A unique take on the story of Superman but is it better than the original?

Rating: 6/10 (7 January 2014)

Like many of the people who watched this movie, I grew up with the terrific and still sensational 1977/78 version of Superman and the movies that followed. The ultimate Superman, "Christopher Reeve".
The original movies to me, still present the best Superman. They also introduced the world to Superman in way which was less in your face and with a story telling that flowed well.
This version of Superman, certainly had some impressive CGI and an interesting interpretation of Krypton. All actors performed terrifically and even the tech had elements faithful to the original, which was pleasing.
However, it had a serious flaw which made me want to go and re-watch the original, to detox.
This was the jagged story telling. Jumping from past to present and everything in between. For me, it didn't work with a straight forward story like Superman. It was also trying to condense elements from the original movies into one movie(In particular Superman 1 and Superman 2).
Essentially they gave Superman the treatments given to the Transformers, the main problem with this for me was that the original had a sense of realism, with this version it kind of destroyed the organic feel which Superman carried so well.
Henry Cavill certainly had a tough role to play and managed to do it justice for me. At the end of the day, Christopher Reeve is always going to be THE superman for me(Kind of like Tom Baker is THE DOCTOR for example), however I understand for Superman to survive it has to continue in some way.
Essentially, this movie is one of the many 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' messages that often screams through my brain on remakes. Personally as a Superman fan, I would have preferred a continuation as opposed to a remake which while OK, was told in a silly way. The format of the original is something that makes it so special, jumping around and making Superman out to be a drifter for a while was kind of silly. Also Superman wouldn't have facial hair problems(if he did, nothing on Earth would be able to cut his hair, correct?).
The simple sets of the 1978 version for me, make it timeless, they work and they work even now. I watch that movie and can't believe it's the age it is. Yes the obviously 80's scenes that come into the movie later are a dead give away, but that introduction is a flawless masterpiece that did not need to be messed with.(In particular the learning tutor as the baby travels through space educating him, was missed in this remake). Superman is not John Carter or Avatar and shouldn't be made to mimic productions like those with it's use of special effects and CGI etc. It's Superman and it's terrific in it's own right. For me, they were trying to incorporate these elements into Superman and put simply, it's neither needed, nor wanted by this fan.
For all it's terrific actors, CGI extravaganza'a and an interesting idea with the terraforming machine(again though, I think the writer watched the new Total Recall movie and got the idea), this movie failed to deliver the story as well as the 1978 version. In fact it was a massive step backwards, proving once again that it's not flashy wiz bangs and all the finest actors alone that make a movie, a great movie. How I wish Hollywood would stop shooting itself in the foot and start allowing new writers into the fold. Without a decent story and a rock solid script, this is what a movie becomes. A collage of flashy wiz bang effects with story sprayed in there somewhere. It's kind of like how everyone these days is huge on sms's and Facebook etc. People are replacing listening with talking. Well here we have good story telling replaced with an extravaganza of visuals. This is sad for the great actors who probably had no control at all over the ultimate cut of finished movie.
Here's hoping if there is a sequel, it will not be as jagged as this attempt at remaking one of the greatest movies of all time.
Superman fan, Sean.