn't rest until Earth was destroyed, Clark had to. I liked that it was at the end of the film, it gives them the ideas that you yourself talked about. I'm willing to bet in the next film, he'll deal with grief and coming to terms with the fact that he killed Zod.

    In conclusion, I think that this film 100% accomplished it's main goal: to kickstart the DC Cinematic Universe. It made me look forward to how the rest of DC can fit into this film, and honestly, it felt like it could. This Superman ISN'T God, despite the constant metaphors. He's a a person, just like we are, and I think that this worked extremely well. The Godlike hero being will come later.
  • trlkly
    avatar
    Yes, it is right to expect the character to be the same. The character is the same in every reboot. That's what makes it a reboot, and not just some other random movie.

    Superman has certain defined character traits. No matter how you change what goes on around him, he still has a core character that cannot be violated. That is how an adaptation works.

    Superman is a preexisting character. You can't change him completely. He must feel like the same guy.

    And at no point in the film is Superman said to be making a mistake. That's the problem. If he was growing into the character we know and love, that would be acceptable. But he's not. There is no sign that he learned a thing. He's not going to try to actually save people in the future instead of focusing on attacking. He doesn't see his entire fight with Zod as a mistake. He thinks he did what was necessary.

    The only thing he seems to have possibly learned is that killing enemies is okay. And not just any killing, but easy chump kills. Superman is not always going to be facing a superpowered thread. When Lex Luthor comes around, this version of Superman has no excuse not to just give him a heat vision lobotomy.

    In any other story, setting him up like this means he becomes a dictator who takes over the Earth, He sees millions of lives as necessary casualties. He's not the protector of the Earth, as he's supposed to be, but the supreme ruler. Someone who we will have to destroy.

    That's the direction they've taken him in this film. If you want early Superman in a modern setting, go with Smallville. HE SAVES PEOPLE. He wouldn't let 250,000 die so he can make cool special effects battles.
  • DakotaCruz
    "Superman has certain defined character traits. No matter how you change what goes on around him, he still has a core character that cannot be violated. That is how an adaptation works.

    Superman is a preexisting character. You can't change him completely. He must feel like the same guy."

    Wow, such ridged thinking and then I ask...why bother making ANY comic book movie? You'll get 300 or Sin City - a shot for shot adaption...works for some, doesn't for others. PLUS if you want that Superman that you want, you have that, in comics, movies and cartoons! He's there, this is different, this is a different take on the character

    even a character YOU don't want to see altered, well some of us do
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    Trikly - you obviously did not pay attention to the scene where he kills Zod. He first, offers him to stand down, then BEGS him to stop, and Zod continues because he has nothing to live for, and he wants to hurt Kal by making him kill the last living member of his race.
    Do you think Kal liked killing Zod? That's why he fell on his knees and screamed and had to be consoled by Lois?

    Geez, you are DENSE. As most americans these days. Unless a moviemaker hammers the moral of the story into you, you do not get it.

    If anything, Superman will now NEVER kill in the future, knowing full well what it feels like, no matter how necessary it was. He is like a cop, who first had to shoot a bank robber who was threatening hostages. You think a cop goes through that easily? There is a reason why they have to go to a psychiatrist and often are given extended leave when this happens...
  • Leon Real
    A friend of mine saw the movie (I haven't yet). He compared the fight scenes to those of "Dragon Ball Z". And yes, he also agrees that the story is pretty silly.

    When you put that together, I'd say the comparison to the anime is pretty accurate.
  • Bloodrealm
    I haven't seen the movie myself, but that is precisely what I was thinking hearing Noah and Miles describe the fights in their video. DBZ had the heroes purposely taking the fight away from populated areas to avoid casualties, though.
  • firefly4f4
    I keep trying to come up with GOOD things to say about this movie, so here goes:

    * You're right, Rob. The scene where Martha is comforting Clark as his powers come into being is quite nice.

    * To that I'll add the oil rig scene. That even goes with the obvious savior symbolism that at other times seems shoehorned in. He saves the crew of the rig, buys the helicopter time to escape by holding up the tower, and then is seen in a cross formation. Well done.

    Everything else, though... ugh. They even (SPOILERS) blow the savior metaphor completely by having him behave so recklessly, bludgeoning the metaphor to death in that church scene. Overdoing it's one thing, but what REALLY upsets me is that (again, oil-rig scene aside) it doesn't apply to THIS character. THIS character shows no concern for the people in and around the buildings he's destroying, and on top of that KILLS ZOD! I'm sorry, but that's NOT an appropriate use of the metaphor. Maybe for Superman in other media, but NOT the one in THIS film!
  • Datadog
    avatar
    You hit the nail on the head about this movie. A dark film on its own is one-dimensional if there's no heart to it. The upbeat campiness of the originals was always off-set by the darker undertones of Krypton getting destroyed or Superman not being able to save everyone. Likewise, a dark film needs levity to work.

    Personally, I think Superman works better as a non-violent hero. With all his abilities, he should be the one guy who never has to hit anyone.
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    That works nicely against bank robbers armed with guns, but not against guys like Metallo, Zod, Brainiac, Darkseid, Doomsday...

    And, it also makes for a boring movie. Do I need to remind you of Superman III, where Superman fought... no-one in particular? Oh, maybe an evil hallucination of himself, briefly.
    And Richard Pryor. Whom he sadly, did not punch to the moon.
  • Wallydee
    Im personally not complaining about the movie having TOO MUCH action, i just really didnt like the action it gave us.

    After Superman or whoever being thrown into a building or an object the 100th time i was like WE GET IT! THEY ARE INDESTRUCTIBLE, STOP IT ALREADY!! DO SOMETHING ELSE FOR GODS SAKE.

    And i also didnt like the ''ACTION'' scenes with all the airplanes and stuff.

    Most of the time this movie gave me the feeling that they pushed Superman to the background, just like they did Batman in ''TDKR''

    But this is just my opinion.

    (im doing pretty ok with my English i hope...?)
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    I always felt that it was mostly the Tim Burton Batman films that focused more on the villains and supporting cast more that the titled character.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Two wrongs don't make a right...
  • well3406  - Not that bad
    I really liked the movie, especially more than the Returns or any of the Donner movies. I hope they keep the style and tone for the next one as well.
  • Mauropteryx
    I haven't seen Man of Steel yet but the Donner version of Superman is a stupidly bad freaking film. It really sucks balls.

    Apart from Clark's parents, the main characters are horrible people, it starts with two Big-Lipped-Alligator moments, the villain is boring guy with a stupid plan that would never work who hires dumbasses even though he's supposed to be incredibly intelligent, the romance sounds like it was written by a preteen on LiveJournal, and the ending is freaking cowardly and makes Superman look like a selfish asshole. To get to his girlfriend in time, he had to have allowed an entire city flood and allowed the people in the city to die. For one lady, a city is allowed to die. Disney movies made for small children have bigger balls and better morality than Superman the Movie. Fuck that fucking movie.

    But yeah, too bad Man of Steel was bad. It sounds like the killing of Zod was handled as bad as the killing of T-Rex. It can be done but you just have to do it right and the movie did not.

    (I realize this post contains a run on sentence. I don't care.)
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    How can you call a movie bad if you haven't seen it yet? You're only calling it bad, because you've watched people like Doug, Rob, and Brad say why they don't like it.
  • Mauropteryx
    No, I'm calling Richard Donner's Superman the Movie bad. Read the damn post.

    So far I'm hearing good reasons for them not liking Man of Steel. I might see the movie after it comes out on DVD but it doesn't sound that great. I'll probably be 'meh' about it.
  • JoeCB91
    avatar
    KNNNEEEEEEEE (video ends)


    Perfect
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    The "Kneel before Zod" thing has become so cliched nowadays.
  • jasonwolf
    The sad part is a lot more people are gonna love it just because it looks good and its action.
  • positivelySlime
    avatar
    Pretty much. Every person I've seen that defends their love for Man of Steel with venomous words can never come up with anything beyond how awesome the action/CG was.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    Characterization, music, emotion, takes itself more seriously than the previous films. How's that?
  • The Dubya
    avatar
    LOL takes it more seriously....this movie is the most childish interpretation of the character ever made.

    It's the little kid that's trying WAY too hard to be "growed up" in the most superficial ways possible. By listening to "grown up" music with cuss words in it, and wearing darker/muted color clothes more, and having this "mysterious brooder" affect about themselves and making up some trite backstory about how the reason his antisocial ass doesn't talk to anyone is because "never understood" and "doesn't trust people anymore" because Blahedy Blahedy Humanity Are Stupid Evil Jerkfaces Wah Wah Cry Cry.

