Four Years Later, thoughts on the film MAN OF STEEL

[daBronzeBomma]

June 14th, 2013:

Exactly, 4 years ago today, I took my fiancee (now wife and baby mama) to a showing of a movie I had been waiting to see since it was announced.

MAN OF STEEL


It's 4 years later now.

For those that saw it during its initial theatrical run, what was your first impression of the overall movie?

I liked this movie a lot when I first saw it. The scene where Clark snaps Zod's neck absolutely stunned the audience. You could hear the gasps of shock and a pause.

Followed immediately by a deafening ovation. The scene killed. The movie got a loud round of applause when it concluded. This obviously was not everyone's reaction.

I really liked it then, and I freakin' love it now.

Have your thoughts on this movie changed in the 4 years since it was released? How? Positively? Negatively? Zero difference?

[The Kid]

A flawed movie with some decent moments that had a foundation that could have led to a great Superman series. I think the second half of the movie is much weaker than the first but still overall probably the second best movie in the DCEU (which isn't saying much though lol). I do think the sequel completely botched the potential foundation left it though but that's for another thread

Overall, Man of Steel wasn't the best superhero origin movie ever although it was a decent flick that had the potential to launch a successful franchise.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

When I first saw it, I was a bit exhausted by the 3rd act. There was simply so much destruction on a scale that I had never seen on screen before. A superhero battle had never been depicted quite like that, outside of Miracle Man. At the time, I liked it a lot, but I had issues with it.

Since then, I have watched it several times with different friends and kids, all of whom liked it, but were also a bit taken aback by how cataclysmic the ending is. There was also a lot of debate over whether or not Superman made the right choice at the end.

These days, I still think the film has sequences that have still not been topped. The Krypton sequence, the Smallville brawl and the final Zod vs. Supes showdown are staggeringly well shot. However, Superman's apparent lack of regard for the destruction being caused around him continues to be extremely problematic for me. I understand this is supposed to be his first real day on the job, and he's suddenly faced with a global invasion of people as strong as he is, and the film had already shown him saving people throughout the movie, but we still needed to see him trying to save people during the battle of Metropolis sequence beyond simply punching Zod. We needed to see that he was concerned about all the collateral damage this fight was causing. If they had done that, I think the film would have been received much better by most people.

I also think the film is far too dour for its own good. Superman should be fun, above all. The tone feels wrong for a character most closely associated with hope.

[superduperman]

I literally left the theater traumatized. I couldn't believe he killed. I immediately turned around and bought a copy of Superman Returns. Not sure why. Maybe I just wanted a version I could watch where he didn't kill anyone. Still haven't really gotten over it.

[beetee]

I found the film problematic. Pa Kent, on the nose "Space Jesus" analog, going 9/11 on Metropolis.... the neck snap oddly enough didn't bother me as much as Metropolis being smashed with presumed thousands dead.... and then smiling(!) in what should have been a somber aftermath. I really hated BVS because it seemed to double down on the things I didn't like about MOS. As a result, I've come to dislike MOS even more four years later. Don't get me wrong, it is quite beautiful in places and contemplative, but overall, just not a Superman I can get behind.

[GreatKungLao]

I didn't minded that Zack Snyder "Watchmened" Man of Steel in a sense that DCEU is a world, that puts comic book characters in a world that is very close to our reality and shows how it would react to the existence of Superman. There is one scene that describes DCEU to me personally in a perfect way. When Superman tells Lois before going after Batman "Nothing stays good in this world". Yet, despite everything he have got on him from the public, bespite such thoughts having a place in his head, he still remained good, proving himself wrong. And this is pretty much the DCEU - despite the grim of the world that is very close to our reality, these heroes still able remain true to their comic book nature in meaning of heroism and absolute goodness. If you keep trying, you can be that way. Even while being "Watchmened", DCEU still follows the message of hope and love as the means to save the world, not global sacrifice and fear.

