Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: June 14, 2013
7.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 3392 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
2,435
Mixed:
590
Negative:
367
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
dijavantewowJun 18, 2013
This movie had great special effects, but the plot, the characters, the acting, the rest was all just meh. I don't ever feel like I care about any of the characters. There was no amazing performance by any of the actors to blow someone awayThis movie had great special effects, but the plot, the characters, the acting, the rest was all just meh. I don't ever feel like I care about any of the characters. There was no amazing performance by any of the actors to blow someone away like Heath Ledger as The Joker. This was just a summer blockbuster to make money, not a good movie and kickoff of a franchise. Expand
8 of 24 users found this helpful816
All this user's reviews
3
StriderKiwiJun 21, 2013
Not gonna lie, this is the worst Superman movie. Even the God awful musical from the mid seventies stands tall over this diarrhea-fest. People have said that it's like Dragon Ball Z, but I think those people are like Peter Griffin in thatNot gonna lie, this is the worst Superman movie. Even the God awful musical from the mid seventies stands tall over this diarrhea-fest. People have said that it's like Dragon Ball Z, but I think those people are like Peter Griffin in that THEY'RE MORONS. The plot is soooo freaking cliche and boring, everyone but superman is poorly developed (if at all) and acting abounds. The fights are lame and somehow less interesting than those in Transformers 3. I really don't see how anyone likes this movie and there's already a sequel in the works so perhaps next time we'll get a good villain and a good actor to play him unlike this time around... Expand
4 of 12 users found this helpful48
All this user's reviews
7
Skullgirlsfan13Jun 16, 2013
Man of steel doesn't need the typical introduction that I usually give a film, because this is just a retelling of the original tale. Although the main difference is the villain; who is General Zod, and is told in a different way. I wasMan of steel doesn't need the typical introduction that I usually give a film, because this is just a retelling of the original tale. Although the main difference is the villain; who is General Zod, and is told in a different way. I was excited for this movie for a while, but when the trailers started showing up; especially the: "How does Superman shave?", I started loosing interest. Seeing in how it looked like it was more focused on visuals than stories, and I wasn't too far off. With that said, this is pretty epic. Of course the visual effects are very pretty to look at, the planet Krypton is both mystic and futuristic. However the effects for the action scenes are the major problems. For a while I enjoyed watching them, but after seeing over a half an hour of superman punching people and them punching back, it gets really old and doesn't look convincing. Mainly the chick that hangs around Zod the most does this sort of super dash, which is annoying. Speaking of Superman, the actor they got was ok. He doesn't do anything that makes him likeable; I'd better explain myself before I get hated. I know he saves people which make him instantly likeable, but he doesn't have a interesting personality. Sure he protects people, but when he's not he is just sort of this serious boring guy. The other actors however were better; in my opinion, especially the guy they got for General Zod. It's a good performance; he does take some traits from the original: Terence Stamp, the character is a bit different though, but for the better I thought. It is strange in how I think they shouldn't have changed Superman's personality and yet changing Zod's is good, but at least here it makes him into an understandable villain. He was raised to be a warrior by the Kyptonian way, and is now protecting the future of the Kryptonian race. Also it's funny that Russel Crowe is like Marlon Brando from the original, in that there big stars only in minor parts, and he does okay. He doesn't take up the scene, but he does have this wise man routine down pretty well. The other supporting cast like Lois are fine; in that she doesn't male any negative impressions, but nothing great. With all that said, I still enjoyed watching this movie. I like the action at certain parts, the drama is good and is even great at times, and the actors do an okay job overall. This is definitely worth your money. Expand
3 of 9 users found this helpful36
All this user's reviews
0
SpankyMay 5, 2015
5 Reasons Man Of steel Is The WORST Movie Ever Made:

1. Washed out blue cinematography throughout the whole movie. 2. Lousy director....the whole film shot with a jerky handheld camera to make it look exciting and full of action.
5 Reasons Man Of steel Is The WORST Movie Ever Made:

1. Washed out blue cinematography throughout the whole movie.

2. Lousy director....the whole film shot with a jerky handheld camera to make it look exciting
and full of action. Trademark of amateur directors.

3. Lousy story line constantly jumping from the past and present on Earth and on a different world.

4. Overuse of CGI. The ending kept dragging on and on as they destroyed more and more buildings. Less is more. Was actually getting antsy and bored with all the destruction.

5. The ending. When in the world is this guy going to use his super speed to at least TRY to look like someone else. I know, I'll put on a pair of glasses and know one will ever recognize me....not even my mother.
Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
0
DannyGNov 8, 2014
The Man Of Steel Is Made of Cardboard! But At Least Henry Cavill Has Nice Muscles! What a shame such a great story turned into something so boring, tedious and annoying! Unfortunately for the Man of Steel, every story has a beginning, middleThe Man Of Steel Is Made of Cardboard! But At Least Henry Cavill Has Nice Muscles! What a shame such a great story turned into something so boring, tedious and annoying! Unfortunately for the Man of Steel, every story has a beginning, middle and end. Something the average person learns when they are in kindergarten or First Grade! All three parts of a story need to be done well or else it's no fun! A great beginning does not make-up for a mediocre middle or a disastrous ending!

The Man of Steel starts with a fantastic back story. For the very first time we really get to observe Krypton in all it's technological glory! Only to see the story slowly degenerate into camp with cardboard characters from the military that you could find in any comic books story. And, then like a car with a stuck accelerator, the story rapidly turns into another brainless war porn and 9/11-type flick (Chicago gets trashed instead of New York. When your story is so rotten you distract your audience by wrecking another major city! Wow! That was imaginative!)

Man Of Steel is also the ultimate product placement film. In fact, you could randomly choose a half-dozen movies that have been shown on the big screen this past year - and I'll bet you the Man of Steel has more product placement then all of them COMBINED! It was so obnoxious it was distracting! In the 45 years of watching movies I can only think of a handful of times that product placement has been this aggressive!! It's also symptomatic of an incredibly weak story!

The Man of Steel is so bad I was dying to walk out; but, I went to see the film with a friend so I felt obligated to stay. At least I had the sense to close my eyes and tune-out the last half hour of explosions, grunting and screaming in order to put my meditation skills to the test! I'm happy to report that even though I was totally sober I was able to completely tune-out the last 30 minutes of the Man of Steel and I could care less about what happened to any of the story's characters!
Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
6
tubguyinloveJul 30, 2013
Man of Steel attempts to tackle profound and interesting concepts in a world with a realistic, overly emotional Superman, yet in the process scorches some of the character's foundation. There are some truly touching scenes, but it all feelsMan of Steel attempts to tackle profound and interesting concepts in a world with a realistic, overly emotional Superman, yet in the process scorches some of the character's foundation. There are some truly touching scenes, but it all feels like trailer content making these feel like a sizzle reel for a possible Superman movie. These are the golden source to an otherwise disjointed construction of cinematic stupidity, but there is enough pretty visuals and those touching scenes do help carry the final product. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
clarkmdqAug 12, 2013
The movie is great, performance, acting, effects, and the way they tell the story is very refreshing, of course people old or more than 30 years old and with little space in his heads cant undestand or acept that christofer reeves was great,The movie is great, performance, acting, effects, and the way they tell the story is very refreshing, of course people old or more than 30 years old and with little space in his heads cant undestand or acept that christofer reeves was great, but.... guys is other time, is a new movie, came on the effects here is extremilly more incredible that in the all movies ever made of this iconic heroe. i hate to allways see a superman who with a little crystal can be defeated, came on... inclusive in superman returns he can carrie out of earth a planet basically made of cryptonite.... how time he was expose to that and dont die... well of course all fans of batman will be not funny to se a superman who can kick ass of batman in a wisper but is the reallity of this universe. if existed. superman will be basically indestructible... and came on batman cant live for ever. and all forget basic things like supernan is not human so pls, dont thing in him like a human, because is not. Excelent job guys i know man of steel II will be a great movie and batman will be great too in this cross over. But pls!!! dont try batman like a person capable to defeat superman because all know....is more tham imposible... and if you take lex on the bigscreen pls a lex like in smallville tv show will be great. Not an idiot like superman I, II, and others. Is a new world, we need new points of view and olders with close minds critic must be ignored. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
8
andrewgarcia732Nov 1, 2013
It's certainly not perfect, but Man Of Steel is a nonetheless an excellent reboot, to say the least. It completely changed my perspective of Superman (who I never had been a huge fan of) and adds many new additions to the Superman story. MyIt's certainly not perfect, but Man Of Steel is a nonetheless an excellent reboot, to say the least. It completely changed my perspective of Superman (who I never had been a huge fan of) and adds many new additions to the Superman story. My only complaint is that Clark and Lois's relationship was very rushed; they start kissing after meeting each other for like only three days! I liked the beginning that showed us a glimpse of Krypton and developed Superman's backstory and origins. I liked the cast, especially Faora and General Zod.

If you liked this review, read my other ones on a wide variety of movies and TV shows by clicking on my name and mark this review as helpful. Remember, every vote counts!
Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
smartyaritraSep 9, 2013
Finally after 3 months of its release, i am writing this review..MAN OF STEEL has become nothing but an underrated movie with low undeserving scores, true its not the best adaptation..but, one cannot simply deny the fact that it was the mostFinally after 3 months of its release, i am writing this review..MAN OF STEEL has become nothing but an underrated movie with low undeserving scores, true its not the best adaptation..but, one cannot simply deny the fact that it was the most successful adaptation of superman on the big screen..lots of exhilarating action..a darker tone on superman unlike the previous ones...we have to admit it..its the best we have got yet..from my side..its a green lit review for this film. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
AnnthiswaySep 12, 2013
Nice movie.. i love Superman, it's really superhero movie. Awesome, i highly recommend it to you if you're fan for example of Superman franchise. I think it's movie is really underrated.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
cag11Dec 25, 2013
I could care less about how many plot holes there are. Sure, after being written by Christopher Nolan and directed by Zach Snyder, I was expecting something truly amazing. Of coarse, I'm always wrong about these things. It was still good, butI could care less about how many plot holes there are. Sure, after being written by Christopher Nolan and directed by Zach Snyder, I was expecting something truly amazing. Of coarse, I'm always wrong about these things. It was still good, but not by the crappy acting or the plot holes, but the action. I try to avoid looking at how well the characters are developed, and more onto how the film was directed. It was directed well. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
danielscotthNov 27, 2013
I went in to this movie excited and with high expectations. These were met and then some. I personally thought the pacing of the movie was brilliant. The cinematography was beautiful and the mix of CGI, not to mention how realistic everythingI went in to this movie excited and with high expectations. These were met and then some. I personally thought the pacing of the movie was brilliant. The cinematography was beautiful and the mix of CGI, not to mention how realistic everything looked, was integrated extremely well. I thought Henry Cavill portrayed Superman flawlessly and the supporting cast were excellent.

I know the movie has been criticized for lengthy action scenes, but I thought they were appropriate for the scope of the movie Superman is extremely powerful and, unlike some weaker superheroes, deserves bigger and longer action/fight sequences. In other words, 10 minute fight scenes with loads of destruction are appropriate for this film/character. However, I can understand completely how this would turn off less hardcore fans of the superhero genre.

I also got a great Nolan vibe from the movie, reminiscent of the dark knight trilogy. I was thoroughly entertained throughout, especially to the point where I had a cheesy smile practically the entire film. Personally, I loved this movie and believe it to be the first film to accurately give Superman's character and story the justice it so rightly deserves. I cannot wait for the upcoming sequel.
Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
eagleeyevikingNov 28, 2013
It lacks character developement and has repetitive over the top action sequences. However, this reboot of Superman delivers emotionally and follows a sturdy plot for a mostly successful resurrection of a superhero.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
wmartucciDec 9, 2013
This is the quintessential Superman Movie to date. It pays its respects to the source material and delivers a superman that people have been waiting to see. Snyder delivers on the action and Cavill's both physical appearance and personalityThis is the quintessential Superman Movie to date. It pays its respects to the source material and delivers a superman that people have been waiting to see. Snyder delivers on the action and Cavill's both physical appearance and personality is the Superman I grew up with since watching the animated series through to justice league and any recent adaptations. There is no Kryptonite and Superman punches people. Thank you Mr Snyder. Cant wait for Superman Vs Batman Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
rockster03283Dec 15, 2013
Man of Steel hooked me from start to finish. The movie is longer than most, but I think the time it takes to lay out the story is time well spent. It ended up being a more satisfying experience than watching the usual action movie. I'll beMan of Steel hooked me from start to finish. The movie is longer than most, but I think the time it takes to lay out the story is time well spent. It ended up being a more satisfying experience than watching the usual action movie. I'll be watching it a second time. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
5
shpreaJun 24, 2013
There is one word that best describes this movie. Disappointing.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie. It's actually quite good. The issue is that this movie was meant to be a revival for the Superman franchise, one that excited its
There is one word that best describes this movie. Disappointing.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie. It's actually quite good. The issue is that this movie was meant to be a revival for the Superman franchise, one that excited its audience and built a lot of anticipation for a soon to follow sequel. Instead, it just acts as another normal superhero movie. That's all.

There are a few things that are outstanding in this movie. For example, the sound design is amazing. Everything from the music to the sound of buildings collapsing and lasers firing was spot on. It really helped to add more depth to the action scenes, which were numerous and awesome. This, however, is one of the issues with the movie. There are way too many actions scenes. It's odd, really. Usually one would think that the point of an action movie is to have a lot of action all the time. However, Man of Steel just takes it way too far. The basic formula of the movie is actions, flashback, action, flashback, action, flashback, so on and so forth. It got to the point where the action scenes began to bore me, which is never a good thing.

Another flaw with this movie was the acting, which was at times laughable, especially due to some rather awkward one liners, such as "evolution always wins". This is more a gripe with the movie and less an actual complaint, but it is something I noticed.

The other minor issues involve spoilers, so I won't bother.

All in all, the movie is definitely worth seeing. It is a good movie, no doubt, hence the score of a 7. It just doesn't quite live up to the quality of other movies in the same genre.
Expand
4 of 13 users found this helpful49
All this user's reviews
3
SuperNaivJun 21, 2013
I don't know what it was, but it wasn't Superman I know and love. It felt more like space alien invasion movie than Superman movie. Stupid soulless action movie without any real contents.
4 of 13 users found this helpful49
All this user's reviews
0
m-oh-mentsJun 16, 2013
This is the worst movie I have seen in years. It is over the top noise and blowing up stuff. It was grey and noisy at best and the dialog was almost pathetic. It was chopped up, badly edited, horribly written. I can not understand all theThis is the worst movie I have seen in years. It is over the top noise and blowing up stuff. It was grey and noisy at best and the dialog was almost pathetic. It was chopped up, badly edited, horribly written. I can not understand all the good reviews written for this film. It has been years since I walked out on a movie, but I walked out on this one. I could not stand the over the top battle scenes one second longer. Way too dragged out. Horrible movie! Absolutely horrible. Expand
10 of 33 users found this helpful1023
All this user's reviews
3
Dicky654Jun 15, 2013
Very disappointed! Having been a fan since the first movie in 1978, enjoyed the 2nd movie immensely and even Superman Returns which I watched again last night before seeing Man of Steel.
The hype said realism (which I know with the universe
Very disappointed! Having been a fan since the first movie in 1978, enjoyed the 2nd movie immensely and even Superman Returns which I watched again last night before seeing Man of Steel.
The hype said realism (which I know with the universe is a stretch) but the other movies felt more realistic and this was a jumble of noise and CGI like Transformers, however even those movies felt more coherent than this mess.
There were some sparks of interesting layout to the movie like Clark growing up and Lois showing integrity by not exposing him to the world, but really this is not in the same league as other superhero movies over the past few years.
I would have preferred a sequel to Superman Returns than this...
Expand
12 of 40 users found this helpful1228
All this user's reviews
7
Voice0fReasonJun 15, 2013
This movie was quite enjoyable. I think that indeed it was the best superman movie to be created and didn't have very many plot holes in it as some previous superman movies had. It was very different from the same old telling of superman:This movie was quite enjoyable. I think that indeed it was the best superman movie to be created and didn't have very many plot holes in it as some previous superman movies had. It was very different from the same old telling of superman: Start with him being shot off of Krypton, have him grow up, learning his abilities one by one, then killing Lex Luther in the end. No, it was very different from that (not going to spoil). I enjoy at the beginning how Krypton was a war torn world instead of a heaven like planet. I thoroughly enjoyed the beginning and the end of the movie. The middle was alright so that is why I give this movie a 7/10, Expand
3 of 10 users found this helpful37
All this user's reviews
4
njlakeJun 17, 2013
When the teaser trailer hit, i was interested. When the full trailer hit, i was really excited. Then i saw the movie, which I was looking forward to as being one of the best of the summer. What a disappointment. The action is boring andWhen the teaser trailer hit, i was interested. When the full trailer hit, i was really excited. Then i saw the movie, which I was looking forward to as being one of the best of the summer. What a disappointment. The action is boring and overly-long. The plot is only there when it needs to be. The acting is sub-par at points. The writers took the plot from The Matrix, added in some Avengers action scenes and called it a day. This movie is mediocre at best. Expand
11 of 37 users found this helpful1126
All this user's reviews
0
malociteJun 15, 2013
I LOVE Superman.... I grew up loving Superman. Perhaps its that fact that made watching this film so difficult. It is a 2 and a half hour disaster. There is so little dialogue that the film is basically overblown fight scenes followed byI LOVE Superman.... I grew up loving Superman. Perhaps its that fact that made watching this film so difficult. It is a 2 and a half hour disaster. There is so little dialogue that the film is basically overblown fight scenes followed by repeated action shots of people who seem too stupid to run away from entire buildings blowing up.

The film is so mindless that the only spoiler is to tell you that after two and a half hours you will be two and a half hours older and ten dollars poorer....

This film did accomplish one thing however... it managed to make Bryan Singer's Superman look like brilliant. Stay away...
Expand
13 of 45 users found this helpful1332
All this user's reviews
6
rmz76Jun 14, 2013
If you like action films and could care less about character development, pacing or good acting you'll love Man of Steel. If however you cringe when seeing trite motifs then you will likely come to hate Man of Steel before baby Kal-El evenIf you like action films and could care less about character development, pacing or good acting you'll love Man of Steel. If however you cringe when seeing trite motifs then you will likely come to hate Man of Steel before baby Kal-El even launches off Krypton… Knowing the power and past works of the creative minds at the top of this project I just expected a lot more than was delivered. The positive take away is that it's not a bore, the action does not stop. Just don't expect to really care much at the end. Expand
7 of 25 users found this helpful718
All this user's reviews
7
JamesCannonJun 16, 2013
I rewatched superman returns and i gave it another try..i have to admit i was tired when i first tried it..its not the terrible mess its portrayed as...
3 of 11 users found this helpful38
All this user's reviews
1
SoloedJun 19, 2013
Lifeless product. Not the loving film we deserve for time and money. Thirty years from now, no one will cite this film as an example of good film making, but Richard Donner's Superman will always be remembered.
4 of 15 users found this helpful411
All this user's reviews
1
mm378Jun 28, 2013
Disappointing. One of the most unimaginative creations to come out of Hollywood in a long time. Special effects distracted from what story there was. Minimal character development. Plenty of explosions, weapons and fistfights, though. IDisappointing. One of the most unimaginative creations to come out of Hollywood in a long time. Special effects distracted from what story there was. Minimal character development. Plenty of explosions, weapons and fistfights, though. I wondered frequently throughout if I was actually watching a "Superman" movie. Expand
4 of 15 users found this helpful411
All this user's reviews
3
GuyinasuitJun 15, 2013
I'll preface this by saying that I don't like Zack Snyder, so I think I went into this movie with an unfair bias against him. That said, this movie was terrible. The opening scene on Krypton actually looked really cool, if you could see it.I'll preface this by saying that I don't like Zack Snyder, so I think I went into this movie with an unfair bias against him. That said, this movie was terrible. The opening scene on Krypton actually looked really cool, if you could see it. The cinematography was so shaky that you couldn't actually concentrate on what was happening. I don't mind the dark tone that Snyder takes, but he just can't pull it off. The script was terrible, it became either a laugh or cringe fest whenever anyone opened their mouth. The action looked like a video game, unrealistic, much too fast, and entirely over the top. I don't even want to talk about the science...just awful. And of course, the acting. I love Amy Adams but what the heck? All she did was scream and cry and she was some of the better acting. Russel Crowe was tolerable, Kevin Costner was mediocre, Henry Cavill doesn't pull off the inner struggle that Snyder wants him to have, and everyone else is absolutely horrid. Micheal Shannon was the absolute worst part of the film, and his portrayal of General Zod was soul-less without Superman taking it from him. Do not go and see this unless you enjoy bad movies or have a unique sense of humor. I was lucky that I got my ticket for free, and I'd certainly hate to see anyone actually spend money on this. Expand
11 of 44 users found this helpful1133
All this user's reviews
0
srininet1Jun 16, 2013
Extreme disappointment to say the least. After a rocking Iron Man 3, Amazing Spiderman and Avengers, this is the exact opposite. Pathetic direction by Zack Snyder the film lacks soul and actors mouth dialogues for the sake of saying it,Extreme disappointment to say the least. After a rocking Iron Man 3, Amazing Spiderman and Avengers, this is the exact opposite. Pathetic direction by Zack Snyder the film lacks soul and actors mouth dialogues for the sake of saying it, without any emotional connect. Dialogues are ridiculous and childish, and the action/special effects is quite boring/repetitive actually. Nothing earth-breaking or new for those of us who have seen Avengers, Spiderman or Iron Man. Screenplay is very haphazard, going to and fro between flashbacks and present day without clarity. Some scenes appear out of nowhere. Most disappointing is the climax...after lots of punching and destroying buildings, Superman kills the villian by twisting his head!! Couldn't he have done it the minute he met this guy? The Superman series is clearly not in safe hands. Someone like David Fincher could breath fresh life into it. Please hire him for the next. Expand
9 of 36 users found this helpful927
All this user's reviews
1
refaelbaJun 23, 2013
I usually don't write reviews, but I had to warn you.
I'm not one of those snobs who can't enjoy a summer flick, and some of my favorite movies are not academy-award material. But this movie is the first to make me it was such a stupid waste
I usually don't write reviews, but I had to warn you.
I'm not one of those snobs who can't enjoy a summer flick, and some of my favorite movies are not academy-award material. But this movie is the first to make me it was such a stupid waste of time, that I left the cinema with my friends.

The movie just takes itself too seriously and ends up not being fun. It's like watching a kid telling you a simple story, while being all serious and so sure it's the greatest most important story in the world.

The dramatic scenes, which could have been the highlight of the movie, are cut too short for the effect to hold. It seems Snyder was worried his audience will get bored by actual story and just cut it down to a minimum in a way which, frankly, was insulting. It's like watching a movie with ADHD.

The bit of story that did make it in, is full of absolutely idiotic holes, and the characters are flat and undeveloped. I wish I could give you examples without spoiling the movie, but I can't. I can just say that I was laughing occasionally because it was so ridiculous and poorly written. So many "come on!" and "Are you serious" moments. Most characters act out of whim, are totally irrational and they all feel like they are still in junior high.

And the love story? Twilight fans should be pleased, because we finally found a movie with a worse love story. In this movie, there is simply no story. There's no love, and then there is, just like that with barely any justification.

The action sequences are terribly long and overdone, as if a little kid took control over the CGI studio and forced them to put his wildest fantasies into the movie. The action was rare and when it did arrive, it was way too much and not really fun. The visuals were very professional but lacked soul, ranging from generic computer game look to a terrible Instagram palette. Honestly, it was disappointing and not worth the price of admission.

Eventually, during the great (boring to tears) finale, me and my friends realized we're not that target audience (We are a group of 24-30 years old). But knowing myself, I wouldn't have enjoyed this whimsical movie even at age 10. It's just not fun. We left and got something to eat instead.

