Man of Steel

An alien child is evacuated from his dying world and sent to Earth to live among humans; but his peace is threatened when other survivors from his home planet come to invade Earth.

Yes, we all know the story of Superman, but given how James Gunn is about to jump start the new DCU with his take on Superman, I figured I would take the time to talk about the movie that originally kickstarted the DCEU; Man of Steel.

Now, it should be noted that before Man of Steel, I really wasn't a fan of Superman. I just thought his character was always overly super-powered. After all, It's hard to relate to someone when they're basically a god.

So I always gravitated to heroes like Spider-Man or Batman - even though Batman is a billionaire genius and Spider-Man has superpowers - because their respective comic books always revolved around personal, human, down-to-earth stories at their core.

Spider-Man resonates with everyone because, who can't relate to the innocent struggle of being a high school kid who has to balance school, responsibilities, and having a girlfriend?

Superman, however - being born from another planet and being virtually indestructible - was not as easy for me to connect with.

And I never really cared for the original Superman film with Christopher Reeves, either. Which may sound controversial, but I never grew up watching those movies, so I have no nostalgia for them. Especially since, watching them as an adult, they just come across as being overly cheesy and outdated to me.

So my current opinion is that Man of Steel is the best Superman movie we have. And I don't just mean that by default. I actually really do enjoy this film. And I remember being very excited to see it back before it even came out. 

See, I’m a big fan of Christopher Nolan. So when I heard he was going to produce a Superman movie, I was ecstatic, even though I knew he was only going to produce the film and not actually direct it himself. 

But I was also a fan of Zack Snyder; as I absolutely loved his work 300 and Watchmen. So, if anything, I knew Man of Steel was going to be a visual treat. Unfortunately, Man of Steel is mostly all spectacle. There's plenty of nonstop action and gorgeous looking set pieces, but there aren't a lot of character building moments . And while the action sequences are visually outstanding, if you're not into that sort of thing, Man of Steel can be an exhaustive experience.

From the very start of the film, Snyder lets you know exactly what kind of movie you're in for. Because the destruction of Krypton - which takes up most of the first act - is immediately followed up with an oil rig explosion on Earth.

Plus, the cinematography in the film is oddly dark and murky - since Snyder wanted to give the narrative a sense of gritty realism - so the bleak aesthetic may make all of the action sequences even harder to watch for those who are already uninterested.

Speaking of uninterested, I should probably talk about Henry Cavill’s performance as Superman. Because, while everyone on the internet may say that is the only guy capable of playing Superman now, it should be made clear that Cavill’s performance - at the time - was met with a lot of criticism.  And I don’t necessarily agree with that criticism, but I understand why some people may take issue with Cavill’s stiff and stoic interpretation of the character. I just think that the fault lies more on Zack Snyder as the director, and not so much on Cavill as the performer.

Because Snyder is clearly a visual director. He can compose some gorgeous looking shots and create some really engaging action sequences. But I don't know if he's the best actors director.

I mean, just look at the cast of this movie: Amy Adams, Diane, Lane, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner, and Lawrence Fishburne. Those are all top tier performers, but no one else from the cast really gets the chance to stand out, either.

So I think Cavill did the best job he could do with the material he was given. He may not emote much or be as charismatic as a lead Marvel actor; but he's still good. Henry Cavill has range. We know that. We've seen that in projects that he has worked on after Man of Steel. But just because he doesn't smile as much as Christopher Reeves used to, doesn't make his performance a bad one.

So I really enjoy Henry Cavill's interpretation of Superman, and I happen to enjoy his performance over Christopher Reeves’. Which is a controversial statement, I know, but I really like what Cavill brought to the character. 

Now, that doesn’t mean  Cavill is the only person who is capable of playing Superman; that’s an incredibly asinine belief. But, while some people may refuse to accept that Cavill’s time as the character is finished, I’m actually really looking forward to seeing David Corenswet’s interpretation. 

That doesn’t mean I don’t like Henry Cavill’s performance as the character; because I do. And I really like what the story of Man of Steel did for Clark Kent’s characterization. Because Clark Kent doesn't fit in with the rest of the world. And when he realizes that he's actually an alien from another planet, his adopted father teaches him that the world is not ready for that information to be revealed. But when it is no longer possible for Clark to remain hidden, he assumes his role as the iconic Superman, in order to protect those who can't protect themselves.