    Crappy kids film is crappy kids film.
  • SpeedyEric  - The Dubya
    avatar
    No. Films like "Batman & Robin" are childish.
  • The Dubya  - @SpeedyEric
    avatar
    Batman & Robin was at least INTERESTING in its badness. There isn't jack shit going on in Man Of Steel, making it bad AND boring.

    Honestly, Batman & Robin at least had the balls to be DIFFERENT and stand itself apart from every other generic action flick at the time. Man of Steel IS that generic action flick of its time; where some boring emo douche that's afraid of having emotions as a "realistic character." Once again, it's that little kid that tries too hard to act "tough" and "cool". They end up just being uninteresting and shallow.

    The Great Gatsby came out this year, and that's exactly what MOS is;it's Jay Gatsby. A little boy PRETENDING to be a grown man with a bunch of lip service flash and no substance. Give me Batman & Robin, a film that ISN'T ashamed of what it is, over this cowardly film anyday.
  • snoofulus
    Batman and Robin was neither pretending, nor claimed to be "taking it more seriously", though - it was a self-aware campy farce, not childish in the sense of "trying to act adult but failing".

    Naming it here especially after you'd set up previously really looks like a move of desperation.
  • trlkly
    avatar
    And what's sad about that is that the effects and action will seem dated in the future. So they're liking the film for something that will not last.
  • SpeedyEric  - @trlkly
    avatar
    YES. I GET IT. YOU HATE MY OPINIONS. DON'T PUSH IT.
  • Dreadjaws
    avatar
    I have experienced the opposite. Mostly every one who seems to dislike this film is because they were not paying attention. Everyone claims things happened for reasons they made up instead of the ones the movie clearly gives.

    The problem here is that this film doesn't hold your hand, and people are spoiled because other sci-fi/superhero movies certainly do. Since Man of Steel doesn't explain every little detail, people either miss or misinterpret the meaning of what happening on screen.

    Watch how many people assume in the last Superman vs Zod fight that Superman is killing a bunch of random people because he smashes against some buildings. Clearly either people didn't realize the buildings were evacuated. Even if there wasn't a scene showing such a thing, why would people assume it didn't happen? Are you telling me that a huge spaceship is going to land in the middle of the city, start destroying everything and people are NOT going to evacuate?

    I tell you, people are spoiled by stupider movies. In regular action movies people behave like idiots, and audiences now don't even entertain the idea of someone in a movie not being a dumbass.

    I agree the big amount of action (which I confess borders on the overcompensating for Returns) works against the film in this case, since people tend to focus on that and don't really realize what happens in the film. But it's also their fault because every time something happens they instantly assumed it happened for stupid reasons or it had bad consequences because of people being stupid.

    I guess it's the film's fault for assuming audiences were going to be smart enough to not think this movie was set in a universe of idiocy.
  • snoofulus
    "Even if there wasn't a scene showing such a thing, why would people assume it didn't happen?"
    :DDDDDDD
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    Nicely put, Dreadjaws. But what can we say? General populace is getting dumber and dumber by the year, so they make movies suited for their brain-power - consider how much idiotic movies like Project X or the Hangover series make...

    They should just watch Idiocracy, methinks. :)
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    -positivelySlime

    Hahahah...

    NO.

    It was well written, and had great actors, and the designs - especially for Krypton and kryptonian tech - were amazing. This movie moves right alongside the Nolan Batman Trilogy as one of my favourite superhero movies.
  • snoofulus
    Don't see what's so bad about that - you pick the aspects you're into ;)
  • empeanutson
    (9:18 in the spoilers video)
    Thank you. I'm really glad I wasn't the only one to think of the "boomer will live" joke.
  • The_Masked_Donut
    avatar
    I did like the movie, but I think some context is needed. I only ever saw the first two Superman movies this year [which are very good, though a bit flawed]. Point being that they're not exactly classics that've warmed into my heart over the years. I was mostly looking at this film on its own rather then comparing it to the others.

    The biggest issue I had was that it was a bit odd structurely. It starts off with a fun enough intro to Krypton [though I hoped they'd go into more detail about the world so you'd feel bad when it goes kerflooey], but then goes to him grown up, then flashbacks and back in forth and so forth. They should have either gone all flashbacks, or all chronologically. It also seemed that there were certain scenes meant to go on longer to flesh out characters. There's a lot of story to go through, so I didn't mind at first; but given how long the action scenes are, I worry they decided that audiences wanted more action, and cut some character moments as a result.

