Man of Steel - Review

14^th June, 2013, on a lazy Friday morning at 8:16am:

Lalit: I will start off with the positives first. What really stood out for me in terms of the development of the character and the story is the direction they decided to take with Superman. Superman was not just an alien. Superman, in definition, was the critique of Kryptonians as well as humans. Let me explain. The Kryptons, in an attempt to get a stronghold in the universe, populated itself artificially. The fate of a baby being born on Krypton was already decided before it was even born. Jor-El wanted to lead a revolution where Kryptons could choose what they wanted to be. His vision was just liberation. Which is why he secretly decided to go back to the roots and have a naturally born child. A child who could represent hope and faith in his vision. Unfortunately, Krypton was a dying planet. Add General Zod to the whole equation and you've already got a huge mess to deal with. He saw his vision die and decided to switch to plan B and beamed his son to Earth, where he hoped his hope and vision will still live. On Earth, Kal-El was adopted by the Kent family and after finding out what he really is, they decided to raise him like a normal child, the explanation of which was beautifully depicted in the film.

Now, back to my point. Superman is a critique to the Kryptonians as well as the humans. The Kryptonian part is explained in my above analogy of him being more than just a pre-decided robot in the army of the Kryptons. As a human he learnt that they would only accept him if he was human. The moment he displayed his god like prowess, they would be scared of him and probably "try" to hunt him down. Which is what happened as he grew up in his town. When Clark finally learnt what he was, he understood that he could be a living god, something that the humans would idealise towards. But the humans already had their gods, and we all know how hard it is for us to leave our religion behind and accept a new one. Which is why he decided to wait. Until Zod showed up. Zod's motives were not just to cause destruction where he went. You could argue that Zod was also correct with his mission, since he was a born military soldier and saw it fit to fight for his people. We would do that too. And the reason Superman stopped him was because Superman was no longer a Krypton but a human as well. He accepted Earth as his new home. Even though it was difficult for him to see his own people die.

This is what I loved. Superman had to face so many decisions. Even as a teen. He couldn't save his human father because he chose to accept that the world is not yet ready for him. He had to decide who he really was. Was he a Krypton? Was he a human? This has never been shown in any of the previous movies with the ramifications as it was shown in this movie. This is what Superman is about. He's not just an indestructible man of steel, he has a conscience. A man of his power will have to face a lot of moral dilemmas. Which none of the previous Supermen faced. They were just fighting machines. Man of Steel has finally bestowed some sense and reasoning behind the iconic character of Superman. Right down to the "S" symbol on his chest. Which was conveniently ignored in all previous incarnations. We now see it as a symbol, rather than a giant S which just stands for Superman.

That brings me to the next important bit - the name. As has been evident with the Dark Knight trilogy, the name is such a vital development point. Kal-El has to earn the title of Superman, which he rightfully does, and when you hear the name for the first time, you understand the value and weight behind it. In Man of Steel, we were waiting for people to start calling him Superman, and when it happened, it happened so suddenly that it did take you by surprise. It worked for this movie. Batman isn't called Batman because he dresses up as a Bat. It's what he stands for. It's what he wants his rivals to fear. The Marvel superhero movies can never seem to get that right. Hawk Eye is called Hawk Eye because, well, no one knows. There is absolutely no weight behind that name. All we know is he is called Hawk Eye because he shoots arrows. Black Widow. Again, a name with no weight. But those are smaller characters. Take Iron Man. Iron Man was a good movie. But even they could not add weight behind the name Iron Man. It's as if they've been given names just for the sake of being given names. Call them by their actual names and nothing would matter. But Superman and Batman had to earn their names. This is a small detail, but in my opinion, a very important one. Therefore, Superman is a critique to the Kryptonians as well as humans. And that's all I have to say about the screen play. I obviously went on length about the screenplay because the story was penned by none other than Nolan and David Goyer. They wrote the underlying story and then handed over all creative control to Snyder.

So lets move on to Snyder now. We all know Snyder is a very visual person. Sucker Punch proved that he is not afraid to take his visuals over the top even if it means crashing and burning on the box office. Having said that, I will say that he did a very good job of maintaining the realism with his visuals, direction and storytelling. The regular flashbacks were a good touch to retell the life of young Clark Kent. Yes, the CGI did go over-the-top in a few instances, but they can be overlooked by the rest. I have to admit, the battles between Superman and the Kryptonians was epic. Faora was downright scary. Her fighting techniques were visual to behold. And when Zod and Superman took to the skies to fight, that was epic. Zod being bashed around by Superman in mid air. That was just really really epic. Krypton looked very good. It wasn't just a land mass covered with rocks. They had their own, very organic technology that was very different, yet similar to our own. It is very difficult to find any flaws with the movie, really.