So Cavill's Clark Kent is lost and confused. He doesn't know his place in the world. And who can't relate to the feeling of being a misfit or an outcast?

Christopher Reeves may be more charming and earnest, but I don't know what his Clark Kent is all about. I know what he believes in - truth, justice, and the American way - but I don't really know what he wants as an individual.

Henry Cavill's Clark, however, just wants to fit in. He wants a place to call home. So even if you can't get a read on Cavill's emotional state, it's easy to empathize with what his character is going through as a person.

Superman is surprisingly human in this film, because Man of Steel isn't really  a movie about Superman; it’s the story of a guy learning to become Superman. It takes time for him to become the hero we all know and love, compared to Christopher Reeves' incarnation of the character, who just becomes Superman without any difficulty whatsoever.

But while Henry Cavill's Clark Kent doesn't boast a loud personality, I was still able to fundamentally understand and relate to his character. Because I'm a pretty shy guy who doesn't really talk much either; so I just thought that Clark was being a modest guy who preferred keeping quiet. And I was totally fine with that. I don't need all of my heroes to be quippy and talkative like Iron Man, after all. 

But Cavill does get to show some personality when Zod and his crew start attacking his home. I mean, he even punches Zod right in the face while he screams at the top of his lungs: “You think you can threaten my mother!?” It’s a nice moment; because, while these movies like to focus on Clark's relationship with his fathers, this moment clearly showed that: he’s a mama's boy.

And Michael Shannon’s performance as Zod is also delightfully over the top here. He's a sympathetic villain whose ideology you can understand, even if you don't necessarily agree with it. Shannon just has such presence in this film. He can be loud and bombastic, but he's also fantastic in the movie's brief yet quieter moments. I could really feel for his character when he tells Kai that he no longer has a purpose. The entire tone of the film shifts, because from that moment on, Zod is fighting with the mentality of a man who has nothing left to lose .

Unfortunately, as I said before, the rest of the cast, for as good as we know they are, aren't really that memorable. Amy Adams, who is great, even has some unbelievably cringeworthy dialogue. But, again, that probably has more to do with Zack Snyder.

Lois Lane feels less like an actual character and more like a tool used to get Superman to do stuff. Zod took Kal into space? Oh, well, better bring Lois Lane into the spaceship for no reason, just to raise the stakes. Everything in the city is being sucked up into Zod's terraforming machine? Oh, well, we need Superman to save someone, so we better have Lois Lane fall from the sky, even if it defies the laws of gravity.

Her function in the story is to be the damsel in distress. And for a modern superhero film with an actress of the caliber of Amy Adams to be filling that role, was definitely a bit underwhelming.

Speaking of the cast, I can't shake the feeling that Zack Snyder was trying to create his own version of The Matrix with this movie, and that goes deeper than just casting Laurence Fishburne and Harry Lennix.

There's a weird scene involving infant harvesting on Krypton for some reason, and it's very similar to how the machines used to grow humans for batteries in The Matrix.

But they grow babies on krypton for… science? I don't get it.Why don't Kryptonians have sex? Couldn't the codex assign genetic roles to an infant after they were born of natural causes? Jor-El and Lara have sex. So it's not like anyone is stopping them. I don't know.

I feel like Snyder just wanted his movie to have some deeper philosophical meaning, but he only made it more convoluted and silly. Don’t even get me started with all of the religious iconography that is featured throughout the film. But my including so many unnecessary layers of “complexity,” to the story, the characters feel like they only serve functions in a plot, rather than having individual personalities.

But aside from the weird sexless society thing, I do enjoy the overly long krypton segment.The Kryptonian government arguing over whether or not climate change is destroying the planet as the planet is literally imploding? Yeah, that sounds about right. Good parallel to real life right there.

I mean, after seeing people freak out after handling real world crises, I can say with complete confidence that Pa Kent was right and that the world is definitely not ready to learn about alien life. But none of that matters because even though the world made first contact in Man of Steel, people were apparently already accustomed to God's meta humans, enchantresses, crocodile people, and other humans with superpowers anyway.