First Clark's appearance in Man of Steel is him saving people without being asked for to do so. He does what he does of his own choices and decisions, which is exactly what you need from a good super hero. Man of Steel also has the best Krypton ever, those first 20 minutes are marvelous. You might say that he wasn't troubled by the destruction, but I think he helped rebuilding Metropolis in those 2 year time skip at the beginning of BvS, not to mention that the very first thing he tries to do with Doomsday is getting him away not just from populated area, but from Earth itself. He learned his lessons.

Man of Steel simply made me love and appreciate Superman as a character even more, because it showed that if he had an encounter with our in many way a cynical reality, he would still remain Superman at the core.

One more most important thing about Man of Steel - Flight scene. THE BEST super hero moment in cinema, hands down.

[Kuwagaton]

I liked this movie a lot when I first saw it. The scene where Clark snaps Zod's neck absolutely stunned the audience. You could hear the gasps of shock and a pause.

Followed immediately by a deafening ovation. The scene killed. The movie got a loud round of applause when it concluded. This obviously was not everyone's reaction.

I really liked it then, and I freakin' love it now.

Same impression. It seemed everyone I saw or talked to liked that hectic, powerful ending. Then word came in that we were supposed to hate it. Two weeks after that late night show, on comic day, and I started running into all sorts of criticisms from the shop regulars. It was weird.

I saw it about two years ago and while pa Kent and the truck are still very silly, and some of the line delivery doesn't hit the mark, it's still a good one.

[Lightning Rider]

When I first saw it, I had mixed feelings about certain things. Namely Superman being so secretive and not embracing his powers right away, his father dying the way he did, the neck break, and Lois knowing who he is right away. I also didn't like the destruction of the 3rd act because it was visually unappealing, especially just coming off of Avengers and Dark Knight Rises. But the more I watched it the more I appreciated the heart of the film, which are the scenes about his childhood, his conversations with his fathers, and his struggle to reconcile his human identity with his Kryptonian heritage. So I went from thinking it was alright to now thinking it was really good. Flight is one of my best movie scenes ever period, and I've grown to love a lot of the memorable quotes and moments from the movie that were really touching. Zod was also done very well.

[Coal Tiger]

I bought special tickets at Walmart for like a 7pm Thursday showing. I was really hyped for it. I zealously defended the movie from people who I thought were stuck in the past and were resistant to a "modern" take on Superman.... and I left the movie with the worst taste in my mouth. It's a collection of great shots and a terrible story. It showed me that a "modern" Superman doesn't really work, or at least that Zack Snyder isn't the guy to pull it off. I felt that the movie was wrong from it's conception. Superman works not because he makes "hard decisions" from two impossible choices, but because he always finds a third option. He's inherently make-believe. Clark Kent didn't grow up in the real world, he grew up in a Norman Rockwell painting. The movie was doomed to failure because it started out with the wrong ideas.

Many of us (myself included) wanted Chris Nolan to take on Superman after seeing the Dark Knight, and it now seems obvious that the Nolan approach doesn't work with Superman. Warner Brothers got what the wanted, but what they wanted was wrong for the character. Hopefully, now that Wonder Woman is outpacing MoS at the box office, WB will take notice that the approach her movie had can work for a character like Superman.

[titansupes]

I was so, so hyped for this movie from announcement to release.

The movie came out two weeks later here in Australia-- So I had plenty of time to absorb the RT meter shock and, to a degree, buy into all the defenses of the movie (most of which are still being carted out today) like "They're stuck in the past/they're biased against Snyder/for Marvel" etc. Then I actually saw the movie myself and though... Oof, yeah, I get why they don't like this.

The movie feels cold and hollow with a false sense of self-importance. The score is obnoxious (though has good bits) and the visuals overbearing. The structure is not balanced well at all, Clark's an overly passive character, the flashbacks are repetitive and poorly placed. The whole Krypton opening-- arguably my favourite sequence of the movie-- shouldn't have been there at all. It would have been stronger to have opened on that fishing boat and learned about the planet and parents through Clark's eyes on the Scout Ship (Jor-El repeats all the necessary info anyway, and it would have been a lot more mysterious and emotional, and put us in Clark's shoes a bit more... Instead, it's repetitious).

I'm not even going to get into the obscene stupidity of the tornado scene.

That cool looking dream sequence in which Zod tries to convince Clark to join him by... destroying everything he loves and sinking him into skulls (??) was there just because Snyder thought it looked cool. Why do Kryptonians even have a dream machine?! It doesn't make sense and is emblematic of Snyder's issues as a storyteller. WW, incidentally, has a similar sequence-- only done right (the same can be said for most of that movie).

The third act is poorly structured in and of itself, with lifeless action after lifeless action. My big problem with the Zod death though, isn't that Supes kills him in the first place (even though it wasn't staged QUITE as well as it should've been) but that it serves no purpose in the movie whatsoever. It doesn't tie into the theme of the movie (Clark had already decided between Earth and Krypton well before that), it didn't tie into Clark's personal story, Zod's or the rest of the plot. It wasn't even followed up on in BvS (boy, that movie...) in a meaningful way (ANYway even).

It was just there... apparently because Snyder thought it was cool or gritty or something?

TL;DR-- It's overlong, poorly structured, written and executed, missing Superman's soul etc. At least the cast is great, even though they've not been used well at all so far. Costuming was cool, too.

So yeah. Dems my thoughts on MoS.

[Atomic Man]

I really shouldn't comment on this, as my temper often gets the best of me. That said, I'm going to put forth my feelings then and now for the sake of showing that there are people who loathe this movie for logical and consistent reasons and feel it is an insult to the character of Superman, his legacy, and his fans. I also want to share my feelings on this to show others who have been silenced on this board and elsewhere because they don't like any of the Snyder movies that they have every right to their own opinion and that that opinion is indeed valid.

I became a Superman comic book fan with "The Death of Superman." I grew up with the Chris Reeve films, Super Friends, the Filmation Superman episodes, etc. I also looked through my older brother's comics and was always drawn to Superman's adventures, yet I didn't read those older comics (all Bronze Age Marvel/DC) until years after becoming a dedicated comic book reader.

Like a lot of fans my age, the "Batmania" that preceded Burton's film in 1989 led me to the local comic book shop. Comics being an inexpensive diversion at the time, my family was supportive of my interest and allowed me to spend a good deal of money each week on a multitude of different comics. I began with Batman at first, then noticed the original X-Factor and was drawn in by those amazing covers, then discovered Wolverine, The Punisher, the X-Men, and of course, Spider-Man, who I knew about as well as I knew Superman from various cartoons and the old CBS series.

I quickly became a fan of the darker material from various companies, especially Batman, Wolverine, Ghost Rider, Punisher, and even briefly, Spawn. The 1990 Flash series ignited my love of, ironically enough, Wally West, as I started reading the comics before the show came out. I'd encounter Superman in the occasional appearances in Batman or Flash (most memorably in A Death In The Family) and was unimpressed. I thought he was kind of lame and boring, not at all as "cool" or "badass" as the other characters I mentioned.

My family and friends knew I loved comics and saved newspaper clippings (this was 1992, mind you) about an event they thought I'd care about: "The Death of Superman." I wasn't terribly interested in Superman, but knowing little about how comic book storytelling worked at the time, I thought they were really killing him off and felt that it made sense as he wasn't as interesting or cool as the other heroes and anti-heroes of the day.

My mom got me the first prints of the DoS and the trade for Christmas of 92. I read the six issues in one sitting, carefully bagged and boarded them, then re-read the whole story in the trade. I immediately fell in love with the character of Superman, his selflessness, his goodness, and yes, his own brand of "badassery" that was definitely real but completely unlike that of other characters. I became a rabid fan, devouring back issues, reading my brothers Bronze Age issues, and adding all the Super titles to my pull list.

That was 25 years ago this year. In that time, I've read stories from every era, seen/listened to every media adaptation, and have researched the character and his legacy and mythology, both for personal enjoyment and in academic research in grad school.