I realize there are a lot of fans out there, so before you send me any hate mail, just remember it's a matter of opinion. I found this movie to be a terrible experience for intelligent adults, but that's not a universal fact. It's just an opinion!
Expand
4 of 16 users found this helpful412
All this user's reviews
2
TECfilmsJun 21, 2013
Produced on a $225 million budget, the special effects are the only thing that impress. At least at the beginning. After the 597th explosion and the 245th fighting scene you just get bored of all the noise and the visual effects that try toProduced on a $225 million budget, the special effects are the only thing that impress. At least at the beginning. After the 597th explosion and the 245th fighting scene you just get bored of all the noise and the visual effects that try to be realistic but are just too big to look in any way compelling. Little dialogue and even less story just give the film the last "kick in the ass". I seriously tried to be impressed, to be thrilled but by any means I was bound to fail! Expand
4 of 16 users found this helpful412
All this user's reviews
6
MarkEMarkJun 15, 2013
Just going to say it was an okay movie. I had a high expectation with man of steel but this movie is good to see it once, and i say that because story line was confusing, boring and the actors were bad. especially The actress who play luisJust going to say it was an okay movie. I had a high expectation with man of steel but this movie is good to see it once, and i say that because story line was confusing, boring and the actors were bad. especially The actress who play luis clark amy Adams) i almost slept the whole movie. But the positive part about the movie is the action. The fighting part got me awake and got me interested. it was good. other than that my last sentence to say is that man of steel movie was okay.. I would only see the movie once, to only see superman but to be honest NO DC comic Super hero Movie can top the batman movie the Dark knight. Thats why i gave it a 6 Expand
4 of 16 users found this helpful412
All this user's reviews
1
papanezJun 17, 2013
As a long time Superman fan I had great hopes and expectations for this film. I was very disappointed with this film. Superman: The Man of Steel is NOT a good Superman film; it's not even a good movie. I could go on and write a short storyAs a long time Superman fan I had great hopes and expectations for this film. I was very disappointed with this film. Superman: The Man of Steel is NOT a good Superman film; it's not even a good movie. I could go on and write a short story length review of this film and list what's wrong with it but instead I'll just get to the main points. First, Zack Snyder was a poor choice for director (where is Richard Donner when you need him?). He is NOT the right director for the character of Superman. He was great for Watchman but Superman is not anything like WATCHMEN. Second, the score was AWFUL! There are no discernible themes for anything in this movie. Thirdly, the action scenes were WAY over the top and just ridiculous. This movie was so bad it makes Superman Returns look like a classic and Superman:The Movie look like the best movie of human history (which it almost is!). Bottom line: don't waste you time on this piece of cinematic garbage. Especially if you are a fan of Superman. You WILL be disappointed. I only hope this movie fails to meet the studio's expectations so we don't see anymore of these abominations!! Expand
4 of 16 users found this helpful412
All this user's reviews
2
ElysiahJul 11, 2013
Overall this so called "blockbuster movie" is a pretty big waste of your money. Id wait until it comes out for rental and get it then.
Wasn't impressed at all.
3 of 12 users found this helpful39
All this user's reviews
6
JacobJun 15, 2013
While Man of Steel promises to have a good story and characters instead we get a lot of action and not enough story. Had the film given us a more character driven film and focused less on the action we could have really had something greatWhile Man of Steel promises to have a good story and characters instead we get a lot of action and not enough story. Had the film given us a more character driven film and focused less on the action we could have really had something great here. As it is Man of Steel is good. It has some fun action, some epic moments, and a couple nice character moments. While it may not have wowed me as much as I thought it was it did keep me more engaged than Superman Returns. If you are a fan of action movies and just want to see Superman beat the sh*t out of guys for the majority of the movie, or at least it feels like it, I think you will enjoy Superman. If you are looking for a more character driven superhero movie then go watch X-Men,Spider-Man 2,The Dark Knight Trilogy, and Superman I & II and even to a certain extent Superman Returns, which while lacking in action does have a story. As it is though Man of Steel is entertaining with enough action, epicness, and character development to make it worth a watch for any superhero fan. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
FozzyJul 3, 2013
Man of Steel is a fairly good film. There's no saying that it's a great film, because it undeniably isn't. Some of the acting is somewhat wooden and flat, and it jumps from scene to scene, plot point to plot point, rather absent-mindedly andMan of Steel is a fairly good film. There's no saying that it's a great film, because it undeniably isn't. Some of the acting is somewhat wooden and flat, and it jumps from scene to scene, plot point to plot point, rather absent-mindedly and not in a memorable fashion. This results in the film falling down slightly from what it could have been. The fact that this film had Christopher Nolan (of The Dark Knight fame) involved meant that some people were expecting more, another Dark Knight, but that doesn't happen in this film because of the cast, both main and supporting, and the way it casually jumps between plot points without anything really holding them together, making it a rather difficult film to follow. However, on the whole this is a good film and, though it doesn't live up to expectations, it isn't exactly unwatchable and, as well as being a solid entry in the franchise, may very well be one of the best films of the lot. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
reddave2Jun 29, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man of Steel is by no means a bad film but it clearly is too loaded, especially for a film which is bound to have the benefit of one or more sequels. Imagine the batman trilogy but with all the plot points established in a week. Clark Kent (well played in all fairness by Henry Cavill) goes from saving kids on a bus as a teen, to saving workers on an oil rig to... destroying towns and cities while battling a small army of similar strengthed supermen. Entertaining, yes, but its all too much. The film suffers from some silliness in trying to get its emotional beats particularly during the final scene where Zod is about to kill four innocent people despite both he and Superman levelling much of metropolis without a care in the world during a (has to be said) visual stunning fist fight.

All that said, Man of Steel is an enjoyable re-spin of Superman and sets up the main characters well. Maybe I would have warmed more to it if the threat of Zod (Michael Shannon is quite good in the few scenes we get with him) was merely introduced, and left for the sequel. But its overlong and I cant help but feel that maybe DC or Warners wanted something to rival Avengers a bit too much. I look forward to a sequel but part of me wonders how they can up the stakes on what happens in this first movie.
Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
moonman1994Jul 15, 2013
This movie is certainly entertaining but it's actions sequences are so long that it begins to become boring. Honestly my criticism of this film can be summed up to the fact that it takes itself far to seriously.
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
JcdbengalsJun 29, 2013
Hmm. My opinion may not be the popular one, but here goes. I can't say in words how excited I was for this movie. Previews were epic, cast is amazing....this movie just didn't seem to have a soul. My girlfriend hated it, but I thought it wasHmm. My opinion may not be the popular one, but here goes. I can't say in words how excited I was for this movie. Previews were epic, cast is amazing....this movie just didn't seem to have a soul. My girlfriend hated it, but I thought it was good, just not great. I just didn't care much for many of the characters I was seeing, such as the reporters who somehow seemed to be the only people who survived the entire city being destroyed...too much action and not enough character for me. Also, this movie seemed very corny in spots. It was more Avengers popcorn fun than Batman serious fun, if that makes sense. I WANT to love this movie but I just don't. I do however think the sequel set up was great and looking forward to seeing the other half of the superman alter ego that was missing from this one and provide maybe SOME comic relief. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
0
gungadinJun 2, 2014
Movie even worse second time, you start ti wonder why do they do this? CGI nightmare, stolen scenes from other movies. Like 4th of July, Doc Oct, Loki mop scene fro. avengers, big robot looking villain walking down small town scene.

The
Movie even worse second time, you start ti wonder why do they do this? CGI nightmare, stolen scenes from other movies. Like 4th of July, Doc Oct, Loki mop scene fro. avengers, big robot looking villain walking down small town scene.

The acting was terrible, I think one of the worse lois lane characters ever, Perry White awful and bad scenes. Same story written again about supermans beginning boring.

Everyone knows who superman is the cops even went by his house. The fact that he didn't save his father was crazy period.

CGi awful, a lot of destruction, even the Characters in front if the CGI background looked more like a game then a movie. Just nit good. Not sure why it gets some good reviews at all?

The story was bad, from the beginning. Typical Hollywood goons can't make a DC franchise good. Enough of the origins of superman already.
Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
5
aaronobrienJun 22, 2013
Man of Steel is a generic summer blockbuster with Superman attached to it. It was entertaining, but I didn't take much out of it. The characters & relationships are 2 dimensional, the story is uninteresting and the villain is just plainMan of Steel is a generic summer blockbuster with Superman attached to it. It was entertaining, but I didn't take much out of it. The characters & relationships are 2 dimensional, the story is uninteresting and the villain is just plain boring. The cast don't even bring anything interesting to the table, which is a surprise since the cast includes Michael Shannon and Amy Adams. The effects are amazing looking & the action was fun, but even the action felt repetitive and tedious after a while. Man of Steel fails to distinguish itself from other blockbuster films and just ends up being a shallow & generic, but entertaining film. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
7
George-rootsJun 17, 2013
Man of Steel is something I give the benefit of the doubt, why I still prefer the likes of Christopher Reeve flying around with a toothpaste commercial smile in a story reminiscent of Kal-El's innocent upbringings in small town Kansas I wasMan of Steel is something I give the benefit of the doubt, why I still prefer the likes of Christopher Reeve flying around with a toothpaste commercial smile in a story reminiscent of Kal-El's innocent upbringings in small town Kansas I was constantly reminding myself in my seat "This is a modernization", but does it hold up to what we expect from a superman story?

Short and personal answer no. I found myself hoping it would take on the form of it's impressive teaser trailer back in 2012, majestic shots, large choir orchestra sounds and heavily inspiring words of wisdom on right and wrong.

What we got was Zack Snyder's best film to date given the talent who was involved i.e Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer respectively, Zack's Filmography is a puzzle to me, he's an extremely talented man in the visual department and I loved the look of all he's previous work regardless of story and some minor casting calls but ultimately none of them manage to carry the weight and depth when tackling something so large on scale such as Superman.

But I wont lie Man of steel looks fantastic, for it's flaws which are many, the spectacle of the movie is in it's destruction scenes be it Krypton or Earth, they outweigh all of what we've seen from Superhero Movies so far. the flying looks spectacular and as stated before Zack manages to bring scope and something much larger to screen then many could envision, even myself with my expectations was still very impressed with the routes they ultimately took and the consequences that follow.

Which brings me to the weight and depth point I mentioned earlier, half the characters are generally not that interesting, big names with small parts who should've had a lot more screen time, I really wanted to see more of Kevin Costner, Laurence Fishburne and hell you make Jimmy Olsen a female called Jenny which I'm all for but she says and does virtually nothing that emphasised her character or the story that mattered at all (I know that the last thing isn't to big a deal because Jimmy is underplayed in all the movie series but it's why I bring up the next point). I found the exposition in this film startling, it goes from one scene to another so fast any interaction from the landscape or human interaction isn't really well executed, like the characters the audience is expected to just go with it, quick explanation, next scene.

What does work is aside from effects is that Henry Cavil makes a welcome change for Superman, though the films ideal was to hit a darker tone such as the recent Batman Trilogy, Batman and Superman are both different for obvious reasons emotionally and ideology, so to see Superman (Cavil) go Batman is new for a superman story, but it just doesn't fit for my personal expectations, that said I did enjoy his performance to an extent and would definitely like to see him play the character again in more familiar superman traits.

Ultimately though Russell Crowe and Michael Shannon steal the show entirely, Crowe's Jor-El gets a lot more screen time than I thought we would see but it's a wonderful performance that comes off more real than just comic book commodity, and with that holy hell Shannon's performance as Zod is so terrifying fierce and soulless to me it rivals that of Heath Ledger.

So after covering both Performance and Visuals how was the story? well that's it there isn't one, one that's particularly memorable anyway. Superman trying to find himself, to an extent does, finds bad guys, puts them down, done the end, typical superhero flair, character motives are basic never bigger than what's explained or seen from the actual characters, so when the visuals are great, acting in some areas solid or flat and overall average story (y'know Zack's trademarks?) why does Man of Steel make the grade?

Because and ultimately it's different, plain and simple not different from the directors standpoint sure but for superman it's both familiar and unfamiliar like a reboot should be. but does that mean it's good? I kind of know the target audience who will really enjoy this movie will be the ones who don't know that much on Superman, trust me I'm no stellar fan yet I've read John Byrne & Grant Morrison serials religiously and watched all the old films regardless how bad the later ones got, am I the only one who thought "Superman Returns" felt way too "Smallville"?