So the whole first contact aspect in Man of Steel feels incredibly insignificant now. But I guess that was inevitable since the movie was never meant to kick off a shared cinematic universe. The film has a few Easter eggs that hint towards a larger universe, yes, but the movie stands completely on its own.There's a reason why it's the only film in the DCEU to be produced by Christopher Nolan; Man of Steel is its own movie. It's just so happened to haphazardly kickstart the DCEU.

I mean, the film did come out one year after Marvel's The Avengers, so Warner Brothers and DC were probably desperate to catch up. Which is why they followed up Man of Steel with Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice instead of Man of Steel 2.

The DC slate immediately following Man of Steel would be like if Marvel rushed out Civil War, Guardians of the Galaxy and Age of Ultron immediately after the success of the first Iron Man. It's ridiculous, because the movies started  focusing on the spectacle of the characters being together instead of on the characters themselves.

And since people took issue with Superman's characterization in Man of Steel, it's a shame that we never got a Man of Steel 2 to further develop his character. Instead, Supe just mopes around during BvS, and then everyone loves him immediately after his death for some reason.

We don't get to learn about how Clark feels being Superman, and that really sucks, especially since he was forced to kill one of his own - effectively making him the last of his species.That would have a profound impact on any normal person; but it never even gets mentioned again in this universe! It’s bizarre!  And the climax itself is weird too! 

Now, I don't mind seeing Superman kill someone - I believe there's plenty of room for collateral damage in the superhero business - but the execution of the scene is just so weird. Superman and Zod demolish an entire fucking city, and Zod's ultimatum comes at the expense of one family of four. Zod is threatening them with his heat vision, but Superman has him in a chokehold. So the family could very easily just walk out of the building and into safety.

Now, I get that the scene is supposed to be metaphorical; Zod doesn't plan on stopping until either he or Superman is dead , but the scene itself, visually feels pretty anticlimactic. And that’s really saying something, since Zack Snyder is supposed to be this great visionary director.

My point of all of this is: Man of Steel has all of the pieces of a great superhero film, but some of that greatness gets lost in the execution. The spectacle is grand, the action is epic, and the music - oh, the music by Hans Zimmer is fucking fantastic!

But the characterizations are a little thin, the product placement is annoying, and the structure of the film is a little choppy, and I think all of these issues could have been resolved if Zack Snyder wasn't the director. Nolan produced the film, and David S. Goyer wrote it, so literally anyone else could have directed it.

Now, I like Zack Snyder, I really do, but all of his blockbusters have had mixed critical responses. So I'm not sure why Warner Brothers thought that he was the guy they NEEDED to completely spearhead their entire cinematic universe. I mean, I wasn’t all that surprised when nearly every DCEU film was met with mixed-to-negative responses, which led Warner Brothers to immediately course correct, and inevitably just rebooting the damn thing. 

And I really like Man of Steel as an origin story. It definitely does feel different than most other superhero origin films. Plus, this origin story really helped me relate to one of the most iconic superheroes of all time; I was able to connect to Superman in a way that I never thought I would before. But while I do respect Zack Snyder's decision to turn the film into a gritty first contact story, I think what he got wrong, more so than the bombastic and exhaustive action, is the tone.

Instead of being the next Dark Knight, Man of Steel should have been the next Captain America.

Superman isn't Batman. He's earnest, modest, pure, and has a big heart. And when Marvel released The Winter Soldier just one year after Man of Steel, they proved that they could put an old-fashioned character like Captain America in a modern setting. They told a story that challenged Cap’s beliefs, but in a way that showed that he still retained his moral fiber. Yes, the film is grounded and gritty and action-oriented and badass and spectacularly awesome, but none of that detracts from the fact that Cap’s character is at the front and center of that story. 

Why couldn't the same thing be done with Superman? Audiences around the world love Cap. And The Winter Soldier is widely regarded as one of the best films within the MCU. 

So I really hope that James Gunn’s Superman will capture the heart, hopefulness, and optimism of the character, especially since it’ll be busy trying to set up an entirely new cinematic universe.

But regardless of how that film will turn out to be, I’ll still enjoy Man of Steel for being the weird little movie that it is. No, it doesn’t fit in with the cinematic universe that it helped to kickstart in the first place, but I think it definitely works as a solid standalone movie. And when I think of it as an individual feature that stands on its own two feet, I can’t deny that I do happen to love it. 

So, despite all of the issues that I may have with the film, Man of Steel would - surprisingly enough - still get a recommendation from me.