The Bus

A character brought in half a century later.

bluetoast

In this situation that's kind of like saying Wolverine doesn't put on his leather outfit until an hour into X-Men. He's still using his powers and stuff (albeit to a lesser degree), but not in the suit necessarily.

Giantrobo

Kinda like Smallville?

JumpCutz

For those concerned with such things...currently 59% at RT.

bluetoast

Never really watched Smallville. Didn't he gain his powers at a glacial pace though? He wasn't fully powered up wandering the Earth, at least not as of 2004 when I last watched.

Mr. Salty

So this isn't as much a review thread as it is a continuation of the discussion thread.

RoboDad

Just wait a few more hours, and you'll have plenty of reviews, along with people telling others they have no idea what they are talking about (from both 'sides').

DJariya

I don't see many reviews here from posters. But I guess those who did see it, saw early screenings.

You're either going to see Man of Steel or not. If it doesn't interest you, honestly I don't need to keep hearing how much you hate CGI or how much you hate Zack Snyder and think he's a hack director. I also don't need links from bad reviews trying to discourage me from seeing it. I'm in my 30's and I don't consider myself as having the eye or taste of some 50-ish movie critic from the NY Times or whatever. I have never once read a newspaper review and said, nope I'm not seeing it.

I know it's another damn origin story and I know people groan that Superman is being rebooted for the 2nd time.

I get it though. You need a balance of good and bad reviews to keep commentary interesting. But, it seems like most of the commentary here is trying to discourage people from seeing it. I'd rather see more commentary from people here who have actually seen the fucking movie (good or bad) and then we can agree or disagree on plot elements etc. and then we can have some more interesting discussion.

Kal-El

Well, Returns wasn’t exactly a reboot. Just a pseudo-sequel to the Donner Cut of II so this is really the first time the franchise has been rebooted in the movies.

As for it being another origin story, I don’t see why people have a problem with that. Yes, people know the origin, but no one in the last 35 years has seen it in theaters. It’s not like Superman: The Movie got a wide theatrical re-release in that time like the Star Wars movies.

I just started the review thread early because I figured with several advanced screenings this week all over the country—and with it being released overseas already yesterday—that we’d have more member reviews by now. I guess I was wrong

Tom Creo

Wow. They showed "too much" from the 18 trailers and 42 commercial spots? Whaddaya know.

Speaking of which, the clip of Clark reaching for the sun so reminded me of Frank Miller's TDKR where Superman is recovering from the nuclear detonation. Awesome.

The Valeyard

I'd love to watch Popeye beat the shit out of Bluto in slo-mo.

Dr. DVD

Couldn't hold on to the fresh rating. Oh well, who needs kryptonite when you have movie critics?

Guess we can scratch this off the "movie of the summer" list. Remember, the "widely panned" Superman Returns wound up with a fresh rating when all was said and done. I wonder if this means we'll get a shot of Cavill in the outfit at the end of the next "Ted" movie?

RocShemp

I just came back from seeing this and it was great. The tone was perfect and it had the right balance of heart, fun, and danger.

For those concerned with the carnage, yes, there is a lot of civilian casualties but Superman is never callous about it. In fact, a major turn in the story hinges on the gravity of loss of civilian life and the dire consequences of actions that must be taken. As a fan of the John Byrne era, I felt that particular moment was handled beautifully.

I didn't get to see this in 3D but don't feel it really needs it. I am curious to see it in 3D but I think it would simply be disorienting given the hyper velocity of the action set pieces. I guess I'll find out the next time I go see it.

Oh and I loved the two Lexcorp logos and the Wayne Industries logo. That said, the latter is a reference to the Nolanverse. They used the Wayne Industries logo seen in Batman Begins on Wayne Tower.

Dragon Tattoo

Still doesn't mean it's a reference to the Nolan movies. Just means they didn't create a new WI logo for a Batman movie that isn't even in production yet. They'll probably just keep the logo the same for the next series.

RocShemp

I dunno since the WI logo was changed in The Dark Knight. I took it as a wink to the fans of the Nolan flick.