Man of Steel to me got alot of things right and wrong but ultimately it's succeeds in it's mission of Modernizing Superman, I would happily watch it again no doubt and I love the set up for hopeful future instalments but as an introduction to one of America's greatest fictional characters? do yourself a favour and look for the real deal. 7.5 Thanks for Reading.
Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
jjvanderlindeJul 14, 2013
I really looked forward to the movie especially when I saw Christopher Nolan was involved. The big problem for me is the big time lapses that occur in the film. It almost felt that they had this great story to tell us but the film would haveI really looked forward to the movie especially when I saw Christopher Nolan was involved. The big problem for me is the big time lapses that occur in the film. It almost felt that they had this great story to tell us but the film would have been too long so they deleted a few scenes which left a few holes for me. I really enjoyed the filming techniques the used especially in the flight scenes. Overall it was an enjoyable film. Just expected a bit more. Enjoyed the childhood scenes and felt Kevin Costner did an outstanding job in the portrayal of Clarke's dad. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
EmuChickenSep 14, 2013
Superman for the new age, how does it rate? Honestly, quite good- but I feel that this movie shot itself in the foot.
The story is pretty much a reboot of Superman, how Krypton blew up, a baby was put on a rocket and fired away. Nothing
Superman for the new age, how does it rate? Honestly, quite good- but I feel that this movie shot itself in the foot.
The story is pretty much a reboot of Superman, how Krypton blew up, a baby was put on a rocket and fired away. Nothing new really, but I liked how it replayed "Supermans" life through arty flashbacks. Nice.
Great cast, no complaints, all good. Russell Crowe and Kevin Costner (both who played Robin Hood!) also added to well played roles.
My main complaints are them stretched out blurry action sequences that have no real reason for being there. It reminded me of the sequels to the 00's Spiderman movies where nothing much really happens. I watch movies to see good acting, not sub-par blurred CG with lots of explosions and smashing windows... These sections droll on so it gets monotonous rather than stays "fun".

All in all, its a "good" movie, but it could have been made GREAT!
A lot of movies seem to fall into the same trap, more quality control is definitely needed to cut down on these 2 hours 30 minute bore fests. Cut off 30 minutes, make a "directors cut" and leave it, PLEASE!
Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
8
SJ-ULTI-ReiewsNov 13, 2013
Man of Steel is a really good movie, it has the the best visuals ive ever seen, there where moments in the movie when my jaw dropped. Man of Steel is actually more believable than any other Superman movie ive seen. Henry Caville and Amy AdamsMan of Steel is a really good movie, it has the the best visuals ive ever seen, there where moments in the movie when my jaw dropped. Man of Steel is actually more believable than any other Superman movie ive seen. Henry Caville and Amy Adams are great as Superman and Lois Lane. This movie also has amazing music playing in the background for many of the serious or sad scenes. Man of Steel is a great movie overall, it has the best super hero fight ive ever seen and does not deserve all the negative reviews from the critics. Overall Score= 83/100 Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
9
SamuelBlakeOct 18, 2013
It seems that DC has started something brand new in Zack Snyder's: Man of Steel. The movie packs a whole array of characters, suspense and action into its story. It upgrades from Superman Returns and brings a whole new array of elements toIt seems that DC has started something brand new in Zack Snyder's: Man of Steel. The movie packs a whole array of characters, suspense and action into its story. It upgrades from Superman Returns and brings a whole new array of elements to the DC Cinematic Universe; if there will be one that is.

Man of Steel brings together a whole bunch of actors to the table and each one of them delivers exceptionally well. Henry Cavill as Superman nails the role perfectly, touching up on not only his physical side but his emotional side too. That's what I like to see, I'd love to see how emotional Superman, who is essentially a god, can touch up on his emotions if he has all this power.

Amy Adams a Lois Lane and Diane Lane and Martha Kent are the leading ladies and boy do they deliver. Adams gives Lane that rough and tough feel about her that was present in comics and DC animated movies and that's what I like about her in this film. Diane Lane's the same who plays that overbearing mother who always cares for Clark/Kal/Supes throughout the whole film. The father figures in the movie are just as good too. Russel Crowe as Jor El and Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent play a rather large role here as they both are great fatherly figures.

However, the big actor in this film has to be that of Michael Shannon as General Zod. He easily stole the show when I watched it and I easily felt creeped whenever he was on the screen. He was menacing, cruel and some could argue that he was a little bit evil. One of the best parts of the film.

However, amongst all the greatness of this movie I feel like there are some flaws that I should address. Superman is seen as the symbol of hope in the comics, animation and hell, even in the movie itself. The reason I'm saying this is because Man of Steel sometimes felt a bit too 'dark knight' for my taste. It's like Snyder and Goyer were trying to Batmanize Superman and that is a big no no. Another thing that bugged me quite a bit was that there was no break from the darkness and no humor was involved in the movie. Just a few light jokes could have easily broke up the Batman type mood that the movie was. But that's I really found wrong with it.

Man of Steel rocks! It is a great film that really dives into what makes Superman who he is, granted there are a few mistakes here and there and one big occurrence that would split the fans down the middle but overall it's amazing. It is easily a contender for my movie of the year!

Pros:
-Amazing acting
-Spectacular visuals
-Superman is reborn!

Cons:
-Too dark in most stages
-Little to no humor included
-Scene that would divide the fans

VERDICT:
9/10
Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
3
boydimagesJun 16, 2013
Something tells me that many of the high scores and posts are from some PR firm hired by Warner Bros., because this movie was a train wreck. Anybody with a modicum of taste in a well scripted, paced and directed film would agree. AttemptingSomething tells me that many of the high scores and posts are from some PR firm hired by Warner Bros., because this movie was a train wreck. Anybody with a modicum of taste in a well scripted, paced and directed film would agree. Attempting to bring a Batman-like seriousness to Man of Steel was an EPIC FAILURE! "Batman" had a well executed story! True, it's my opinion...although my teenage boys didn't even like it! That's pretty telling. It's not an awful movie, it just seems to be two distinctly different movies in one. One part, life of a young boy dealing with being different while being raised in a small town (which, was not bad story telling in this film), and the other part, this over the top Michael Bay "Transformers" battle to the death, chock full of extraneous dialogue. Cavill is a "good looking" Superman for the eye candy crowd, in fact in the movie a character of a female cop sheepishly admits to this. However, this Superman is not a lot of fun, in fact he's pretty bland. Perhaps this Clark Kent should spend some time hanging out with "Iron Man" Tony Stark for a lesson in loosening up a bit. Expand
8 of 33 users found this helpful825
All this user's reviews
4
WhiteTalpaJun 16, 2013
Boring
12 of 50 users found this helpful1238
All this user's reviews
7
G-BorkhJun 14, 2013
Boundlessly cool and entertaining, amazing visual effects, the fights are fast and explosive and the stakes feel high. Michael Shannon steals the show. He delivers a performance that gathers all the intensity he has ever played into oneBoundlessly cool and entertaining, amazing visual effects, the fights are fast and explosive and the stakes feel high. Michael Shannon steals the show. He delivers a performance that gathers all the intensity he has ever played into one character (That's super intense).

Take this how you will, but there is more destruction in this film than I have ever seen. Nothing is sacred. It's sweet.

Hans Zimmer's score: I think it's some of his best work. With it, he pays more dividends to the plot beats and the characters than the script or actors. It is delicate and sensitive but at moments notice can go from 1- 100! It raises the stakes to where they should be and makes some of the more cheesy moment so much more palatable. He has gathered a brutal drum ensemble and it shakes you to your foundations!

I will say that the film suffers from minor plot holes and some teeth grinding cheesy moments. There is a lack of comic relief, and perhaps some comic moments that seem misplaced or gauche. The pacing is strange and seems to polarise people, you either love it, or hate it. I'm not quite sure yet... but i'm leaning towards disliking it.

I still think Superman is too "good". He needs to struggle with himself more! We need more internal conflict in order to relate more and for us to want him to win that much more. BUT.
I think we finally have a superman film that is BADASS and another superhero that is accesible to this generation.
Expand
5 of 21 users found this helpful516
All this user's reviews
5
notaworryJun 17, 2013
Quick Review:

Compared to Dark Knight series, not as good. Plain and simple. Lois Lane is annoying, and if she was not in the movie, the plot would have been exactly the same. One point of the movie Lois Lane's boss is trying to save an
Quick Review:

Compared to Dark Knight series, not as good. Plain and simple.
Lois Lane is annoying, and if she was not in the movie, the plot would have been exactly the same.
One point of the movie Lois Lane's boss is trying to save an intern that the audience has no idea who she is, nor does the audience care for them, and it is just a stupid scene.

There are plenty of awesome action scenes in this movie, but if you want to see this movie because of the story, you are going to leave the theater empty handed.
Expand
4 of 17 users found this helpful413
All this user's reviews
1
luvharrypotterJul 2, 2013
I was very upset when I left this movie...expecting that this was the rehash of Superman as we know it, the writers and director decided to change the entire history of Superman to fit their overblown, overkill, over detroy whatever city theyI was very upset when I left this movie...expecting that this was the rehash of Superman as we know it, the writers and director decided to change the entire history of Superman to fit their overblown, overkill, over detroy whatever city they were in, and change all of the known facts of Superman, like Lois Lane knows that Clark Kent is Superman right away??? and Clark's father, Jonathan Kent, is killed by a tornado and NOT a heart attack??? And after he lands on earth, we go straight to 33 years later and he has a beard and works on a crab ship?? Why are all these hollywood types think that they are better than the original authors!!!! And all the KILLING!!! I almost walked out. I like Henry Cavill as superman but pleaaaaaaassssseee get someone who KNOWS superman history to write the next story and stop with all the special effects. A few are needed but not all the destruction. And where was metropolis??? Expand
3 of 13 users found this helpful310
All this user's reviews
0
AugusJul 11, 2013
this is the single worst thing I have ever seen in the theater. It's nothing but a bunch of noise and smashing around for at least half of the movie; the other half was incredibly slow; The two best acting jobs in it are Russell Crow andthis is the single worst thing I have ever seen in the theater. It's nothing but a bunch of noise and smashing around for at least half of the movie; the other half was incredibly slow; The two best acting jobs in it are Russell Crow and Kevin Costner; there's pretty munch no meaningful dialogue what-so-ever and none of the characters give you any reason to care about them. The best thing to do is wait until it comes out on video, then wait a little longer for it to air on TV, then change the channel and watch something else. Expand
3 of 13 users found this helpful310
All this user's reviews
2
marsmoleJul 21, 2013
just boring, cheesy and monotone. henry cavill is just annoying -sonny boy...no edges....certainly no super-hero! music won`t stop during the entire film, it´s totally packed and you feel nothing else than relieved when it's over! booo!
2 of 9 users found this helpful27
All this user's reviews
2
mlf5330Jun 16, 2013
I walked into this movie with high hopes provided I love a good movie. Being produced by Christopher Nolan and a huge fan of generally speaking all of his work, I really expected alot from this movie. I came in expecting a movie that reallyI walked into this movie with high hopes provided I love a good movie. Being produced by Christopher Nolan and a huge fan of generally speaking all of his work, I really expected alot from this movie. I came in expecting a movie that really dwelved deep into superman's character, but unfortunately none of my hopes manifested themselves. It ended up being a movie where the important character development was explained in its entirety in promotional trailer of the movie. Another problem I had coming into this was my expectations for a modern superhero movie with semi-interesting plot and some character development, but instead felt as though I was left with 300:Superman Edition. The first 40 minutes kept throwing new information at me that I hoped would go somewhere. Hope that it would become something more, but those hopes quickly died. after the first 40 minutes the movie turns into that epic battle scene that lasts 2 hours too long. Beyond that, the story was faced with many plot holes, a superman that fails to be connected with, an a love interest that feels forced and rather stale. If you go to a movie simply to see a plethora of CGI, by all means, this is the movie for you, but if you are looking for a movie with any level of development your money would be better spent purchasing rope and an afternoon in your garage. Expand
3 of 14 users found this helpful311
All this user's reviews
2
badpopeJun 19, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man of Tin

As you can guess from the title of my review, I did not enjoy “Man of Steel.” It had great effects and the scenes that took place on Krypton were awesome. But overall the MoS was poorly paced, poorly directed, and didn’t provide characters that I could really connect with. The action sequences also lacked a sense of peril because the combatants were invulnerable.

I’ll start off tin what I liked about MoS, Krypton. Krypton was amazing in this film. It looked and felt completely alien. There was a giant flying creature that Jor’El rode on at one point. The structures and plains in the background were uniquely designed. Krypton in this movie was a breathtaking sight to behold. The narrative on Krypton flowed better than the rest of the movie also. Major plot points are setup masterfully on Krypton but soon begin falling apart once the story moves forward to Earth.

On to Earth, and the bad aspects of the film. MoS does a poor job of telling Superman’s origin story and establishing him as a character that we can root for and care about. We get to see Clark Kent roam around aimlessly with a big depression beard, while throwing in flashbacks of his childhood. This part of the movie wasn’t horrible but the pacing was odd. He’s a man, then a boy, then back to a man, then a teen. The individual scenes were good but they were linked in an uncomfortable, schizophrenic manner. The movie begins with Clark’s birth on Krypton, so how about maintaining a linear structure throughout the rest of the movie. Clark discovers his true identity and becomes Superman in a rather matter the fact way also.

