Man of Steel

User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 3111 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Apr 11, 2016
    4
    Henry Cavill makes for a good Superman and there are some entertaining scenes but, to be honest, the movie is a bit of an unstructured mess and I didn't really have much idea what was going on most of the time. I did make it to the end but I was bored well before the final credits rolled.
  2. Apr 8, 2016
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Zack Snyder's first outing with the DC Cinematic Universe shows some promise but it also faces major stumbling blocks. This reboot tries to depict a more humanized Superman as he tries to be the ultimate bridge between Earth and Krypton. I admire the film for its ambition and there are some good elements that are unfortunately balanced out by serious problems. The film is not your typical Superman movie for better and worse. For instance the entire movie is tinted in a greyish- blue kind of color which sucks the life out of the frame. This choice is supposed to reflect the somber mood but there is barely a balance of life in the frame. Another major failing on the technicals is the excessive use of Shaky cam. There are some scenes when it is called for such as Superman flying for the first time and a few of the crashes but there are other scenes when the shaky cam is used during quiet scenes. It especially got bad during the one scene when Johnathan Kent was trying to teach Clark a life lesson and the shaky cam got in the way of me trying to connect with the scene. On that note, Kevin Kosner played the worst portrayal of Johnathan Kent to this date as he is very apathetic and even encouraged his son to let his classmates die. Lois Lane appears to only be in this film out of obligation since her contribution to the film was very limited at best. Superman himself is very emotional detached and is reckless in his actions causing so much collateral damage that it would even make Michael Bay blush. General Zod is the one character who appears to have some depth to him as he wants to save Krypton at the cost of all life on Earth. The biggest scene that caused controversy is the scene when Superman snaps Zod's neck. This act goes against everything that the character stands for. