Man Of Steel Ten Years Later - What’s Your Thoughts On It?

[Kuwagaton]

It remains my personal favorite Superman movie, and among my favorite interpretations of the Man of Steel. It brought Superman into the 21st century, whether the fans wanted it or not. It treated Clark, Lois, and the Kents as people first and foremost, and not some idealized paragons.

Agreed. From the five year point (2018) on I have to say: it's really the crux of parenting. Sleepless nights sobbing about what you aren't getting right when you're doing what's typical, and going in with all of your heart and experience bearing down only to flub. Pa Kent didn't feel just like a movie character with farmer anecdotes or parables from Nam that center Clark. Even if he was supremely benevolent in raising this alien kid, he was also a man with no experience or plan running from a very scary experience for his child that wouldn't be undone. Ma said screw it, live your life because you're my boy and you don't belong to them. That imperfection is at least good concept. Even the utterly ridiculous death of Pa, I do think there was a better way to do it but life isn't about the best of things happening as a compilation. In a movie about life, even if it's science fiction, you don't just leave the real world and what we understand about it behind. When you put senseless chaos on a different scale you still have to deal with fall out in a way that feels like what we'd really feel. So yeah, years later Clark is like "idk what the hell is going on" and yeah having your dad sucked up by a tornado in front of you to protect you from protecting him will do that.

[Johnny Thunders!]

In the end I’m a fan, I think the Man of Steel Trilogy includes Snyder’s Justice League and it’s a massive, flawed and spectacular work.

[Jon Clark]

Not a fan.

Look I get the "this is a different take" idea, but to me that is what things like Mark Waid's "Plutonian" or Will Smith's "Hancock" are for. And I understand that some things from the comics just might not translate well to the screen (Spider-Man's self-made web-shooters Vs organic ones). To me though if you are making a Superman story- the one thing you should get right is the core of Superman. The character is by nature a hero and dynamic.

Superman is not a Marvel Mutant. That scene with him cowering in the closet because his super-hearing kicked in. Hated it. Superman should never see his powers as a burden or a hinderance. These are his natural inborn abilities- things that while they may not be fully superhuman from day one are not strange new abilities that pop up suddenly from nowhere.

Let Jonathan and Martha be as indecisive as you want, Clark's basic nature should always be to save others where he can. That scene with Jonathan Kent and the tornado may have been perfect for that version of Pa Kent, but it was Clark being as far from Superman as you can get (short of Injustice). Given choice between obeying Jonathan and saving Jonathan- Superman saves Jonathan. It might not fit the story Zack Snyder wanted, but that is because his story was Brightburn rather than Superman.

The first flight scene was the only moment where we saw Superman shining through.

And just so no one gets the wrong idea- I could enjoy the movie as a movie. Wouldn't be on my "must watch" list but it wasn't horrible. It's just that as the movie that was intended to relaunch Superman and in turn the DC Movieverse it was 180 degrees off.
It's the same way i can enjoy the Adam West series, but would deride anyone who remade Batman (1966) in 2023 as the tentpole for a Batman or DC Universe.

Get the classic version of the character right before trying to reinvent it.

[HsssH]

For me Man of Steel, Batman vs Superman Director's Cut and Snyder's JL works as a trilogy. It has some stupid things and things that I don't like, but overall it is my favourite "extended" adaptation done in last 10-20 years. MoS obviously is the best one.

[Agent Z]

I liked the chemistry between Cavill and Adams, and liked that Lois knew his secret from the beginning. It's probably the best version of Lois's reporting skills we've gotten in a film. I also appreciated they showed Clark was heroic since he was a child.

Man of Steel is not a perfect movie. It is also not not nearly as bad or "deconstructionist" (too many people on the Internet do not know what a deconstruction actually is) as people call it.

[The Kid]

I still think it's a decent movie although with some flaws. I haven't re-watched in a long time but at least right now, I still have a positive opinion of the film. Unfortunately, BvS felt like it doubled down on the flaws and I still strongly dislike that movie.