Which brings me to another and the most problematic aspect of the movie, unnecessary subplots and superfluous characters. There’s a constant cutting away from Superman to give screen time to characters and subplots that could’ve easily been cut from the movie. Uninteresting shots of military personnel meticulously setting up they’re gear and they’re guns. Scientists who reiterate plot points that General Zod just explained two scenes ago. Lois Lane’s search for Clark after seeing him use his powers really fell flat. All of these subplots detracted from Superman’s story and character development and he felt like a significantly underdeveloped character by the end of the film when we’re supposed to be really rooting for and empathizing with him.

When this movie was first announced I was really put off by the darker tone, but it turns out they stayed true to what and how Superman is supposed to be. Well…. Up until the very end. When the writers put Superman in an impossible situation and he’s forced to do a very Un-Superman like act to save lives.

The villains were not interesting at all in MoS. General Zod is no Joker, Bane, or even Loki for that matter. Zod has zero charisma and he’s completely uninteresting when he’s on screen. I didn't care about what his evil plan was, his fist fights with Superman lacked impact because they were both practically invincible, and his minions were of a dime a dozen seen’em before variety. Zod was the absolute pinnacle of mediocrity. So he fit the rest of this mess of a movie perfectly.

So…… Since Superman and Zod can’t really hurt each other, everything around them gets destroyed. They manage to almost completely level Metropolis during the last 30 minutes of this movie (in between uninteresting shots of military personnel meticulously setting up they’re gear and they’re guns.) I haven’t been this bored watching things blow up since Transformers: Dark of the Moon. I ended up just feeling sorry for all of the fictional people who were going to get stuck with rebuilding Metropolis and cleaning up this mess. During the final battle in Marvel’s Avengers there was destruction, but it was mainly cars and parts of buildings. You didn't feel like there was a catastrophic loss of life during the final showdown in the Avengers. MoS feels like a hundred 9/11s are happening all at once. It felt a little sad, because if city blocks are being completely leveled left and right, you just logically assume that thousands of innocent people are dying during this dumb slug-fest.

That’s my opinion on MoS. It feels like another failed Hollywood attempt to bring Superman to life. Made by people with no respect for the franchise or the comic book art form. Superman’s story has been told correctly in animated form and re-imagined in countless comic books for years. But the director, Zack Snider, and the writers of MoS thought they were all smarter than all of the people who have brought this character to life successfully. Sad. But this movie is still going to make a billion dollars because you people don’t care. You just want mass destruction and explosions. You don’t even care if the plot makes sense or if the characters are fully developed..
wheregeeksgotodie.wordpress
Expand
3 of 14 users found this helpful311
All this user's reviews
0
JeveuzacJul 19, 2013
es una muy mala pelicula, ni buenas actuaciones, excesivamente larga, tediosa. Las escenas de accion están muy largas y el actor no es ni la mitad del Superman que fue el anterior.
3 of 14 users found this helpful311
All this user's reviews
4
TheQuietGamerJun 14, 2013
Another super-hero reboot movie, however this one falls short. It's way too serious for its own good, trying to mimic the tone of the Christopher Nolan Batman movies to no success. It focuses too much on being melodramatic and that brings theAnother super-hero reboot movie, however this one falls short. It's way too serious for its own good, trying to mimic the tone of the Christopher Nolan Batman movies to no success. It focuses too much on being melodramatic and that brings the whole movie down. The action is interesting at times, mostly when Super Man is fighting his foes in mid-air, but ends relying on huge explosions and disasters rather than satisfying fights. It ends up being too noisy both visually and aurally. But by far the worst thing about this movie is how it doesn't feel like a super-hero movie, but rather some generic alien invasion flick. I never cared about what was going on, the characters failed to grab me in any way, and outside of the occasional cool action scene this movie ended up being a waste of time. It's all so disappointing because this was supposed to bring Super Man back with a new tone. If this is how the rest of the Super Man movies are going to turn out they need to just stop now. It even makes me worry that, if one ever gets made, the future Justice League movie will fail. Expand
7 of 33 users found this helpful726
All this user's reviews
0
DemoraseJun 17, 2013
I judge movies based on what they promise versus what they deliver. The first MoS trailer and the following trailers promised a deep story centered on Clark and his quest on finding his place in the world to ultimately become the savior ofI judge movies based on what they promise versus what they deliver. The first MoS trailer and the following trailers promised a deep story centered on Clark and his quest on finding his place in the world to ultimately become the savior of humanity, this is what they were teasing in a nutshell. But instead what we got is a glorified Transformers-like movie: no real characters, no deep story, mostly stuff exploding for half the movie. The screenplay is particularly inept, it tries to cram so many insignificant details (do we absolutely need to know what the codex thingy came from or look like for example...) at the expense of smooth transitions (scenes can literally jump from two people in a room to them standing in the desert), character development (the characters are cardboard cut outs, and no, 3 flashbacks of 5 mins are not enough to actually flesh out a character sorry), and most importantly storytelling: indeed the whole movie is constructed like one giant exposition, you spend most of the time catching up on things that already happened instead of having the story naturally unfold before you, and it's not a particularly interesting or original one at that. So in conclusion, my hat's off to the marketing team, because they did a hell of a job hyping up this movie and making it look like something worthy of interest, I just wish the actual filmmakers could have been as competent as them. Expand
5 of 24 users found this helpful519
All this user's reviews
0
BenjaminMaxJun 14, 2013
It could have built on the foundation it laid in the first hour but instead it decided it wanted to be a Roland Emmerich film and became sillier by the minute.
8 of 40 users found this helpful832
All this user's reviews
0
jsowersJun 18, 2013
I have to say, I thought this movie was awful. Superman had no character. He barely even had any lines. The story flowed without much logic and it made the movie feel like a 3 hour trailer. It felt a lot like a Michael Bay movie, exceptI have to say, I thought this movie was awful. Superman had no character. He barely even had any lines. The story flowed without much logic and it made the movie feel like a 3 hour trailer. It felt a lot like a Michael Bay movie, except everyone knows what they're getting with him. Bay makes Bad Boys and Transformers, not exactly high caliber material to begin with. Snyder plays with some pretty important works and just totally blows it. 4/10 Expand
4 of 20 users found this helpful416
All this user's reviews
3
ginam5Jun 15, 2013
Man of Steel was a total disappointment on every level. Perhaps my expectations were too high knowing it was made by the same people as 300 and Dark Knight. The preview was better than the movie.
4 of 20 users found this helpful416
All this user's reviews
0
chrisvbJun 23, 2013
Terrible. Plot holes throughout. Then scenes where they do something that makes no sense just to keep the weak plot moving. This is not a good movie. The special effects were good, but the story just ruins it. Seriously, at one pointTerrible. Plot holes throughout. Then scenes where they do something that makes no sense just to keep the weak plot moving. This is not a good movie. The special effects were good, but the story just ruins it. Seriously, at one point Superman is being beaten, with no hope to win, then he just wins. That happens like 4 times in the movie. I know it's science fiction, but give me something at least somewhat believable. Expand
3 of 15 users found this helpful312
All this user's reviews
3
CptMercJun 17, 2013
I had doubts about the movie at first. And I was right. It didn't feel like I was watching Superman, but a guy who had his powers. He was a gloomy character and seemed more like a over powered irritated babysitter than a a protector of good.I had doubts about the movie at first. And I was right. It didn't feel like I was watching Superman, but a guy who had his powers. He was a gloomy character and seemed more like a over powered irritated babysitter than a a protector of good. And through out the whole movie all kept saying to myself is why did they do that or why didn't they do this. I guess Nolan and Synder thought that by adding a ridiculous amount of special effects and destruction that it would carry a movie with a horrible story. But one plus about the movie is that the kid inside me loved it. But I have been a grown-up for a while. Expand
3 of 15 users found this helpful312
All this user's reviews
5
BHBarryJun 21, 2013
“Man of Steel” is, as everyone knows, the new Warner Bros. entry using this previously tried and true franchise about the native from the planet Krypton who finds a new home on Earth. Unfortunately, wearing a cape and an S on the front of his“Man of Steel” is, as everyone knows, the new Warner Bros. entry using this previously tried and true franchise about the native from the planet Krypton who finds a new home on Earth. Unfortunately, wearing a cape and an S on the front of his shirt is where the similarity ends. Starring Henry Cavill in the title role (an intentional Chrstopher Reeve look-alike), the film also boasts of a cast consisting of Kevin Kostner, Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishbourne and Michael Shannon. Directed by Zack Snyder and co-written by Christopher Nolan and David Geyer, the failure for the film to work must rest with one or all of the aforementioned gentlemen.. Certainly the writing is the main culprit with a plot that is too complicated and a story that lacks total credibility. As a result, the viewing experience is deeply marred by this overly long movie.. The film’s action scenes are excessive and don’t allow for the story, what there is of it, to be told. Being a fan of the old Superman comics and films, I found this movie to do a tremendous disservice to the property and the image of this almost legendary and timeless superhero. I give the film a 5 because it just doesn”t live up to the potential and hype which preceded its opening day. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
5
DarkCriticJun 22, 2013
Man of Steel is a new reboot for the next Superman series which was done by director, Zack Snyder and the production was hold by Christopher Nolan after he accomplished his Dark Knight trilogy. Before I discuss about the new reboot, thisMan of Steel is a new reboot for the next Superman series which was done by director, Zack Snyder and the production was hold by Christopher Nolan after he accomplished his Dark Knight trilogy. Before I discuss about the new reboot, this movie is very different like most other classic Superman films. Superman and Superman II are very memorable and most other three Superman movies are quite disappointing and pretty weak. I would say that the movie is very underwhelming. The new story is about Jor-El (Russell Crowe) from Krypton is sending his son Kal-El (known as Clark Kent/Superman) to the planet Earth, which he'll turn into a super strength superhero with energy source, until General Zod (Michael Shannon) will capture the son and the planet Krypton is been destroyed. After that, the son grows up as a new Superman (Henry Cavill) to fight over General Zod and his men to destruct the entire world. As a follow up like most other Superman movies, this movie is pretty weak. The situation is that the story is too complex with too many cut scenes, the acting wasn't that great, and the plot is too rushed. The characters are also forgettable and I would say that the Superman movies or the animated series from the 90's are well done with memorable characters, take time with their motivation, and acting is good. But the new characters in this reboot are too cliché with throwing too much stereotypes into a wooden dialogues. Henry Cavill portrays the new Superman is okay, but not that memorable and this protagonist is an obvious hero who is here to find some answers and act like he is brave or what? There is an obvious Lois Lane (Amy Adams), there is an obvious military soldiers, there is an obvious henchmen, and there is an obvious people from the city or in the small town of Smallville. That is except for two characters like Jor-El play by Russell Crowe and General Zod play by Michael Shannon. Russell Crowe did very well as the father of Superman with good character development and some good back story about him. Michael Shannon is having fun for playing the over the top villain and acting like Terrence Stamp's performance. But like I say the story and the characters are kind of bland and too forgettable. The movie is not that horrible or bad, it's just that the movie is too underwhelm with confusing back stories, the shaky cams are too fast, and the characters are pretty weak. At the same time, this movie is a minuscule of average superhero flicks. Thumbs Down. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
4
FamousdogJun 29, 2013
Hmm. A mixed bag, this one. The Lord of the Rings style Krypton in the Prologue came as a bit of surprise but not an unwelcome one. The film really came alive, however, once baby Kal-El made it to earth. The growing pains and adoption issuesHmm. A mixed bag, this one. The Lord of the Rings style Krypton in the Prologue came as a bit of surprise but not an unwelcome one. The film really came alive, however, once baby Kal-El made it to earth. The growing pains and adoption issues of the first act were beautifully handled and the relationship between Clark and his (human) father and mother was really very touching. But then... well. What happenedin the next two acts? I'll tell you what happened. What happened was that chauvanist arse of an executive producer, Jon Peters (ex-hairdresser to Barbara Streisand) finally got his way after trying to screw up the Superman franchise with his lame-ass, ill-conceived ideas and lack of any real love for the Superman mythology. Peters has wanted for years to re-jig Superman's suit ("too apparently) and have Kryptonians bashing the hell out of each other (and Kansas... and Metropolis...) for a whole hour or more of my (and your) paid-for cinema-going time. The second and third acts of this film are like Independence Day kicking seven bells out of Battleship while Transformers stamps on the Matrix Revolutions' head. This might be a 14 year old boy's idea of a good movie. But it ain't mine. Come back Bryan Singer, all is forgiven. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
7
theofficeJun 15, 2013
The movie suffers from its own arrogance really. It simply tries waaaay too hard to be epic in almost every scene and honestly it really takes away from the story. The plot is a sort of modern day twist on superman 2 and uses flashbacks toThe movie suffers from its own arrogance really. It simply tries waaaay too hard to be epic in almost every scene and honestly it really takes away from the story. The plot is a sort of modern day twist on superman 2 and uses flashbacks to tell superman's past/childhood. The whole scheme really doesn't work all that well. In any case the move is overly dramatic to the greatest extent. It's as if the director, writer, and producer were so caught up in their idea that the movie would be sooo epic that they looked past the fact that it really wasn't epic at all... Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
6
DodgerJun 21, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is by far the best superman movie, but to be fair that not saying much. There are moments in this movie that are very good, like the battle in Smallville. But the story line in places could of been much better like destroying the world to re-colonise it...why? If they left it as it was they would of been unstoppable as they would all be as powerful as superman... Also Zod is a trained soldier who has been bred and trained his entire life to fight and yet was beaten by somebody who has actively avoided fighting his entire life...