    That said, I found the action pretty awe-inspiring; which surprised me because I thought I'd seen it all. The camera is a bit shakey, but I could always tell what was going on, and every punch felt big and immediate. I also like, though it bored me at times that it managed to keep a consistent tone. This Superman doesn't have much levity, but the tone doesn't permit for too much of it because of the stakes going on. One of the biggest issues I had with The Avengers was how in the midst of an Alien invasion, our heroes were bickering and seemed more concerned with spouting one-liners then saving lives.

    Any how, I'd like to see a sequel because I feel there's a lot they could do with it, but I don't want a Justice League movie. Partly because I'm one of two people who didn't care for The Avengers, but also because it'd be movie making for all the wrong reasons. I felt this at least had some kind of artistic vision to it, which is more then I can say for many of the Marvel movies. Any way, that's my two cents. It could have been better, but I wasn't terribly hyped in the first place, so who knows...
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    They did the flashback thing in "Batman Begins," and I was okay with that.
  • Fury of the Tempest
    Wait wait wait. Hold on.

    So, people are complaining about how 'Superman destroyed Metroplist!' During his like, first proper outing as Superman? And how he had no idea at the damage he could wreck? It shows why he needs to be careful. It shows in a realistic way. What happens when two extremely powerful forces start fighting one another.

    I rspect you guys greatly. But without even SEEING the movie myself. Yes. I have not seen the movie. And only having seen less than half of the review. I have to say you do NOT know what your talking about with this film

    Oh and the 'Its the Dark Knight all over again' thing too. That's another mark against you on this.
  • positivelySlime
    avatar
    Clark already knew what he was capable of. He EASILY knew what he was capable of. I know this because...you know...I've actually seen the movie.

    How can you honestly say something as idiotic as "I have not seen this film but you do NOT know what your talking about."

    ???

    That's another mark against you.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    He just started his superhero career in this film. Give him a chance, man.
  • Valzahd
    avatar
    So if a newbie superhero destroyed your home town, needlessly risking the lives of you and your loved ones because it didn't click in his head that maybe he should, I dunno, lead the fight away from a populated area? That you'd be totally cool and just smile and shrug it off saying "It's his first day!"?
  • tedzey  - Really?
    avatar
    Maybe because collateral damage in superhero movies isn't something entirely new! All because "The Avengers" didn't imply as deeply as did "Man of Steel" that people died doesn't mean that New York didn't suffered as much as Metropolis. Maybe it shows that death can cause the audience to feel a direct impact on what's going on and TO THINK! Leaves you wondering if Superman is doing the right thing versus a neat little bow to tie things together! BTW the grand scale shows that Superman was one person who by the end of the day saved THE WORLD. You really think people lived in those buildings when giant chitauri snake monsters dropped dead on those buildings?! What if the chitauri monsters that died left a deadly pathogen that can kill humans?! Yeah... let's just shrug that off because the movie doesn't want us to think of that.. neat little bow to tie things together!

    Am I saying that the Avengers is worse because of this? No, but that a superhero movie that's supposed to make us think about the moral implications maybe should show more moral implications! Also, nobody can answer your dumb-ass rhetorical question because at the end of the day superheroes are like unicorns and leprechauns...

    THEY DON"T FUCKING EXIST!!!!!
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    Which part of Zod saying "I will kill all humans, one buy one, and make you watch!" did you not understand?

    Kal could not have just flown away... if he did, Zod would have started gleefully destroying Metropolis.
  • Valzahd
    avatar
    Seriously? How can you possibly say you know more about a movie you haven't seen than two people who have actually seen the movie?

    Way to sound ignorantly pretentious.
  • AlucardsQuest
    avatar
    He's a man in his thirties who knows how to control his powers, yet he almost helps Zod destroy Metropolis with as much damage as he causes. Why does he have no consequences for his actions? You're asking us to fall for the filmmaker's padding a movie so that it can tell a narrative over a trilogy instead of in one film. That's the result of an incompetent screenplay! The writing is poor, and you don't even have to go to film school to understand that.

    And the reason people are saying it's Nolan's Batman all over again is because it rips off all the bullet points of those movies. People are allowed to have opinions different from yours.
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    When you are fighting a badguy who is on THAT power level, you cannot just punch him to the Sahara desert to fight him without any collateral damage.

