"Welcome to the Planet".

Rating: 8/10 (29 March 2016)

I'll be taking a somewhat different approach I think, than most reviewers here. When it comes to super-hero movies, I'm not dazzled all that much by the over the top action sequences and the inevitable destruction they bring to the big screen. I'm more into character development and a compelling story line, so an early scene on the planet Krypton really intrigued me. It had to do with the Kryptonian high council and the way they saw themselves versus the population as a whole. The idea was best expressed by Jor-El (Russell Crowe), who decried a society that had lost it's element of choice. The elites of Krypton made decisions for the entire planet based on their status as 'knowing' what was best for their citizens. It sounded very much to me like a recipe for Communism, whereas Jor-El voiced his defiance in terms of a child aspiring to something greater, he saw individuals having the potential to be a force for good in the world, virtually impossible in the command and control society Krypton had evolved into. I thought that concept was rather fascinating, since you don't hear that very much from our own political leaders today.
I've long ago given up on the idea that modern films will honor the continuity of characters that originated decades ago, which makes it interesting to consider the origin of the 'S' on Superman's uniform. In both the Richard Donner directed "Superman" from 1978 and this picture, the 'S' symbol originated on the planet Krypton, once again with the character Jor-El. I believe he even intimated in this story that with Earth's atmosphere, Kal-El would grow up to be a super man among men. If my recollection of reading Silver Age Superman comics is correct, the 'S' was originally an idea that Ma Kent came up with when she fashioned his first set of clothes from the wreckage salvaged from the rocket that brought him to Earth. The rationale one has to accept in these reboots is is that Earthlings would interpret 'Superman' in the same manner and spell it with just the right letter.
So is Superman someone to be trusted or feared? The film seems to suggest that people's reaction to Superman would initially be one of fear, presumably fear of the unknown. There's some merit in that, but with all of his good works on Earth, I'm not sure I agree that one had to be wary of Superman's motives when challenged by General Zod (Michael Shannon). What doesn't help though, in giving movie goers what they want, is for Superman to engage in a battle with his enemy that takes out entire city blocks. That's an area that also diverges significantly from the early canon which insisted that Superman never harm or kill a living being. I know, times and tastes change, so belaboring this point is a meaningless exercise.
I think for my last point I'd like to make an observation that definitely suggests a post 9/11 influence. Prior to that horrendous event, epic battles didn't feature the same kind of destructive scenes that are on display here (as well as other recent movies). I refer to those scenes that elicit a subliminal recognition of the horror that occurred on that day, specifically to those rolling dust clouds that unwind down streets surrounded on both sides by canyon walls of high rise buildings, trapping the destruction within their outer walls. If you think back, probably the first time you ever saw something like that was when the Twin Towers fell and the images of destruction were broadcast for the entire world to see.
So my viewing of the picture the other day was in preparation for "Dawn of Justice" which follows the events here in linear fashion. I suspect and expect that the action in that film will attempt to outdo what we've seen here in terms of size and scope. Not completely necessary for this viewer, but I'll be there.