But anyway not a bad movie, worth a watch, but not the best superhero movie.
Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
6
Tbrown15Jun 17, 2013
Man of Steel

Director: Zack Snyder Starring: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner Runtime/Rated: 2hr. 28min/PG-13 ‘Man of Steel’ was my very first Superman movie I have ever seen. So,
Man of Steel

Director: Zack Snyder

Starring: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner

Runtime/Rated: 2hr. 28min/PG-13

‘Man of Steel’ was my very first Superman movie I have ever seen. So, how did it far with me? Did I enjoy it? Can it be better then ‘The Dark Knight’ films? Well, let’s get started!

The story starts at Superman’s home planet called Krypton, where we’re introduced to Jor-El, (played by a good Russell Crowe). Jor-El is at the council talking to the elder people and mentions that their world is in danger of being destroyed, I don’t know why this is happening, I don’t know if its because they didn’t explain it, or maybe I just didn’t hear it. I don’t know. Then General Zod comes zooming in, (played be Michael Shannon who is one of the main reasons why I some what liked this movie). Zod comes in and starts causing havoc, and saying this planet is DOOMED!! Again, I don’t know why its DOOMED?!? After this encounter with Zod, Jor-El breaks away from him and goes to his son and sends him off to Earth as Krypton is being destroyed. Then for about a good hour of the film we have half ass character development for Clark Kent. It’s told through to many tedious flashbacks and monologue talks from his father and mother (played by Diane Lane and Kevin Costner). Finally, after sitting their an hour of painful and dull acting and character development, General Zod comes back to save the day! From here, the story kicks back up again and Zod wants to transform Earth into the next Krypton.

One of the main reasons why I didn’t love this movie is the poor character development. Using Flashbacks as a tool to show development for Clark Kent didn’t work for me. When you first see Kent, he’s already a man, so the film jumped their story about 25 years later after the events on Krypton. Then the movie takes you back years later for when he’s a kid. That’s the development for Superman FLASHBACKS most of the flashbacks were all the same anyways, Clark saves the day by using his power, then has a long speech with either his father or mother. This happened four times in the movie. Another big problem I had with this film, which is a huge one, is the emotions I did not feel between the characters. The whole relationship between Kent and Lois Lane felt extremely fake, it felt like there was no connection through those two characters. Most of their interactions felt dull and stale this might have felt like this because of the very bland Henry Cavill but even with all of the other relationships between the characters, i still didn’t feel any real emotions. I would say that the only relationship that I connected with was Kevin Costner’s and Henry Cavill’s, which felt very real. The ending also was dull. When Superman takes the first punch of the movie, and I mean first REAL punch, that’s when you feel the most adrenaline pumping through your body, but that fads pretty fast, and by the end of the film you’re more excited for it to end then it to keep playing.

‘Man of Steel’ defiantly has plenty of flaws, but with saying that, I still enjoyed the movie. I loved the visuals and effects, which could very be the best effects I will see this whole year. Most of the action was nice to look at, especially when Superman is whooping everybody’s ass. Like I mentioned before, Michael Shannon had a brilliant performance and stole the show every time he was on screen. The true summary of ‘Man of Steel’ is, “it looks to par, but lacks the emotional depth that it NEEDS to make it stand out then all the other generic action summer blockbusters”. Also, I would like to mention that Zack Snyder has a great visual approach to his movies, but when it comes to story, he’s one of the worst.

To answer the question if i enjoyed my first Superman movie or not, i would say that yeah, i enjoyed a good chunk of the movie, but for the most part was extremely disappointing.

See this movie as a matinee showing.
Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
5
zombox5000Jun 17, 2013
Lengthy, slow and toiling at the beginning the movie retells the Superman origin unnecessarily. Once the lead actually becomes Superman the movie picks up some steam, but by then I had already given up hope for being engaged. Further, this isLengthy, slow and toiling at the beginning the movie retells the Superman origin unnecessarily. Once the lead actually becomes Superman the movie picks up some steam, but by then I had already given up hope for being engaged. Further, this is a bleak, dark film which does not suit Superman thematically. The character is best used when he creates hope, justice and honesty. A reflection of the best ideals on humanity. While they took a stab at this it comes off as whiny and vacillating as opposed to firm and inspiring. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
7
BlackfuryRisesJun 16, 2013
The two huge issues I had were the over-glorified destruction and death of millions, simply played for entertainment, and the poorly developed, half-baked romance between Kal-El and Lois Lane. Other than that, I really enjoyed it. It had veryThe two huge issues I had were the over-glorified destruction and death of millions, simply played for entertainment, and the poorly developed, half-baked romance between Kal-El and Lois Lane. Other than that, I really enjoyed it. It had very poor pacing as well, but a fun summer movie none-the-less. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
3
chibistevoJul 7, 2013
For a film that included non-stop building destruction and overblown fit-for-children violence, Man of Steel not only manages to be uninteresting and dull, but partly laughable in stages.

An unholy amount of back story and flashes drags
For a film that included non-stop building destruction and overblown fit-for-children violence, Man of Steel not only manages to be uninteresting and dull, but partly laughable in stages.

An unholy amount of back story and flashes drags the first half beyond reason, and the outrageous amount of fist fights between immortals and half of America's army in the second only further points the movie toward tedium. The scale and enormity of the violence is laughably trivial, that I had to wonder if I was watching the blockbuster version of Dragon Ball Z, where the violence never ends due to the borderline immortal characters.

Except, a film must end. And ignoring the awful cast and characterization When a German actress playing a side role outdoes everyone else, you have a problem the final scene of action is so hilariously trite. Despite causing Billions of dollars worth of damage and no doubt killing thousands in the process, they tag a moral scene on at the end for Superman Yes, that is your name, despite the film's idea of subtlety which is not only irrelevant, but insulting.
Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
2
IloveelijahwoodJul 11, 2013
This movie was good...about 10% of the time. The plot was confusing and jumbled, the characters were pretty dumb and most of them had 2 second screen time and had no meaning to the story of Superman at all, the acting was too overexaggeratedThis movie was good...about 10% of the time. The plot was confusing and jumbled, the characters were pretty dumb and most of them had 2 second screen time and had no meaning to the story of Superman at all, the acting was too overexaggerated and most of all, the movie was so boring that I would've enjoyed the Lone Ranger a lot more! Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
7
Cwilson336Jun 16, 2013
This movie wasn't bad, but wasn't great. It definitely doesn't rise to the level of Nolan's Batman trilogy, but it does return Superman back to the upper echelon of superhero franchises (we can officially forget Superman Returns).

With
This movie wasn't bad, but wasn't great. It definitely doesn't rise to the level of Nolan's Batman trilogy, but it does return Superman back to the upper echelon of superhero franchises (we can officially forget Superman Returns).

With that said, there were many moments that the movie got painfully slow. The dialog and plot movement lacked a spark that the Iron Man series possesses, and simultaneously lacked the "take me serious" edge that Batman Begins and The Dark Knight clearly held. It's not either of those, but it is more enjoyable (and even more plausible) than The Dark Knight Rises.

The movie rates a solid 7, however, because the action sequences and creative elements take Superman in a new direction. This is not a remake of Salkind Superman series from the 70s. It definitely transforms itself into a legitimate 21st century film approach of porting a comic book.

My hope is that with the sequel (and we know there will be one), that we avoid the Transformer-esque "destroy everything" and get back to some of the fun, humor, and ride that has always made Superman so fun. I never thought I'd say this, but I kind of missed Lex Luthor.
Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
3
megaDJun 17, 2013
Terrible movie. It's more a "War of Worlds" and "Independance Day" than a Superman movie. You see more shooting, close combat, spacebattle and explosions than actually the main character evolving in the story. The medieval appeal of theTerrible movie. It's more a "War of Worlds" and "Independance Day" than a Superman movie. You see more shooting, close combat, spacebattle and explosions than actually the main character evolving in the story. The medieval appeal of the Krypton doesn't fit at all my view of the home world of Superman. Sure, it was formed by the first movie from the late 70's but flying on dragons is something I wouldn't expect from Superman's father. It felt a bit like "Game of the thrones". Sure, the special effects are nice but the story suffers a lot. Expand
3 of 16 users found this helpful313
All this user's reviews
5
GreatMartinJun 15, 2013
“Man of Steel” could have/should have been called “Superman: Everything You Know About Him, Everything You Don’t Know About Him Along With Many Things You Didn’t Want To Or Need To Know About Him!” Should you be familiar with the comic book“Man of Steel” could have/should have been called “Superman: Everything You Know About Him, Everything You Don’t Know About Him Along With Many Things You Didn’t Want To Or Need To Know About Him!” Should you be familiar with the comic book Superman or his many TV shows and movies the only reason for seeing this movie is to feast your eyes on a new, hunky, extremely well built, dazzling actor, named Henry Cavill, who flies into stardom with this role which will lead to interesting comparisons of Cavill versus Christopher Reeve. Along those lines I can picture a panel at a future Superman convention not only discussing the Supermans but Margot Kidder versus Amy Adams as Lois Lane, and Marlon Brando versus Russell Crowe as Jor-El, Phyllis Thaxter, Eva Marie Saint versus Diane Lane as Martha Kent and who would win as the better adopted father Glenn Ford or Kevin Costner, the latter in the latest version. Perry White has gone from Jackie Cooper to Frank Langella and now Laurence Fishburne not to forget the question of how does the latest film score by Hans Zimmer stand up against John Williams scores?

The Superman movies have never been known for memorable villains, say like Batman, and Michael Shannon, also from the planet Krypton, does a good job but he is over- shadowed by the mayhem that ensues his battle against Superman. The last hour is glass shattering, cars being tossed around and crushed, buildings being destroyed, shootings, killings and all that makes a movie soar during the summer and it isn’t even summer yet!

After seeing “Iron Man 3”, “Oblivion”, “Fast and Furious 6”, “Star Trek Into Darkness” and now “Man of Steel” there isn’t much in the way of CGI effects that the remaining ‘blockbusters’ can offer so, unless you are a glutton for punishment you can avoid “After Earth”, “World War Z”, “Elysium” and “White House Down” just to name a few.

There is nothing wrong with “Man Of Steel”, except its 2 hour and 23 minutes running time, but there is nothing new in the screenplay by David S. Goyer while the direction is pedestrian. The film goes back and forth between Superman’s childhood on the planet Kyrpton, his being a child in Kansas and the present day. All the actors do good jobs and the film will definitely make Henry Cavill a star. Did I mention how well Superman’s outfit fits him? Or how hunky he looks bare chested?