DonnachaOne

Man of Steel has problems with its sense of flow; stuff will matter deeply in one scene and feel unnecessary the next, and the film asks us to jump into liking people we don't know very quickly. But it's big and spectacular and grand and beautiful - everything crap like Transformers or Star Trek Into Darkness would try to do and fail. If Batman Begins was an entertaining, if sometimes-boring look at a man trying to become an inspiration by becoming more than a man, Man Of Steel is nothing short of a God trying to become an inspiration by becoming more *of* a man. Its setpieces hearken back to some of the more brilliant parts of Thor's smalltown battles (themselves owing a lot to Superman II) and the alien invasion in The Avengers, and what it lacks in humor it makes up for with, as Joss Whedon might put it, big damn heroism.

Pros: Henry Cavill embodies the role. It's a different Superman from Reeve - this guy is a little less sure of his place in the world (who would be, knowing it's not even yours?) and far less comfortable as a hero. Still, Cavill is an admirable and charming presence, and it's fun to see him get a little cocky as he gains more control of his powers. The cast is aces all round, really, and the film is beautiful, looking far different from the Marvel high-key technicolor sheen and Nolan's Michael mann-incluenced Batman universe. Someone watched a lot of Malick (and, as can be assumed by a beautifully-rendered animated exposition sequence, Georges Méliès), and then took time to plan out fight scenes where you could see everything, which is nice. Throw in some Duplass zooms for good measure and you have a Superman flick that doesn't look like other superhero movies you've seen.

Cons: It wouldn't be a summer tentpole without a needlessly complicated story, would it? Michael Shannon's General Zod is basically a Nazi from space, looking for a "codex" of predetermined genetic materials that force Kryptonian children into a caste system - like the sorting hat, but with more light-up floaty bits - which the film will find need to remind you of incessantly (I'd say you could make a drinking game of the amount of times they say "codex" in this film, but I don't recommend drinking that heavily while Shannon yells at you). Normally I find it hard to suspend disbelief when it comes to woefully inefficient plans, but this film won me over, since the details of the plot are mere frills to the simple core story: Zod wants to remake Earth as a new Krypton and will happily wipe out every human to do it.

Still not as good as The Incredibles, but I am one happy Superfan. Go, see it on the biggest screen you can, and enjoy Superman fighting for truth, justice, all that stuff.

Mr. Cinema

Just got back from the Walmart special screening. Our feature began with 3D trailers of Pacific Rim, Gravity, The Hobbit 2, and for some reason, Pacific Rim again. Then for some dumbass reason, we get this 5 minute making-of feature on Man of Steel right before....Man of Steel. It mixed in a bunch of clips and small interviews with Snyder, etc.

I enjoyed the movie. I'd call it good, not great. For a movie that ran roughly 135 minutes minus credits, I thought the pacing was terrific. I was locked in the entire time. Well, except when our entire row was checking their fucking phones and talking the whole damn time. Other than that, I was fully engaged with what was going on.

The Jor-El scenes were great. I really liked how they handled his scenes, post-Krypton. Shannon was solid as General Zod, and Faora was a major badass. Another thing I really enjoyed was the young Clark scenes and how they were revealed in the film. Zimmer's score was fantastic and definitely fits the mood of the film.

Cavill gave a strong showing as Supes and I am looking forward to him growing in the role. I do think they'll lighten him up some in the sequel now that they've established everything. The effects were very nicely done and the flying scenes were amazing, particularly when he first takes to the air. I think that was my favorite scenes from the entire movie.

I saw it in 3D and it didn't really improve anything. With the fast cuts of some of the scenes, it definitely made it harder to follow some of the action. I would recommend seeing this in 2D and sit back as far as possible. Also, the characters were definitely not fleshed out much at all. You got the sense they were cramming in as much as possible in that first 70 minutes and then get to the good stuff.

I actually don't understand some of the reviews saying there was too much action. I thought there was a nice balance of story setup and action set pieces.

The movie isn't perfect, but I knew that going in considering who directed it. But Snyder did as well as anyone could have expected him to. I think it's a solid stepping stone towards a new trilogy of films. It's far more entertaining than Tony Stark Iron Man 3.

Maxflier

Every bit as awesome as I hoped it'd be. The action scenes were pretty damn intense.
Hopefully Snyder will start getting some respect around here now.

Oh, and damn Faora was hot!

Patman

So, given the complaints that "Superman Returns" didn't have a single punch thrown by Superman. Weil, they dispensed with that nitpick in a grand fashion, and often.

Lots of action in the film, but it was getting anime-ridiculous the longer the action scenes ran on.

The film has a lot of flashbacks, so the pacing sputters more in the first act, but towards the end, I found myself not liking the conflict resolution, and found the plotting/storyline to be both rushed and underdeveloped. After discussing the film with a friend afterwards, there were better ways to get to resolve the ending, as it is, it just felt like lazy writing to me. Plus, the characterizations are so reliant on people's walking-around knowledge of them, it's kind of a shame, actually, so don't expect much in characterizations of anyone but Clark/Kal, and even then you don't get much more than the mysterious good samaritan angle and high school punching bag scenes for his characterizations.

The product placement got a little much at times.

And for me, I didn't really think Superman had a genuine Superman moment in the film, just the knicks of a thousand knife wounds to encapsulate his struggle with General Zod and his forces.

I give it 2.75 stars, or a grade of B-. (Mostly A- for action, C- for story).

Ringo20000

It's interesting you would call the action scenes intense. I guess there was a lot of fast action, but never was there any sense that Superman was in danger. There were never any stakes. Characters are thrown through buildings, punched, hit, shot, but never injured.

Even at the end

RocShemp

I've been saying that since day one.

If there is an extended cut, hopefully she'll get more screen time.

Speaking of screen time, I was surprised they bothered giving Emil Hamilton any given that

And on the subject of character's from the comics, I guess Jenny really wasn't an Olsen. I don't recall anyone saying her last name, she's billed simply as Jenny in the end credits, and I didn't see her as being a photographer for the Daily Planet. Honestly, I have no idea what her job at the Planet was, other than

Did you take a pee break when the

Shilex

I've always loved the original Superman movies, and even respected Superman Returns for what Bryan Singer was trying to do. The action was never as important to me as the story and characters. Of course I do want to see him challenge his powers to his fullest extent, but the action in Man of Steel began to have an artificial feel to it after the billionth building crash. Maybe I'll feel differently after a second viewing and after having more of a chance to breath and decipher all of the action going on. My discussions with people who have also seen it has ranged from "loving it" to " hating it" to "it was ok". Regardless of how I feel about the movie, I hope it does well enough to warrant more sequels more often.

bluetoast

I believe she was an intern. That bald guy was trying to ask Lois to the game, then she said "try the interns" then he turned to Jenny.

RocShemp

Thanks. I forgot about that bit.

Mike86

Man of Steel was damn great if you ask me. This movie is a refreshing take on the Superman story while at the same time keeping enough of the tradition of the character that he's not recognizable. I really liked Cavill as Superman and Russell Crowe was awesome as Jor El too. Really the entire main cast were all great. As far as the movie being slow I guess I can agree in a way but the way the story is done makes sense. Gives the audience an idea of where Clark is at in his life and what he's been through so far, slowly introducing us until we finally see him as Superman. I didn't have a problem with the way it was done I guess and really the entire second half was pretty action packed so I think it's a bit odd to say it doesn't have enough action. I've also really grown to like Hans Zimmer's scores for both The Dark Knight Trilogy and now this. I'm trying to think of a negative thing to say about the movie but really can't think of much. Some people might be upset that Clark is a bit wreckless at times in the battle sequences and

Warner Bros. really needs to do whatever they can in my opinion to keep Nolan and Goyer around. At the least as consultants on their future films because they clearly know what they are doing and have given us great adaptations of two timeless characters. I'd love to see what they can do with the rest of the DC Universe.