In 2008, Warner Bros. and DC Comics were in danger of losing Superman's rights to the heirs of his creators unless a new film in production by 2011. Rather than a sequel to the mediocre "Superman Returns", they decided to restart the franchise altogether. Once David Goyer and Christopher Nolan, the men behind the Dark Knight trilogy that revitalized my own interest in Batman with "Batman Begins", joined the project in 2010, I knew Superman was in good hands; Zack Snyder of "300" and "Watchmen" fame signing on as director only made it better. While the rights issue was taken care of, there was still much more on the line with the new theatrical Superman adaptation, not only for the character himself, but with any future DC superhero's film future aside from Batman. Now that the movie's out, has it lived up to what it was set out to do? As a starting point to a new universe, I believe it has.
This is the Superman movie I have been waiting for, and it did not disappoint. In fact, it left me wanting more. I will admit that it takes a little bit to get into, but it all pulls together as it goes on, especially when he acquires the suit. I have seen comments from people questioning why we need a new Superman movie or why they have to tell the origin even though it's so well known. To answer the first question, people tend to forget that he was the first superhero. THE superhero. Without him, people wouldn't be watching Batman, Spider-Man, or any of the Avengers on the big screen. He deserves such treatment as the rest of them. As for the origin, I saw similar complaints when "The Amazing Spider-Man" reboot came out last year. Here's how I feel about retelling origins: if the film makers feel there is something new to tell, then I am all for it. Considering how "Man of Steel" is the first theatrical depiction of Superman's origin since the original 1978 Christopher Reeve film. I'll admit, the opening Krypton scenes were very reminiscent of the original. Given that was over 30 years ago, it was time to restart for a new generation, especially in a time where, realistically, such an individual would be viewed with fear and mistrust, which is indeed what the film set out to do.
Some people have complained that the film is "too dark." Well to that I say, that's how the world is. The movie is supposed to show that even in a dark world, someone will rise up and give us hope. As Jor-El put it "[he] will give the people of Earth an ideal to strive toward...they will stumble, they will fall, but in time, they will join [him] in the sun." Like the title of this post reads, this is not your daddy's Superman. This is Superman in the modern world, and it's a broken one he is trying to help.
Out of the reviews I have seen, critics complain that it devolves into a "generic blockbuster." Going in to the movie with that in mind, I could see where it could be seen that way. However, it was necessary. As far as cinema and special effects have come, Superman's capabilities could now be shown to their fullest in film industry of the 21st century. Yes, this was attempted with "Superman Returns" and what did they show? Superman LIFTING a space shuttle. Superman LIFTING a car. Superman LIFTING the Daily Planet globe. Superman LIFTING a boat. Superman LIFTING an island made of Kryptonite (which makes no sense). Did I mention he lifted things? My point is, "Man of Steel" was able to showcase the Superman of modern cinema in a fight, whether it was with Faora or Zod. It reminded me of the fights in Dragon Ball Z.
And while speaking of Superman's powers, I felt the filmmakers did a good job showing him develop his powers and the ways and reason in which he uses them. Whether or not it was intended, the way he was shown to be leaping at first is a good reference to the original Superman comics of the late 1930's where he would originally leap. The morality issue worked both in the ways of holding back, such as Jonathan Kent telling Clark to stay where he was in order to protect his secret, even if it meant he had to die, and doing what was necessary, such as when he had to snap Zod's neck to save a family from being incinerated by his heat vision. I feel I knew how Clark felt in both situations.
Now onto the cast members. I felt Henry Cavill did a brilliant job as the new last son of Krypton. He played the role of a man trying to find out who is very well, but apparently that translates to some critics as not showing enough emotion; I don't know where that's coming from, but I digress. The point is, Cavill portrayed Superman as I expected the hero to be.
Amy Adams played the go-getter reporter we know as Lois Lane quite well too, especially in the aspect that she goes deep into her investigations as she is usually shown too. But what I really like about this depiction of Lois is that she isn't an idiot. As someone who spends as much time with both Clark Kent AND Superman, she should know they are one and the same.
When they announced Zod would be the main villain of the film, I groaned because I hoped for a villain not yet used in film, like Brainiac. But in the first film of a new series, it worked out quite nicely. I liked Michael Shannon in the role. Zod showed how determined he was in his conquest to save his people and later on revenge. I liked her performance overall, but felt he overacted whe he kept yelling "I WILL FIND HIM!", referring to Kal-El.
While Cavill was the star, I believe Russell Crowe stole the show as Jor-El, a role I believed would only encompass a few scenes in the film. As much as Superman is supposed to be the symbol of hope, it was his father that helped him become that symbol.
With the movie out now, I wonder what will come next. Critics have been mixed but the box office is looking promising. Unlike "Green Lantern", this DC film looks like it will be a success and have sequel potential. If we also compare "Man of Steel" to the Transformers movies in terms of critics and box office, it is most likely we will see Cavill suit up again in the future. And in said sequel, I do have some questions. What will the relationship between Clark and Lois be in this new series and how will it develop? Will anyone else at the Planet recognize Clark as Superman even with the glasses? (Should be worth mentioning that I had a feeling he would join the Planet at the end of the film). Will this help springboard more DC films within the same universe and eventually lead to a Justice League movie? Like I said, alot was riding on this movie.
If there was one thing that was left to desire, it was set-up for the next film. I mean, in "Batman Begins" we had the Joker card. Something referencing Brainiac or Darkseid (for a Justice League movie) would have been nice. There were a bunch of LexCorp signs around Metropolis, but it's not like Lex is anything new. I can see why they would avoid it though, given that they do not want to get fans' hopes up in case nothing new comes to fruition (I'm looking at you "Green Lantern"-post-credit-scene-with-Sinestro-putting-on-the-yellow-power-ring).
In conclusion, I feel it's up, up, and away for the new Superman and here's hoping we get to see him soar again in the future, and maybe along with some other heroes. Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge.
Score: 8/10
Good review! I loved the movie too.
ReplyDelete