That being said, I will now talk about things that I would like to have seen differently. But this is just my opinion. Snyder wanted to show things on a grand scale. He did. But I really can't understand why he did not chose to go even "grander" by choosing the IMAX format rather than the wide-aspect. Rather, they just blew it up and post processed it with 3D. I hate 3D and I always will. I would have enjoyed the movie much more if it wasn't in 3D. Snyder's decision of choosing 3D over IMAX was like Superman eventually choosing Kryptons and deciding to stand by Zod. One more thing I didn't like about the movie. "I think he's kinda hot". WHY? Why was that in the movie? So unnecessary. There was already some comic relief in that very scene, why did they think it was necessary to end that scene with that stupid inclusion.

Lalit’s Rating: 3 – EPIC

Later that afternoon…

Varun: Good one

Tarun: Bhaari hai boss. Iske aage kuch bolna mushkil hai

Lalit: Haha. By the way, the satellite that Zod and Superman destroy towards the end of the movie had Wayne Enterprises written on it.

Varun: Wow you serious?

Lalit: Yeah, I did not notice that myself. But I read it online.

Varun: More reasons for me to dislike Superman.

Lalit: Why so? Haha, because he destroyed Wayne's property?

One day Later..

Tarun: I pretty much agree with what Lalit said. The characters of Zod and Superman were very well written. I liked the whole non linear narration of Clark's childhood. The visuals and action sequences were fantastic. The music was good but too similar to the Dark Knight Trilogy for it to stand out. This is the first Superman film I've ever seen and it completely shattered my preconception of Superman being a boring, have-it-all comic book hero. I've always been a Batman fan and so for me other comic book films will have to measure up to the Dark Knight Trilogy. And this film does that.

With the Dark Knight Trilogy and this film I think DC has made a statement, that their villains are more real than Marvel's. The Marvel villains are fun too but this new breed from DC mean business. They're menacing and far more intense than anything previously seen in films adapted from comic books. And even though Zod is an alien and could've been comic bookish in his dialogue and demeanour, you can feel his pain and his motive and the reason behind it. And Loki, who felt like a real threat from another planet in Thor and Avengers, now feels over the top and cartoonish in comparison to Zod. With Zod, DC keeps up with their tradition of great super villains and raises the bar for Marvel. Credit goes to the Goyer for those strong scenes and monologues that can very easily go wrong. And of course to Michael Shannon for bringing Zod to life.

The one thing that I found slightly off was that Superman had no issues with ramming Zod into buildings and petrol stations that ironically housed the very species he was trying to protect. This is probably where Snyder let his visuals take over the story. That and the “He’s kinda hot” sequence as Lalit mentioned. Other than that, it was a solid film that I wouldn't mind watching again and again. DC doesn't have the strength of numbers like Marvel but they now have four solid films that they can further build their franchise on.

Tarun's Rating: 3 - EPIC

Lalit: Spot on analysis. Yes, the fact that the casualty numbers during the fight sequences would be substantial was shocking. And Superman not being bothered by that seemed a little off

Varun: Yes good analysis. I liked it.

Lalit: Since Superman is relatively new with his skills, it could be that he couldn't handle two things it once, but if that was the case, there were no attempts made in the movie to show that. Which tends to show the lazy side of Snyder. Yes, Snyder does get carried away with his visuals so much so that it seems he sometimes forgets the direction the movie is headed towards.

Just another little fun fact though. Throughout the comics in which Zod is featured, the words "Kneel Before Zod" are far too common since Zod likes it when humans (and even Kryptons) think of him as a god/leader. It's probably not related and just a coincidence but when Superman kills Zod, he finally is kneeling before Zod. I hope that was intentional because if it was then it is a very nice throwback to the comics.

Tarun: Another side note: the symbol on Zod's chest looks like a sickle. I'm sure this is from the comics which were developed around the cold war era.

Lalit: Oh, nice find about Zod's symbol.

Three days later and after a second viewing, Varun is ready with his review.

Varun: My brothers, I watched the movie second time yesterday (Don’t ask me how and why, just to write the review) Ohh sorry, you guys did like the movie. I thought it was a very standard predictable movie with no thrills or cinematic moments even though I was watching a superman movie for the first time. Over the top visuals are a given in a Zack Snyder movie, however i feel he did restrain a bit. The fight sequences were ridiculously funny or I’m getting carried away thinking about the scene where Superman attacks Zod for the first time going over the grass and punching him continuously saying "Don’t hit/touch my mother" other than that the fight sequences were quite average. 

Casting was big, what I liked the most was casting of Amy Adams for the role of Lois Lane, I thought that was unconventional and good. Talking about casting, please do not forget the role of Diane Lane, well you might forget because it was quite a forgettable role. The childhood back story was shown just too many times maybe 4-5 for which the point could have summed up in 2. Screenplay wasn't tight, dialogues were weak, visuals over the top (which I have mentioned earlier).

