Man of Steel, finally a Superman movie that tries something new

Rating: 7/10 (15 June 2013)

Man of Steel can be broken down to 2 well-toned segments, basically post-Superman Clark Kent and Clark Kent as Superman, pretty much like the first movie ever in that regard. After a deliciously prolonged epilogue taking place in the planet Krypton, the movie focuses on Clark Kent's difficulty in adjusting to both his unusual powers (even to his own kin) and the society, at a really young age. What we see in terms of the portrayal of young Clark's difficulties in life aren't really all that surprising or even new, such as Clark as a kid being constantly bullied but not being able to respond the bullies, Clark having problems with his powers that he cannot yet control to fullest extent, him constantly requiring to save people without being caught into doing it, and so forth. Rinse and repeat, all the stuff we've constantly seen in many, MANY mediums; other movies, animated features, comics And I think Zack Snyder knew that we would expect it, so the exposure on Clark's life as a kid is told only in brief flashbacks, when it's actually required to be told, without making it seem like they're only purpose is to spew exposition. Aside from that, the first half of the movie tells the story of a 33 year old Clark Kent, being a citizen, while trying to learn his heritage and becoming the iconic hero.
And that's where Hollywood finally, totally nailed how to do it. See, I don't like Superman I and II (and, well, goes without saying, I don't like III and IV either or Returns No Superman movie so far I've deemed "good"). Say what you say about CG becoming more and more important in modern cinema than fully-fleshed story lines and characters, but it's what Superman I did at its own time, with reducing that whole notion to a tag line, nonetheless.
"You'll believe a man can fly." The first Superman movie had the visual aspects of the movie on its top shelf, for everyone to see. Sure I mean, when you watch it now it does not look all that impressive, but you have to remember that the movie was shot when the whole "green screen" and, well, "string" technology was invented, so they made a lot of use of such to make it seem like Christopher Reeve was actually flying around in set and/or they added some stuff in post production. The classic movie did prioritize the special effects, and this became the signature of all the other movies that came after (except for IV because I don't even know what they were trying to accomplish with that). But, you know Characters were caricatures and had no depth whatsoever. Superman's Clark Kent persona was only played for goofs and comedic relief and Superman himself, apart from his flying, wasn't really done all that well either. Superman does not even punch anyone in these movies, I mean, how do you even accomplish that? Anyway, in Man of Steel, Clark Kent was done well, we have a better empathy with his morals and decisions. His human side is played a lot better, for instance we see how he acts around his mother on Earth (after saving lots of people in Metropolis and everything) and that scene was actually very cute and unexpected. The scenes where the point of the scene is not Clark Kent not resorting to his powers despite dire circumstance in order not to reveal his identity, honestly, ain't all that much, but the other scenes are not set out to make fun of the character, which adds a tremendous human quality to the character, something the previous movies could not ever accomplish. You'd think perhaps "this is because we take cinema more seriously now, as this is the modern age". Well, Superman Returns was made in 2006, it had a similar line of advertising with Man of Steel, what with the "kinda different looking suit/colors wow we're starting new and fresh", but ended up being the very same movie with the first one, with all the jokes, all the stupid cartoon-y characters, with new but unworkable ideas thrown around. With all the new advancements in cinema, Superman Returns did not even DARE to go out of boundaries, the same boundaries that a movie made in 1978 built.
Anyway, THIS movie. This movie's great. Go see it. I love how it's not weighed down by the other movie installments, it is a fairly lovely representation of the lore, and I love the score MUCH better than the classic Superman theme. It is actually fairly difficult to make a SUPERMAN movie altogether, because the character story does not offer much elements and when they do, they're blatant (character back story: HE'S AN ALIEN. powers: HE'S A GOD. weakness: THAT ONE GREEN ROCK AND NOTHING ELSE) but this movie offers good plot points that makes it feel more organic. Movie does change the Superman lore a little, but they are mostly acceptable. I like how the Kryptonian technology looks in this movie rather than their previous crystal design, which didn't make much sense to me.
None of it is to say Man of Steel offers the same depth that The Dark Knight offers, as it is more of a great popcorn movie if nothing else, and certainly not a borderline offensive one like Transformers 3. Speaking of Transformers 3, Man of Steel does share one commonality with it, the commonality being having a really long climax with very complicated scenes botched together. This decade surely isn't for people who are extremely susceptible to seizure inducing visuals. I mean, in some parts it does look like anime, but hey. I liked the climax, although long, because it went somewhere with new interesting stuff thrown here and there.
Go see it. One suggestion however, watch the movie in 2D if available, or I don't know, find a good 3D cinema.