Sorry, but aren't you going to take us on a date first Mr. Cavill?

Rating: 4/10 (14 June 2013)

It's hard to dislike "Man Of Steel" because it does so many things right; however everything about this film screams LAZY. It's sad because clearly a lot of thought went into the story and I just wish the same amount of thought had went into the overall execution of the film.
The opening 20 minutes was unexpected and refreshing. Similar to "Batman Begins", quickly we're introduced to a story we've never really seen on screen before - the struggling Krypton. We get a well-paced introduction to why Kal-El is sent to us and how important he really is. However after the opening scene the rest of the film is paced horribly. We see Clark grow up in the laziest sequence of flashbacks you could possibly imagine and we spend WAY too much time on redundant story aspects while skipping over things that should have been deemed important. Unfortunately due to the pacing with getting to know Clark, by the time we feel we're starting to understand who he is he's handed (that's right literally handed) his suit already pimped out in blue and red and literally seconds later we're flying space with the dude. Sorry, but aren't you going to take us on a date first Mr. Cavill?
As much as we do get to see Clark through the years we don't really see him grow up. We don't see him transition into Superman which is what I was most excited for. They hammered into our skulls that this was "Superman as you've never seen him before" which I interpreted as lots of Superman not in the suit; more of a Clark Kent character study but this is not the case. This film is just as generic and cliché as the filmmakers told us it wouldn't be. It's not necessarily a bad thing, since I find Superman to be the most generic/cliché superhero to exist it actually seems rather fitting; also they do deliver it to us in an interesting way, so don't read this as entirely negative.
The most distracting thing about this movie is the way it was shot. There is a lot of consistent shaky cam throughout the film to bring this sense of realism to the story. I'm not sure which filmmaker thought this hand-held/camcorder style shooting was pleasing to the eye because it's certainly not. There are, at least what appeared to be, well choreographed fight sequences but you can't see any of it. I understand a bit of shaky cam during an action scene but this film had it when people were talking, or walking and even just to look at things. The film was also shot very dark. I don't know why but I've noticed it a lot in these large production recently that they love making it just bright enough for you to kind of make out what's there. Even during the day scenes I found myself constantly taking my 3D glasses off to get a better look at the screen. On that note I beg you guys to watch it in 2D. There are quite a few films I have enjoyed in 3D and this was not one of them. If you are interested in actually seeing what's on the screen you'll have enough difficulty with the shaky cam and dim lighting; the glasses just make it even worse.
The music was the only thing holding the tone of the film together. Zimmer knows exactly when subtlety is needed and when he needs to bring it loud. Having to follow up John Williams' masterful score seemed next to impossible, yet when I was leaving the theatre it was the only thing I could hear for the next few hours. Bravo.
I've heard a lot of complaint over the action sequences so maybe my low expectations of them were the reason I enjoyed them. While I feel at least one of the major fight sequences needed to be cut from the film and the fights were essentially just Superman and the bad guys taking turns throwing each other through buildings, I would feel bad complaining that there was too much action in a superhero movie There's just something so anti-climactic about these seemingly immortal beings throwing each other around for 45 minutes.
I found it rather difficult to relate to any of the characters but there's no question that actors are what bring this film to life. I was worried about Henry Cavill originally but the guy was great. As many of his cast members have said "he IS Superman". He looks, sounds and acts the part. Michael Shannon (who I absolutely adore) is our antagonist General Zod and he delivers this intimidating military leader that you almost sympathize with. I loved that the movie wasn't just about good vs. evil, there was this grey line of right and wrong and Shannon brings that out in his performance. However all the feels go to Kevin Costner and Russell Crowe who both play wonderful fathers willing to do anything for their son. They both stole the screen every time they were on it and it a pleasant treat to see how much screen time was given to both of them. Laurence Fishburne, Amy Adams, Antje Traue and Christopher Meloni all do fine in their respective roles but I found most of them highly under-used. Perhaps in the already scheduled sequel when (spoiler alert?) Clark is working at the Daily Planet we'll get more out of them. That'd be nice.
While the film is wickedly entertaining the story is a little too cliché, the action is a little too over the top and there is WAY too much shaky cam for me to find it great. If they had cut an action sequence and replaced it with more Clark Kent transitioning into Superman this film would have been extremely enjoyable.
More reviews at themoviebloggers.com