I mention all of this because while I enjoyed Superman Returns as a love letter to the Donner films, I felt it was a misfire tonally and a failure as a launching point for a DC cinematic universe, which it could have easily been with a few narrative changes. Like millions of other fans, I longed for a new take on Superman for a new era, one that would update the visuals of the mythos, put a new spin on certain elements like the Daily Planet and Krypton. I was excited by what I saw of Man of Steel, felt that Cavill looked the part and that the casting was largely inspired. I liked what Goyer had done with Blade and later with Batman. I knew the suit was going to be changed, I'd read the spoilers that the love triangle was gone, I also knew of elements like Clark being a wanderer and being older when first putting on the suit than previous iterations.

Never in my wildest imaginings, informed by decades of reading Superman comics and about Superman, did I think Man of Steel would not actually be an iconic Superman movie. By the time 2013 rolled around, I had long developed my clear idea of who Superman is and what makes him who he is as a character, both textually and extra-textually.

I arose early to get the Walmart advance tickets, waited two hours before seating to get a great seat, and even convinced my wife to watch the movie with me. I was mostly thrilled, even with Jor-El dying before seeing Kal-El off with Lara, an iconic moment in the mythos that never fails to move me.

Then I saw what Goyer did to Jonathan Kent. Jonathan had always been encouraging, loving, supportive, and inspiring, an example of true manliness and humanity for Clark. Along with Martha, from whom Clark learned compassion and gentleness, Jonathan was why Clark was super, not because of his Kryptonian heritage. This even held true in pre-COIE iterations, though not as pronounced in the Golden Age.

[Atomic Man]

Goyer and Snyder's Jonathan was a fear-monger, a coward, a morally ambiguous influence on a son desperately in need of strong direction, encouragement, and inspiration. He told Clark to essentially hide his light under a bushel basket, to not risk being discovered by the world because of what that would mean for the world, not for Clark himself, not for the innocent, oppressed, and the powerless. This Jonathan Kent went so far as to commit suicide to convey to his son the belief that Clark should not use his great power for good, but rather, keep it a secret. The result was a wandering, aimless Clark Kent who helped people here and there but didn't really inspire, didn't seek out those in need but instead helped if trouble came to him.

This was the first sucker punch, no pun intended. I didn't think things could get worse and I assumed that I could get past these developments, even though it seemed like Clark was now more Batman Begins Bruce Wayne than his iconic self. Then, I watched "Clark" carelessly battle his Kryptonian brethren, caring little or not at all for collateral damage, a concern that a superhero is always diligent in preventing or diminishing. I was numb to the disaster porn that played out when the action reached Metropolis, hoping that once the Phantom Zone criminals were sent back, the climax of the film would be over and we'd see a mournful Superman, saddened by what's happened to his adopted world and determined to help in reconstruction and to help the world at large that now feared him.

Then Clark was written into the corner of killing Zod, something I later read was Goyer and Snyder's idea despite the original script calling for Zod to go back into the PZ. I was stunned, not believing what I was seeing. I watched Goyer and Snyder's take on Superman scream in what was supposed to be anguish after killing Zod, a quick assurance to the audience that, hey, he's broken up about it, so don't worry.

I left the theater in shock. I processed this for days on message boards and other forums online. I read the defenses: "Superman killed Zod and crew in Superman II, so what's the problem?" "Superman killed the Pocket Universe criminals in Superman #22, so what's the problem?" Others defended Costner's Kent, saying he was "realistic" and "reflected how real parents would act in today's world." Being a real parent in today's world, I completely disagreed.

My ultimate conclusion remains the same today: there is some good stuff in Man of Steel. I'll admit that the casting of Costner, Lane, Shannon, Fishburne, and a few other minor characters was inspired. Krypton looked sufficiently alien if not entirely original. Some of the SFX sequences were really well-done, and I even liked some of the production design. Martha Kent's moment with Clark at school was beautiful. The \S/ shield was great, recalling Golden Age/Earth-2 symbols while also looking sufficiently alien in design. I also liked that Waid's idea for what the shield stands for was used, if not ever actually fully supported by what was on screen.