Crazy that it's been a decade. I just graduated high school when I was posting here back then about the upcoming MoS movie. There was a lot of hype because say what you want about the movie when it came out, the trailers made it look like it was going to be a 'The Dark Knight' type masterpiece for Superman. I think a lot of the posters in that thread didn't survive the stricter rules when CBR forums rebooted and have been banned since but thinking about them is really throwing me back. Time really flies

[Kuwagaton]

The wildest thing was that I came out of that theater expecting comic fans in particular to get behind that movie like comic fans got behind TDK. Surely Goyer and Nolan had done it for Superman, and probably put him over Batman considering the way that trilogy ended.

It was almost a perfect 180 degrees.

Look I get the "this is a different take" idea, but to me that is what things like Mark Waid's "Plutonian" or Will Smith's "Hancock" are for. And I understand that some things from the comics just might not translate well to the screen (Spider-Man's self-made web-shooters Vs organic ones). To me though if you are making a Superman story- the one thing you should get right is the core of Superman. The character is by nature a hero and dynamic.

Superman is not a Marvel Mutant. That scene with him cowering in the closet because his super-hearing kicked in. Hated it. Superman should never see his powers as a burden or a hindrance. These are his natural inborn abilities- things that while they may not be fully superhuman from day one are not strange new abilities that pop up suddenly from nowhere.

Funny enough I think Hancock is a great comparison but "Marvel Mutant" well... it's almost exactly what Johns did in Secret Origin some years before that. Not an idea I like much either but it was sort of a natural, inevitable update when they decided that young Clark was a loner.

[Morgoth]

It's the movie that broke the brand. Or to be more precise, it was the beginning of that.
I can't say it's bad, it's visually stunning (but I really hate Metropolis battle), there are interesting artistic ideas, I really liked Snyder's take on Krypton, and Michael Shannon's Zod is one of the best cinematic comicbook movie villains of all time. But unfortunately Snyder's take on Superman just doesn't feel right, Cavill has absolutely no chemistry with Amy Adams, third act is too chaotic.

[exile001]

It is my favourite Superman movie, and one of my favourite comic book movies. I watch it about once a year.

[bat39]

That opening night was the right moment in the right place in my life. Damn, that experience was amazing and I wish I could go back. I'd seen the movie a few times after, but not since 2019 at the latest. I'm really not one to sit down and watch stuff.

I like Clark Kent. He had this PTSD thing that gave him an actual heroic arc. This isn't the comic character and so it's important to show why a regular minded guy in a realistic world would have some issues with just enjoying what should be the greatest life in the world, and why he finds it important to overcome those feelings. The other important thing is that he on the other hand, didn't have to develop his Superman persona. There's no reason to believe that he isn't the guy he was when he was arrested, and that's even more fantastic than the way Cavill looks.

I like Zod. Historically his relevance comes from being a scene chewing cornball from an older movie, but here he feels like a guy who's dangerous without super powers. The alien invasion broadcast and "thousands of years ago" creepiness really helps. The threat is threefold with the other two (Faora and Nam Ek are great references) and the terra forming macguffin is a cool idea.

I like Krypton. Crowe El is cool and actually felt like Cav-El's father. Lara feels like she could be featured in a story as a character and not the wife or mom of a character. The firefalls/fantasy stuff mixed with the Kryptonian genetics stuff is actually even better than the random ideas and imagery that comics were offering at the time.

I like the DP. It was utterly important for Perry to corroborate part of what Pa said. Lois, well I didn't feel like they gave her much but Adams is very respectable.

But I know, this is a retrospective and not a review. What I have to say now is that the screenplay set a watermark and the (provocative?) direction makes a deal breaker situation for all DC going forward: they have to directly win people over now who didn't like it if they want any hope. Unfortunately I think it's got a chance of giving us a pandering, lcd, feel-good baby food Superman movie that doesn't at all get away from Tony Stark having a burger in the middle of a press conference. "Hey guys, he's cooler than Batman and faster than Flash and has all the feels and doesn't make mistakes, please like it after hating exactly that in the first place and essentially causing the other stuff you don't like." As a cycle. I like Gunn, but the worst thing ten years since MoS is now that there's an obligation to defy it.

Totally agree here. Especially the last bit, which is really unfortunate. As much as I'm looking forward to Superman Legacy, I'm also worried that we'll get some variation of a Donner-esq 'feel good' Superman movie (and certainly, Gunn's statements so far don't entirely contradict that notion). And really, if you think about it, so much of the post-Snyder DCEU has been about running away from the tone of MOS (and BvS), starting with the Whedon cut of JL, then Aquaman, the Shazam films, WW'84 (which took things to an extreme in the other direction) and even Black Adam. Some of it has been good, some of it has been mediocre or bad, but none of it has had the impact of this film IMO. And I'm worried that DC/WB thinks that the right direction to go in for their universe is a blend of MCU-lite and a throwback to Reeve/Donner (or Lynda Carter's Wonder Woman).

Agreed. From the five year point (2018) on I have to say: it's really the crux of parenting. Sleepless nights sobbing about what you aren't getting right when you're doing what's typical, and going in with all of your heart and experience bearing down only to flub. Pa Kent didn't feel just like a movie character with farmer anecdotes or parables from Nam that center Clark. Even if he was supremely benevolent in raising this alien kid, he was also a man with no experience or plan running from a very scary experience for his child that wouldn't be undone. Ma said screw it, live your life because you're my boy and you don't belong to them. That imperfection is at least good concept. Even the utterly ridiculous death of Pa, I do think there was a better way to do it but life isn't about the best of things happening as a compilation. In a movie about life, even if it's science fiction, you don't just leave the real world and what we understand about it behind. When you put senseless chaos on a different scale you still have to deal with fall out in a way that feels like what we'd really feel. So yeah, years later Clark is like "idk what the hell is going on" and yeah having your dad sucked up by a tornado in front of you to protect you from protecting him will do that.

Good points. I think the, for a kid's comic-book, the idea that the Kents were these noble souls who told Clark that it was his duty/destiny to use his powers to help people right from childhood kinda works - in a fairy tale/moral parable kind of way. And then of course, Byrne 'updated' it a bit by throwing in some 80's Reagan-era American patriotism ("You're an American citizen. And that means you have responsibilities.") Honestly though, I'm not the greatest fan of the idea that Clark is Superman because the Kents told him to be a hero...any more than I'm a fan of the idea that a hologram of Jor-El told him to be a hero. MOS does have a bit of the Jor-El hologram guiding Clark bit, but ultimately, the movie makes it clear that Clark is someone who innately wants to help people, and after circumstances lead him to expose himself to the world, he decides to continue doing so publically as 'Superman', albeit on his own terms - answering to no one. Jonathan Kent admired his son's innate goodness but was more concerned about how the world could hurt him. Jor-El had an aspiration for his son to inspire humanity, without having any specific expectations for how that would be achieved. Ultimately, its Clark who used his powers secretly to help people for years, and who then uses them publically to save earth and humanity, and then to continue doing so. And I think that's perfect!

I don't think the Kents need to be paragons of virtue. I think its enough for them to be nice, decent people who got themselves into a tough situation raising an extraordinary child the best they could, and being concerned about what would happen if the world found out what that child could do.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

The film was so close to being a great reinvention of Superman for the 2010s, but failed because there wasn't anyone in a position of power willing to say no to certain creative choices that crippled the entire movie.

[manwhohaseverything]

This is everything superman for me..the rocket lands..shifts to a guy doing intense and risky labour.Anotger guy jumping to take the guy out of harms way.The guy disappears to do the same for a bunch of oil rig workers and gets hurt in the process..This is action comics.This clip is kinda the newspaper clip like pacing..

[Godzilla2099]

Enjoyed it then and I appreciate it far more today. Especially from the Pros I give it:

+ First Flight: This and Reeve's Helicopter Rescue were the best Superman Scenes of all time in my books. Hans Soundtrack made it perfection
+ Hans Zimmer: This soundtrack will be timeless
+ Fights: By far the most realistic (and creative) interpretation of a fight with beings having Superman's Powers. Faora stole the show. Her actress was masterful
+ Cavill: Perfect Casting for Superman. He nailed it
+ Suit: Man of Steel Costume is my personal favorite Superman Suit
+ Military: It was nice seeing the military aid Superman during an alien invasion

Two things I couldn't stand

- Jonathan Kent: No way in hell would be let a school bus full of innocent kids drown!
- Jor-El: He was too perfect and good at everything. Reeve/Donner's Movie got Clark's Dads correct. Their Jor-El educated Clark while Jonathan raised him with good morals.

[bat39]

Enjoyed it then and I appreciate it far more today. Especially from the Pros I give it:

+ First Flight: This and Reeve's Helicopter Rescue were the best Superman Scenes of all time in my books. Hans Soundtrack made it perfection
+ Hans Zimmer: This soundtrack will be timeless
+ Fights: By far the most realistic (and creative) interpretation of a fight with beings having Superman's Powers. Faora stole the show. Her actress was masterful
+ Cavill: Perfect Casting for Superman. He nailed it
+ Suit: Man of Steel Costume is my personal favorite Superman Suit
+ Military: It was nice seeing the military aid Superman during an alien invasion

Two things I couldn't stand

- Jonathan Kent: No way in hell would be let a school bus full of innocent kids drown!
- Jor-El: He was too perfect and good at everything. Reeve/Donner's Movie got Clark's Dads correct. Their Jor-El educated Clark while Jonathan raised him with good morals.

Agree with you on everything but the Jonathan Kent bit. I think people tend to misunderstand that scene. Jonathan isn't seriously saying that he would have wanted Clark to let those kids drown. That "maybe" comes from a place of serious concern for his son. Ultimately, when push came to shove, Jonathan sacrificed his own life to preserve Clark's secret. Jonathan doesn't have any clear-cut answers to big moral dilemmas anymore than most of us do. He's just an ordinary man in an extraordinary situation trying to do what's best for his family. And the thing is that, as the movie later shows us, Jonathan's concerns are not entirely without foundation either.

The point is that it's not that Jonathan wanted Clark to let a bus full of kids drown. The point is that Clark, in saving those kids, risked exposing himself to a hostile world...which in Jonathan's view made it all the more important for Clark's powers to be hidden from the world.

[All Star Superman]

I literally left the theater traumatized. Seeing Superman snap someone's neck was jarring to say the least. The symbol was...a choice. I hope Gunn goes back to the more traditional look with that one. The whole codex storyline was very unnecessary complex. I get that they were going for the Byrne origin which was fine, I guess, but they still made it more complicated than it needed to be. I think I've only watched it once since seeing it in the theater. Which isn't a good sign. If I were to say something nice about it, it would be showing how his powers worked. And Krypton looked cool. But it's offset by his parent's attitude of he doesn't have to help people. His parents upbringing is the whole reason he became Superman.

This is precisely why "Man of Steel" isn't a Superman movie. Snyder and Goyer even admit that they didn't want to make a Superman movie in post-release interviews; they wanted to make "their version" of Superman, a deconstruction. Nolan has admitted he knows little to nothing about comics and Snyder has only read Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns. Goyer, though, knew enough about Superman to fully deconstruct him: if the Kents aren't the Kents, there can be no Superman. Hell, even the movie itself is ashamed of the name. The "Man of Steel" is an angst-ridden, cowardly, murdering dullard. Goyer and Snyder wanted him to be relatable, despite the fact that we aren't supposed to relate to Superman in the same way we relate to a Wally West or a Peter Parker. Superman is an inspirational/aspirational hero, he is better than us. That's why he's not just "Man," he's "SUPERMAN." Of course, we can relate to certain aspects of Superman since he's more human than "god" or "alien," but he's not supposed to have our flaws and failings. He doesn't "learn" that killing is wrong by killing, unless his father is fear-mongering coward who was weary of having to raise a son he feared instead of a son he could inspire.

This movie is utter trash and remains the single most destructive blow to the iconic perception of Superman in his 85 years. A faithful film could do a lot of good to restore that idea, but I doubt Gunn's movie will be it. He's just a deconstructionist of a different kind.