Man of steel - The superman of the 21st century

Rating: 10/10 (16 August 2014)

I'm not a comic book aficionado. I grew up with cartoons in the 1960's and 1970's and leaned more to DC Comics than Marvel, but even I had to say that up to the BATMAN re- boot with the Nolan Trilogy, Marvel films were better action and better stories. But MAN OF STEEL comes up to bat and while it might not be a grand slam, it is certainly a home run.
Zach Snyder and Christopher Nolan have added a new layer of complexity to the Superman storyline, while still allowing for character development, action, and a storyline that stays true to the original mythology. Henry Cavill (Superman/Clark Kent), Amy Adams (Lois Lane; she had an appearance as a villain in "SMALLVILLE"), Michael Shannon (Zod), and Diane Lane (Martha Kent) all give great appearances in their roles, big or small. Russell Crowe is a fantastic and very believable Jor-El; let's hope they can re-utilise him in future DC Comics/SUPEMAN/Justice League sequels.
MOS is a unique film compared to previous Superman story lines. From the 1951 "ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN" through the cartoons of the 1960's and 1970's to the 1978 SUPERMAN film with Christopher Reeve to the recent SMALLVILLE TV series, every showing of Superman has shown Superman advancing in chronological order, usually from birth/his appearance on Earth. But MOS took a different tack which makes the film very interesting, where series of flashbacks (like dream sequences) from Clark's time on Earth are interspersed with the main storyline. So you see a very young Clark in school, an adolescent Clark saving a school bus, an early-20's Clark working at a bar, Clark on a fishing vessel, and the death of Jonathan Kent (great performance by Kevin Costner) at different times in the film, seemingly popping up at random. It accentuates the importance of these events in the younger Clark's life and tells the story of his time on Earth in a different perspective. The ordering of the appearances fills in the blanks and makes the story arc of the Last Son Of Krypton riveting and appealing to those who already know the Superman mythology (which is probably most of us). Very well done !!
As for the movie itself: Jor-El and Zod's relationship is dramatic and a new twist on Zod's megalomania; it is too bad they couldn't explore this in further detail or go back in time when they were strong allies (perhaps in a sequel?). I have always thought that a story arc focusing solely on what happened with Jor-El/Zod and the rest of Krypton before the planetary cataclysm would have made for a great storyline. The darker tone of MOS would have lent itself more to such a story (more so than the Kryptonian Council scenes at the beginning of the 1978 SUPERMAN movie). Pay attention to the difference in Clark's tone and attitude toward his parents when he is complaining to Jonathan Kent about following in his footsteps as a farmer, and later in the movie when he goes after Zod for 'threatening his mother.'
Lois Lane's relationship to Superman is introduced in a different fashion than in previous incarnations of Superman. Another positive; the writers and producers stayed true to the basic Superman story arc but knew they needed a few 'changeups' to make this different to captivate the audience, besides the darker tone. Perry White's character is much less interesting (and funny) than Jackie Cooper's portrayal in the 1978 film. But if Lawrence Fishburne is OK with it, who am I to complain ?
The ending has plenty of action, and the complaints by some that there is too much rock- 'em-sock-'em action is a bit off base. This isn't the BATMAN trilogy where you are dealing with a brilliant martial arts detective, you are talking about super-powered beings whose dense molecular structures are magnified probably 1 trillion-fold by the power of Earth's Sun. The complaint about SUPERMAN RETURNS was that the trailers had most of the action and the movie had very little follow-up. That isn't the case in MOS. Even little things are accentuated, as this film pays attention to detail: check out Clark's eyes when he helps heals Lois' injury. Nice touch !
"MAN OF STEEL" is a great film in its own right and a worthy successor to the 1978 movie which was one of the biggest box office hits of the 1970's. Some have commented that the ticket sales for MOS were disappointing, but it is possible that the SMALLVILLE TV series (ended 2011) and SUPERMAN RETURNS (2006) both dampened any pent-up demand for a successful and new version of the story. BATMAN BEGINS was 8 years after the final George Clooney semi-camp Batman movie but the Nolan Trilogy didn't kick into high gear until THE DARK KNIGHT hit in 2008. MOS did better than BATMAN BEGINS by almost 50%. When THE DARK KNIGHT followed up BATMAN BEGINS 3 years later it more than doubled the earlier film. One wonders if there was a Superman-only follow-up (instead of the rumoured Batman-Superman "Justice League" hookup) if it could springboard on the first film's success and reach the levels of the 2nd and 3rd films in the Nolan Trilogy. Looks like we'll never know, so let's hope Ben Affleck and the scriptwriters don't screw up the successor to MAN OF STEEL.