All of that said, this is not a Superman movie to me. It's a deconstruction, a revision, a caricature using the name and some of the tropes unique to the character to appear that it is in fact the real deal. Many have argued that it's a valid Elseworlds take on Superman. Perhaps, but I always argue back that the most iconic version of Superman, the true take that presents Jonathan Kent intact and thus, the true Clark and Superman intact, should be the goal of the filmmaker. Donner felt this way and made a movie that brought the heart of the iconic Superman, the character as he existed for the majority of the the decades prior and even afterwards, straight to the screen. Donner felt a responsibility to do this, perhaps realizing that while a few million probably read Superman comic books, many millions more would watch his movie and that it would likely be all they would know about the character and his world.

There was a way to update the world around Superman so that it would appeal to today's audiences. Remaking him in the image of Batman was not the right choice and may have led to some financial success but at the cost of the iconic character being introduced to a new generation that has never and probably never will read a Superman comic book.

Four years later, Goyer and Snyder's Man of Steel remains a dark, sad, and ugly film, a wasted opportunity to do for Superman what Raimi did for Spider-Man, Favreau did for Iron Man, and others have done for other, lesser-known and storied characters. A foundation of sand upon which Goyer and Snyder's Extended Universe is built, a pale imitation of what could have been a glorious series of film adaptations of the greatest comic book hero and universe in the history of the medi

[Atomic Man]

I bought special tickets at Walmart for like a 7pm Thursday showing. I was really hyped for it. I zealously defended the movie from people who I thought were stuck in the past and were resistant to a "modern" take on Superman.... and I left the movie with the worst taste in my mouth. It's a collection of great shots and a terrible story. It showed me that a "modern" Superman doesn't really work, or at least that Zack Snyder isn't the guy to pull it off. I felt that the movie was wrong from it's conception. Superman works not because he makes "hard decisions" from two impossible choices, but because he always finds a third option. He's inherently make-believe. Clark Kent didn't grow up in the real world, he grew up in a Norman Rockwell painting. The movie was doomed to failure because it started out with the wrong ideas.

Many of us (myself included) wanted Chris Nolan to take on Superman after seeing the Dark Knight, and it now seems obvious that the Nolan approach doesn't work with Superman. Warner Brothers got what the wanted, but what they wanted was wrong for the character. Hopefully, now that Wonder Woman is outpacing MoS at the box office, WB will take notice that the approach her movie had can work for a character like Superman.

In your opinion, how could WB apply the WW approach to Superman when MoS and BvS has already done so much damage and got so much wrong?

[ultrarider7]

I love the film. The only problem I got is how Pa Kent died but I get what they were trying to do there. I love that Lois knows everything about Clark from the get go and I love the fights, as a kid I always wanted Superman to fight just like he did in the comics and the animated series and I finally got what I wanted, I love the flight scene, I love that Clark IS Krypton since he has the Codex within him. I just love the doubts Clark has in this film and BvS and I didn't mind one bit that he killed Zod, if he had no reaction after killing him? Yes, it would have bothered me but he cried and screamed about what he did, he took a life and that is devastating for him. He appreciates all life and was caught on a situation he probably could of handled better but unfortunately his lack of experience got in the way, in BvS it's clearly shown how he improved. Oh and the soundtrack, godly soundtrack. I am open minded with Superman, he is my favorite super hero and I am amazed that people can still come up with creative ideas for the mythos, he doesn't need to stay in one idea, people trying to force Superman into staying in one exact characterization has only hurt him, I am glad this film was made and that they tried something new and different.

[Atomic Man]

I literally left the theater traumatized. I couldn't believe he killed. I immediately turned around and bought a copy of Superman Returns. Not sure why. Maybe I just wanted a version I could watch where he didn't kill anyone. Still haven't really gotten over it.

Same here, my friend. I know why some people don't like Superman Returns, but flaws aside, it's still the Iconic Superman. It works beautifully as a love letter and coda to the Donnerverse films. I'll take that any day over a dour caricature made by people who've admitted that they neither liked or cared for Superman as he is.