    What's next, you'll complain that in the comics - or the DVD movie adaptation -Superman doesn't just grab Doomsday and puts him on the moon? Newsflash... he fights him in Metropolis, there is even more collateral damage than in this movie, and LOTS of people die. Superman doesn't want that, but he is powerless to stop it, against someone who is his equal. He does his best to contain the beast... and he does the same here with Zod.
  • Perfect-10
    avatar
    Ok, so I COMPLETELY agree on your points about the writing and cinematography. But honestly, my 2nd favorite thing about this film was that the actors fought through the bad character writing as well as they could. Did they turn in great performances? Not by any means. But they TRIED. My favorite thing was the action scenes though. This film makes you feel every single punch and shows the impact VERY well. This was a great movie for action choreography and design.

    So this is kind of a rare phenomenon for me; usually I'll put writing and character development as my most important aspects, but given what the effects department and actors had to work with in terms of a script, they really did the best they could and they did a good job of it. So, I still think Snyder's a VERY weak director in terms of getting good performances out of actors (look at his ENTIRE career) and I felt the writing was poor, but the movie overall succeeded despite that due to those elements.

    I know I'm forgiving a lot in this opinion (and I actually completely disagree with your opinions on Michael Shannon's performance, I found it very interesting and captivating), but I feel that what this movie got right, it REALLY got right. There's my final word on the film.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    I also like Shannon's performance of Zod. To me, it has more emotion and realization than Terrance Stamp's take on him. The Stamp version wanted global domination (OF COURSE!), but the Shannon version was focus on the survival of Krypton and its people, and not that of Earth, which is also why he never said "Kneel before me/Zod."
  • BB Shockwave
    avatar
    Agreed. I never saw him before, but man... great actor. His best lines were after his plans failed, and he tells Kal how whethever he did might seem evil or bad, he does them for the good of Krypton. I liked that they took the idea from the comics that he used to be friends with Jor-El and was one of the few who believed his theories.
Only registered users can write comments!

Latest Videos

Oancitizen: Shakespeare

Watch Video

Phelous: BZ - Super Mario World

Watch Video

MikeJ: Microwave S'mores Maker

Watch Video

NChick: 50 Shades S2E3

Watch Video

Film Brain: Amz Spider-Man 2

Watch Video

Taylor: Tales of Symphonia HD

Watch Video

Adventure Time: 5 More Short

Watch Video

NC: Swan Princess

Watch Video

Leon: AotT: Inquisition

Watch Video

NChick: Game of Thrones S3E3

Watch Video

Diamanda: Amz Spider-Man 2

Watch Video

Benzaie: Neo Versailles Ep 5

Watch Video

Lotus Prince: Snatcher Finale

Watch Video

Linkara: Athena #2

Watch Video

Sage: Plastic Little

Watch Video

Lupa: Haunting of the Innocent

Watch Video

Suede Played Higurashi P1

Watch Video

Adventure Time: Jake the Dog

Watch Video

Blockbuster: Planes

Watch Video

Adventure Time: Finn the Human

Watch Video

Lupa: BW - Rookie School

Watch Video

Sage Vlogs: Under the Skin

Watch Video

Diamanda: The Raid 2

Watch Video

Brad: Transcendence

Watch Video

Nash: Tasmanian Triangle

Watch Video

NC Com: Alice in Wonderland

Watch Video

Linkara: LPPO Ep 17 & 18

Watch Video

LP - Snatcher P13-15

Watch Video

NChick: ID vs WotW P2

Watch Video

Rap Critic: Loyal by Chris Brown

Watch Video

ChaosD1: Digimon Masters

Watch Video

Benzaie: Neo Versailles Ep 4

Watch Video

Lesbian Talk: Episode 54

Watch Video

Adventure Time: The Lich

Watch Video

Todd: Ghetto Superstar by Pras

Watch Video

MikeJ: Marley & Me TPY

Watch Video

Brad: ET the Porno Bloopers

Watch Video

Nerd: Ep 110 - Outsourced Anim

Watch Video

Adventure Time: I Remember You

Watch Video

Brad: Two of a Kind

Watch Video

Phelous: Gingerdead Man 3

Watch Video

Taylor: Lightning Returns

Watch Video

Blog Categories

What's Up? (138)
Sports (264)
News (273)
Book Reviews (523)
Funny (559)
Top # Lists (736)
Animation (869)
Wrestling (969)
Movies (1031)
Anime (1055)
Thoughts (1122)
Comics (1137)
Misc Reviews (1174)
Music (1256)
Video Reviews (1794)
Film Review (2617)
Uncategorized (3964)
Video Games (4931)
Old Blogs (15357)