Oh yes, a reason for seeing this movie may be that you don’t know what you think is an S on his costume and if Lois Lane knows who Superman is. You may or may not know the answer to the first and you may not be sure of the answer to the second but do you really want to know?
Expand
3 of 16 users found this helpful313
All this user's reviews
0
WhySoSerious54Jun 19, 2013
With one repetative fight scene after the next. Poorly utilizing Crowe and Costner and no character development of any kind for a number of key people in the movie. This gives you a joyless superman with no charisma or charm even from the manWith one repetative fight scene after the next. Poorly utilizing Crowe and Costner and no character development of any kind for a number of key people in the movie. This gives you a joyless superman with no charisma or charm even from the man of steel. I was hoping for much more than just your average popcorn action movie. I love action movies but i understand others when they said the action seemed to dull down other elements such as who the characters are, why they are important, and why they do what they do. Expand
3 of 16 users found this helpful313
All this user's reviews
1
Ecto1Jun 21, 2013
Why did they change Superman? What was wrong with him? I feel like its the same as with the Dark Knight Rises... So different from the source that it may as well be something completely different.
2 of 11 users found this helpful29
All this user's reviews
5
fahryabrusJun 18, 2013
The first 10 minutes I already had a feeling this movie is going to be bad. Zack put a lot of actions but still doesn't help. The fighting scenes many have said its mind blowing. Like anything never seen before. Those people definitely forgotThe first 10 minutes I already had a feeling this movie is going to be bad. Zack put a lot of actions but still doesn't help. The fighting scenes many have said its mind blowing. Like anything never seen before. Those people definitely forgot that Matrix Revolution did the same thing a decade ago. Expand
2 of 11 users found this helpful29
All this user's reviews
6
smaug87Jul 22, 2013
A movie filled with repetitive action which got boring very quickly. The first hour was good as we saw a gradual build in Clark's character as well as flashbacks but once the action starts it does not cease and kept me looking at my watch andA movie filled with repetitive action which got boring very quickly. The first hour was good as we saw a gradual build in Clark's character as well as flashbacks but once the action starts it does not cease and kept me looking at my watch and relieved once the film was over. Russell Crowe and Kevin Kosnier are great as well as Diane Lane but no one else really stood out to me.

Hopefully the sequel can bring someone a bit new and refreshing.
Expand
2 of 11 users found this helpful29
All this user's reviews
1
shengJul 15, 2013
LAME
i expected more. superman is supposed to be SUPER! this movie makes him look like a second rate copy cat whatever super hero he is. the scenes in the movie aren't that clean also.

the lamest movie ever
2 of 11 users found this helpful29
All this user's reviews
0
nidvarJun 27, 2013
this is not an origin story. they do the origin of krypton but everything else is a flash back. the moment where clark realises who he is is not even portrayed with any significance. this movie is one very expensively done saturday mormingthis is not an origin story. they do the origin of krypton but everything else is a flash back. the moment where clark realises who he is is not even portrayed with any significance. this movie is one very expensively done saturday morming cartoon drama. Expand
3 of 17 users found this helpful314
All this user's reviews
0
Iamhuman001Jun 27, 2013
the "S" must stand for stupidity.
They spent so much time with the cinematics that they forgot the plot.
It was weak, corny and absolutely predictable. It had the essentials in there. But they were just slapped in with no real focus. There
the "S" must stand for stupidity.
They spent so much time with the cinematics that they forgot the plot.
It was weak, corny and absolutely predictable. It had the essentials in there.
But they were just slapped in with no real focus. There was no originality, it was just a remake.
The only thing special about this movie was the special effects.
If they are going to remake these movies they have to do it differently.

Superman? or Moral:
of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.

I could tear this movie apart into tiny pieces and then tear those tiny pieces into more tiny pieces.

I wanted to leave the cinema halfway through this "blockbuster".
An absolute shocker.
Expand
3 of 17 users found this helpful314
All this user's reviews
0
movieplzJun 27, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Minor Spoilers Below

Man of Steel is the biggest disappointment of the year. What makes it such a letdown is that despite the interesting ideas it presents it fails completely with the execution. Take for example, the character development of the main character. Henry Cavill is a fine actor but you wouldn't know from this film. Clark Kent in MOS is a very poorly developed character. He has no personality and a severe lack of character development. And when I say personality, I don't mean that Clark has to be glib or witty, I mean that we as an audience don't get a sense of his point of view. We don't really see how he feels or where he stands. We don't see him develop a sense of morality or a sense of purpose. And this is largely because he spends most of his time listening to exposition of other characters of what he should be doing. We don't see him make any important decisions as a result. Instead he spends much of his life wondering from one place to another until through a very contrived circumstance; he overhears the discovery of an alien craft (Seriously?!) And when he finds the ship, he is told again through exposition of what he should be. Thus when he finally becomes a superhero (which in other origin films-ex. Batman Begins- is one of the most triumphant moments of those films) it is very flat and uneventful. The other main character Lois Lane, doesn't fair much better. Amy Adams is again a fine actress, but she is not a very interesting character because much of her presence is contrived. She often shows up in the film inorganically and is forced into situations with Clark and the other characters to keep the plot moving. As a result, she has really little chemistry with Clark because their relationship feels forced. Thus when (small spoiler) they finally kiss at the end, it comes off very flat and uneventful. The other characters are suitable but if the two major characters are bland and dull, that is a major issue.
The film also struggles to develop its themes. In the beginning of the film two major themes are introduced: hope and faith. The film suggests that Superman will be a symbol of hope and how he will be the one find a way, do the impossible, defy the constraints etc. The film also introduces this idea that Superman will have a reciprocal relationship with the people of earth: he will have faith in them in making the right choices and they will in return have faith in Superman in saving them in their time of need. Only, these themes, as interesting as they, are again developed very poorly. Superman is hardly a symbol of hope in this movie because he simply doesn't do anything really hopeful. We don't see him inspire people to be better. We don't see him try to do the impossible. In fact, in the last scene of the movie, when superman has a chance to deal with the main antagonist in way that defies expectations (hence hope), he instead opts for the lazy and predictable way. As for faith, this theme is poorly developed for the simple fact that we barely see Superman interact with the people of the world. We don't see them "stumble and fall" or "join him in the Sun" because the film simply didn't care to develop these ideas. If you notice a pattern in my criticism, its that the film likes to introduce ideas but has either no idea what to do with them or the film decides to distract you with action.
Which leads me to another major issue, the nonstop CG action in the final 40 minutes of the film. About a little more than half way through the film, the movie forgets about the character development and themes(which it handled so poorly already) and decides to show 40 mins of pummeling and tiresome action. If you are fan of Dragonball Z or the Matrix films you may be amused for a while. But there is only so many times that I can see someone be thrown through a building before it becomes tiring. And during these ridiculous action scenes, Superman forgets to do the one thing he does in every other version of Superman (comics, cartoon, Reeve's films): saving people. So many building are destroyed and so many people are injured and yet we barely see Superman even acknowledge his surroundings. Snyder was more interesting in topping the previous action scene than providing the proper balance of Superman fighting and saving.

This last point is indicative of the problem of the film: style over substance. The film gives the illusion of depth by introducing interesting ideas but does such a poor job developing these ideas. Instead the film tries to distract you with expensive CG action scenes, but even these scenes ring hollow because there is nothing beneath the action. If you are looking for film with interesting and relatable characters, quality storytelling, and good thematic development look elsewhere. If all you care about is action, you may enjoy the last half of the film.
Expand
3 of 18 users found this helpful315
All this user's reviews
4
FortysevenJun 22, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Henry Cavill is the one major thing that makes this movie worth seeing. He’s vulnerable, but when the scene warrants it, he somehow brings exactly the amount of intimidating gravitas needed. For that reason, the interrogation scene with Lois at the mid-way point of the flick is easily my favorite it’s the moment that ultimately sold me on Cavill in the role. In that scene Kal-El is respectful, but he also carries himself in such a way that it makes you believe it when it’s noted that the military could never even hope to control him. To me, he is utterly believable, and a worthy successor to Christopher Reeve.

Despite being a glorified Jedi Knight, Russell Crowe made a decent father figure for Kal-El. The amount of screen time he had after being murdered was actually rather startling. No doubt because “Russell Crowe”.

I’m not entirely familiar with Michael Shannon, but as a bad guy he did his job proper as the Shouty Evil Madman. He’s no Terence Stamp, but this a different Khan. I mean Zod.

The rest of the cast was pretty much transparent. Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne, Kevin Costner, and Diane Lane seem to exist only to fill the required spaces in the script. None of them brings anything especially memorable to the table. I don’t blame them, as actors, because that’s reflective of the movie in general aside from plot issues, this version of Superman’s world is as dry as a saltine. In contrast, Margot Kidder and Jackie Cooper had immense personality. These same characters in the Man of Steel universe are largely forgettable.

Much like Star Trek Into Darkness, Man of Steel starts out pretty good, and then around the half-way point, things just begin falling apart. Once Zod re-enters the story, the whole thing descends into an almost endless sequence of fighting, explosions, and raw carnage.

Honestly, I’m half surprised Michael Bay didn’t get an Executive Producer credit.

During the numerous battles, Superman takes absolutely no care to keep people from getting killed…until it’s time for his close up at the end, of course. We see him purposely thrust his foes violently through seemingly occupied office buildings and causing gas pumps to explode. This version of Superman, at this point in his life, simply does not give an actual ****

If this was woven into a larger narrative about the consequences of unchecked power a hard, guilt-fueled lesson for Kal-El to learn this might almost be forgivable. But it’s never addressed, and nobody even blinks.

On one hand, I thoroughly enjoyed the exploration of the vulnerable Kal-El an outsider dealing with heavy childhood issues, raised in a harsh world not his own. But on the other hand, it really needed some moments of levity to balance things out. The movie is so friggin’ deadpan. I’m not asking for comedy, just a little something to take off the edge.

Because of this, it’s not fun. Batman is the one who’s story is supposed to be grim and serious. The flick only really loosens it’s sphincter at the very end, with the female soldier noting how hot Superman was. I let loose a small smirk finally but it was too little, too late.

On a more practical level, visually, the special effects are nearly flawless (but in 2013 that’s to be expected nowadays, movies can no longer coast on amazing visuals alone). But those visuals are bogged down by that dark, depressing, gritty, undersaturated, high-contrast, usually blue-tinted tone present in so many movies of this era. The “shakycam” look got tiresome pretty quick, as well.

The style might have worked if it was just limited to the childhood flashbacks, but it’s used everywhere. At the very least, the style matches the tone of the movie. But that’s definitely not a complement.

There was a lot of potential for something seriously great here, and we may, some day, see such a movie. A sequel with a better story, starring Cavill, could easily hit it out of the park if done right… but as it is, this was an ominous start to DC’s multi-film “Get Us Some of That Sweet Marvel Movie Cash” arc.

Worse, this movie seriously damages my optimism for the inevitable Justice League movie, and as a guy who tends to enjoy DC comics characters more than Marvel, that hurts quite a bit.
Expand
2 of 12 users found this helpful210
All this user's reviews
1
omonriseJun 20, 2013
Visuals: one of the best I've seen (espec in a blockbuster)
Cast: ok, althought the actor of Superman has too big imho
Storyline: same as 99% of blockbusters, this got me really sad. Imagine if they really put a GOOD, not braindead story
Visuals: one of the best I've seen (espec in a blockbuster)
Cast: ok, althought the actor of Superman has too big imho
Storyline: same as 99% of blockbusters, this got me really sad. Imagine if they really put a GOOD, not braindead story with these visuals.. wouldn't that be magical? -3 points for griffindor for that.
i think I'll add one more thing: if you have control of the spaceship, WHY on earth don't you simply remove the athmosphere and kill all the villains?
Expand
2 of 12 users found this helpful210
All this user's reviews
4
D-macdaddyJun 24, 2013
Action sequences drag on and are extremely repetitive. I watched identical looking buildings collapse and superman vs zod and company fight in seemingly identical action sequences too many times throughout the entirety of the movie. Plot wasAction sequences drag on and are extremely repetitive. I watched identical looking buildings collapse and superman vs zod and company fight in seemingly identical action sequences too many times throughout the entirety of the movie. Plot was very cliché and acting was mediocre. If you are looking for high end cgi action sequences, that is about all you will get from watching this movie Expand
2 of 12 users found this helpful210
All this user's reviews
7
EludiumQ36Nov 10, 2013
"Man of Steel" is decent enough. Yes, there are problems in this 2-1/2hr epic but overall it gets its job done. My main problems are with the casting of all the major characters (Henry is great but he's too pretty, I wanted a grittier"Man of Steel" is decent enough. Yes, there are problems in this 2-1/2hr epic but overall it gets its job done. My main problems are with the casting of all the major characters (Henry is great but he's too pretty, I wanted a grittier Superman and Zod was not menacing enough), the wholesome childhood, the lack of emotional reaction when he finds out he's from another freakin' world, and how Lois Lane can't stay out of scenes. Then there's the very final scene where he joins the Daily Planet which makes absolutely no sense in the context of this re-telling, I mean, the dude just saved the entire planet from some very bad characters so now he takes a menial job at a newspaper. I guess they have to adhere to canon but it's just so unmotivated in 2013. Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
7
Tal_KalonJul 3, 2013
Man of Steel was okay. Not great, nor bad. I think Henry Cavill was the strongest part of the film. They really went overboard with the action, as if they were trying to make up for Superman Returns. I found it sorta exhausting after a while.Man of Steel was okay. Not great, nor bad. I think Henry Cavill was the strongest part of the film. They really went overboard with the action, as if they were trying to make up for Superman Returns. I found it sorta exhausting after a while.