Yes, speaking about superman, I thought the character in itself is a dazed, confused and a troubled character which makes the acting of any actor easy(Nothing against Henry Cavill, he could be a good actor), I guess to get in that suit you just have to be a looker. Zod’s performance is impressive and I agree with Tarun’s point that the pain did come across the screen of both Superman and Zod, I just hope our pain did go across to them too. I did go for this movie because of Nolan association but this movie has disappointed.

Varun’s Rating: 1 – OK

Tarun: So now Lalit and i post counter arguments?

Lalit: Wow, Varun finally delivered. And now I finally understand your grounds for criticism. Yes, we can post counter arguments if we see the need.

Tarun: Definitely see the need.

Lalit: Haha

Lalit: Varun, the points you have put across, according to me, can be divided into two - standalone filmmaking and the Superman mythology. When it comes to the Superman mythology, I think the fact that Nolan was attached to this project gave you some unexpected hopes. In the end, you have to watch this movie as a Snyder movie and not as a Nolan movie. In the end, Superman is a comic book movie. A story about a super "man" with unnatural powers. Batman was not like that. What Nolan did with Batman cannot be compared to what he could have or would have done with Superman.

Tarun: I disagree about the fight sequences. I think the Superman we see in this film is not a veteran Superman but a brash kid who is suddenly allowed to unleash the power he was asked to hold back for most of his life. He's still going through a lot of change emotionally and physically. He's still trying to understand the limit, or lack of, of his powers.

Lalit: Agreed. Superman has just discovered his true powers and with the nature of it all, it was fairly accurately depicted in this movie. Kal-El is still learning. Like Tarun said, he is very brash, since it is something new to him. On filmmaking grounds, the jittery back and forth of the timelines might not have worked for you, and I completely understand. For me, it was important since in all the source materials, Clark's childhood has been a very pivotal influence on what he believes as Superman.

Tarun: I felt the Nolan touch was there in the flashback sequences. They could've summed up the entire flashback in two sequences or shown the entire story at the beginning of the film. Instead they chose to break it into parts and show the parts that are relevant to what Clark is going through. This is similar to what Nolan did with Batman but this feels new. And that's what kept Clark's story human. If they would've shown the tornado scene in the beginning, it would have lost the weight it had.

Lalit: And if Snyder would not have shown his childhood, it would not have given Superman any grounds of morality. He would just be another Krypton. But we were shown how he lived his life as a human and how he fought his urges of displaying his powers. And Superman has to be dazed and confused. Anyone who slowly discovers that their past was very unnatural will be confused in what to believe. In a way, we went into the flashbacks when Clark did. We were in his shoes. Whenever he was thinking back, so did we.

Tarun: Exactly

Lalit: Ooooh, Varun's typing  

Tarun: Hahahahaha

Varun: Yes, I agree Nolan’s participation increased my hopes and could be a sole reason for me to see the movie. However, the movie as a whole did not work for me. I thought it was predictable, draggy. And, if this is the best superman movie made till now, I do think Superman’s story does not have a lot of material.

Lalit: And I agree, I have never thought of Superman as an amazing character. For me, it has always been and always will be Batman.

Tarun: Neither did I. But this film showed the potential in the character.

Lalit: But given that, Snyder still made an interesting movie out of that character, which is why I liked this movie more than I expected to like it.

Varun: And Snyder still has to come up with a complete movie. Though I havent watched The Watchmen till now.

Lalit: Watchmen, to me, is Snyder's Pulp Fiction

Varun: Heavy words

Tarun: I agree with Varun. Snyder hasn't delivered a complete film. Although he might have come close with man of steel.

Lalit: Coming back to Man of Steel, I think our views are quite clear. It's not a movie for everyone, but Snyder surely did deliver the Superman movie we all deserved. Was is the best superhero movie? Not even close. Was it the best Superman movie? Difficult to say from our review since we haven't seen them all. But I think after you guys see the previous Superman movies, you will agree that Man of Steel is the best Superman movie ever made.

My question is - do you think this movie will create interest in non-Superman fans to develop interest in the character? 

Varun: I definitely don't think so

Tarun: The answer is 50-50. Varun and I haven't seen the other Superman films and one of us didn't like it and the other did. So I think it can go either way. People have hated the film and people have loved the film.

Lalit: Yes, the votes have been very divided. Critics have mostly hated the film. I have read a few critics reviews and almost all of them wanted Superman to be more charming and romantic. I don't understand why that is of paramount importance. And let me add that Superman was not charming and romantic in the comics, but he was in the previous movies. The critics didn't want that image of Superman to change. Sometimes I don't understand critics.

Tarun: Maybe that is one of the problems of rebooting a series too soon?

Lalit: It could be.

FilmyFoodies Aggregate: 2 – GOOD

Man of Steel - Your Rating

  Man of Steel
  reviewed by Filmy Foodies on June 2013
  Rating: 4