I've seen a lot of different problems pointed out about the movie. I have a few but my biggest is how was General Zod, who was the foremost warrior on his planet and bred to be the best, so easily beat by Superman's father, the foremost scientist of the planet. Then he loses to the man's son, who's genes were completely random. I'm just saying General Zod really sucked at his job if you ask me.
Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
0
SuperazJun 27, 2013
First off, screw the critics, I've lost any respect I had left for them, MOS is a masterpiece, THE greatest comic book film made, this is what Superman fans have been begging for and it was delivered with perfection! Stunning visuals,First off, screw the critics, I've lost any respect I had left for them, MOS is a masterpiece, THE greatest comic book film made, this is what Superman fans have been begging for and it was delivered with perfection! Stunning visuals, gripping story and the best action fight scenes I've ever seen, it was brutal! It made the The Dark Knight trilogy look like the Brady Bunch, I also loved the Sci-Fi aspect of it as well, Krypton and the spaceships were unreal, thankyou Mr Snyder for this amazing movie and please don't listen to the critics they don't have a clue, they still want Superman in red tights saving cats out of trees! MOS smashes 1978 Superman in every area, it's how a Superman film should be, absolute carnage! I was blown away by this and if the critics think it was so poor then why did the whole cinema I went to cheered and clapped in the end? I've never seen that before with any movie! Man of Steel is the new benchmark for superhero films now, It's way better than anything marvel has brought out, if I could rate it more than 10 then I would, EPIC in everyway possible!!!! 15/10 Expand
3 of 19 users found this helpful316
All this user's reviews
4
BertrandHebertJun 16, 2013
My youngest son fell asleep before the end. After Avengers he told me it was the bes t movie ever My oldest one told me that if they were not blowing up a building every few seconds at the end he would have probably fell asleep too. WhyMy youngest son fell asleep before the end. After Avengers he told me it was the bes t movie ever My oldest one told me that if they were not blowing up a building every few seconds at the end he would have probably fell asleep too. Why not let the material speak for itself used bad guys that were never on the big screen before and DC might get a shot at this. Those movies are sci-fi stories they are human stories. Warner should be hand off and create a DC movie division and let them do what they do with their cartoon movie. Is it that hard Marvel has given them the formula and they can't get it right Expand
2 of 13 users found this helpful211
All this user's reviews
6
revealer99Jun 14, 2013
The Good: Occasional realism, and I repeat... OCCASIONAL. Cool special effects. The Bad: Bad Actors, plot scenes that should be rushed are dragged, and plot scenes that should be taken slower are rushed. Overall, I it's clear by watching theThe Good: Occasional realism, and I repeat... OCCASIONAL. Cool special effects. The Bad: Bad Actors, plot scenes that should be rushed are dragged, and plot scenes that should be taken slower are rushed. Overall, I it's clear by watching the movie what Nolan was "trying" to do, and for that I applaud him... But somewhere it all got lost. I really wanted this movie to be the best, unfortunately it is an OK movie. I think the main flaw of the movie is the bad acting, and the plot rushes... Expand
3 of 20 users found this helpful317
All this user's reviews
5
spiljJun 14, 2013
This film explored the emotional issues of Kal-El very nicely. This is a signature mark of crafting by the awesome producer, Nolan. Somehow, the interaction between the alien world and humanity is a little less entertaining. This story canThis film explored the emotional issues of Kal-El very nicely. This is a signature mark of crafting by the awesome producer, Nolan. Somehow, the interaction between the alien world and humanity is a little less entertaining. This story can be hard to adapt to more realistic terms like Batman so, do not expect that. I'm not a big fan of Snyder. His vision doesn't bringing to life the challenges that Superman faces. Expand
4 of 28 users found this helpful424
All this user's reviews
0
MovieMan12Jun 28, 2013
I was so looking forward to seeing it after all the great looking trailers, but this is a mess and the worst movie i have ever seen. Everything was a mess. Long, boring and predictable like every other stupid summer blockbuster.
3 of 21 users found this helpful318
All this user's reviews
6
a7xfanJul 7, 2013
I felt that they built this movie up too much to really enjoy thoroughly. It felt like they were trying to use the Dark Knight Trilogy's style but it didn't work for this movie. The story flashbacks were too short and happens every so often.I felt that they built this movie up too much to really enjoy thoroughly. It felt like they were trying to use the Dark Knight Trilogy's style but it didn't work for this movie. The story flashbacks were too short and happens every so often. The new superman: Henry Cavill, makes it better than Brandon Routh did that is for sure. It is too long of a film to really pay attention too, for it's quality. I will still see the sequel if they make one which they probably will. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
5
walterwJun 22, 2013
I liked Superman, Lois Lane, Perry White, Mama Kent, and a few of the supporting characters. Overall, the cast was not one of my issues with this movie. The exception being Zod, who was really one-note and shouty, despite having a prettyI liked Superman, Lois Lane, Perry White, Mama Kent, and a few of the supporting characters. Overall, the cast was not one of my issues with this movie. The exception being Zod, who was really one-note and shouty, despite having a pretty understandable motivation for doing what he was doing. He could have been an interesting character, but they didn't go that route, which is pretty disappointing. But he wasn't the sole disappointment. Another thing that didn't work for me was the prologue on Krypton. It was too long and way more science fiction-y than I was expecting, criticisms that I suppose could be extended to the entire movie. I'm fine with science fiction, but I really think they should have downplayed some of the alien-ness of Krypton. I don't think we needed Russel Crowe riding around on a dragon. It's already ludicrous enough that they're on a different planet yet are identical to us in appearance. You don't need to highlight that by showing the vastly different morphology of Krypton's wildlife. Makes suspension of disbelief a good deal harder. And to be honest, I'm not sure what level of reality they're shooting for in this movie. By making Lois aware of Superman's identity, they've basically conceded that it would be ludicrous for her to be fooled by a pair of glasses. But what about the rest of the world? We see in the last scene that he's working at the Daily Planet (It's real easy to become a reporter at a major metropolitan publication, right?). Not the sort of below-the-radar drifting that he had been doing previously. Seems like just about anyone who has seen Clark and Superman would put two and two together. And I know this is an inherited piece of ridiculousness. It's from the comic books, it's from the previous movies, and they couldn't tear everything to the ground. But the reason it wasn't an issue in previous media (I can only speak for the films as I've not read the comic books), is that they always had an air of campiness to them. Suspending your disbelief wasn't hard because it was clear that the world of Superman didn't really operate on anything resembling real world logic. That's not the case in the dour, self-serious world of Man of Steel. I feel like Superman's identity would be known in about 5 seconds flat. Okay, I'm out of good transitions, so another thing that bothered me was Pa Kent's death. I get that he didn't want his son to reveal himself by saving him, but why didn't he just let Clark get the dog in the first place? He could've done that without raising suspicions. It was just kind of a clumsy way of setting up his death. Also, though I liked Superman and Lois on their own, I thought they had very little chemistry together and their kiss was completely unearned. I'm sure there were other things that bothered me, but I'm not thinking of them right now. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
7
DusksparkJul 1, 2013
If we think of a super hero, almost ninety percent of us will think about Superman. When I think of one of the best movies this year, I personally think about "Man of Steel". But just because it's a great movie doesn't mean it's flawless.If we think of a super hero, almost ninety percent of us will think about Superman. When I think of one of the best movies this year, I personally think about "Man of Steel". But just because it's a great movie doesn't mean it's flawless. Some emotions feel forced, forgotton, or simply ignored, and from one moment to another, Clark Kent simply becomes Superman. There's no building tension to him realising, discovering and exploring his posiblities as a super hero, they just throw the costume into his hands and bam, you have Superman. This is one of the biggest downsides of the movie, but that doesn't mean it's a complete mess. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
7
Pablo22Jun 17, 2013
Well... this was... I´m kind of confused here. Going into the theater I had enourmous expectasions for this movie. I was pumped and ready to go into a new emotional take into the famous story of Superman. And what I got was more or less fortyWell... this was... I´m kind of confused here. Going into the theater I had enourmous expectasions for this movie. I was pumped and ready to go into a new emotional take into the famous story of Superman. And what I got was more or less forty five minutes of that and the other hour and a half... well let´s say it didn´t stik with my that well.
The way the trailers made me expect this movie was more of a slowly dedicated and emotionaly striking version of the man of steel (especially the third one, damn!). Still the fourth trailer was more focused in action than in story and that´s how saw this movie at the end.
The beginning of the movie which takes place in the exotic planet of Krypton, (yeah, when I say exotic I mean giant alien rhinos and really got me emotionaly atached to Jor-El (Superman´s dad). It actually pulled on my parents strings! Seeing the planet implode in such a way was breathtaking and kind of harsh!
Then came the stretch of the movie which I actually feel confused about: The becoming of Superman. From Kal-El beeing sent to earth it immediatly cuts to him all grown up and going. I felt good about this decision, it gave us the feeling of mystery! Then came the flashbacks and these were reeally good! I felt the confusion of Clark and his attachement to his earth parents, the Kents. But then when this ends, (mainly at the reveal of the Fortress of Solitude) I felt that they were going too fast and the buildup lacked something. Then immediatelly Zod shows up! And I was like "Woah! I espected this farther into the movie! I´m not ready!" And then from the first attack on Smallville everything goes crazy! At first I thought the effects where amazing! and the fast paced action was dynamic. But then the scene dragged, and dragged, and dragged. And I felt overwhelmed and kind of bored. I was praying for an break to get into the deeper aspects that the movie had shown us at the beginning! Then it stopped! I was relieved and interested about where it would go from here! And then more action... and more action. I saw that they where going in with those world tearing machines that I saw in the trailer and actually felt worried for the character of Perry running from the destruction! But those scenes dragged even more! The action was spectacular but it lacked substance! Except for one part where Superman can´t destroy the machine across the globe and Perry is trying to save the other chick. That was intense. That was... Nolan! Finally! I found you! And then... guess what!! More empty action sequences... Damn, someone went haywire with the effects. The fight between Zod and Clark began with a good setting of... well ash. It was nice to see something new. That fight I really liked but maaan, content pleease! Then the movie ends and Clark goes to work at the Daily Planet and and yeah, the second half of the movie left me so mind numb that I didnt give a about the ending. Otherwise I would be cheering for that scene.
An aspect that I want to highlight is the relationship between the Kent mom and Clark. I really felt something in that mother to son relationship.
Henry Cavil also lacked some emotion. Russel Crowe and the Kevs Costner were pretty good and inspiring in their roles.
To summarize my experience I cried more in the trailer than in the movie. That beeing said, it was not BAD! I only expected something greater.
Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
7
PStakhivJun 16, 2013
And yet again, Superman franchise is reborn! The best thing about this movie is Henry Cavill, fits his role perfectly, actually all actors did amazing job! Main plot is good, but the story progression isn't. Action part is probably the bestAnd yet again, Superman franchise is reborn! The best thing about this movie is Henry Cavill, fits his role perfectly, actually all actors did amazing job! Main plot is good, but the story progression isn't. Action part is probably the best this year so far. It's a ok start for Superman saga, even though it's not flawless! Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
7
fastwombatJun 16, 2013
Good, but not perfect. A decent Superman movie at the very least, but i've seen better superHERO movies. If I could give you one tip? Don't expect too much from Lois Lane. She's basically there to be stared at.
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
6
UnknownCriticJul 7, 2013
This was a movie I wanted to like, and the acting, story, and special effects were all good. That being said, it was missing something I assumed would be a given for a superhero film, that feel good feeling you get when the hero wins. I'mThis was a movie I wanted to like, and the acting, story, and special effects were all good. That being said, it was missing something I assumed would be a given for a superhero film, that feel good feeling you get when the hero wins. I'm not sure if it was the script, or the editing, but I found myself not caring if Superman would win (and it felt like he didn't care either). Lois was in only because she needs to be but didn't add the film. Overall I am glad I seen it, and you may love it, but it could should have been better. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews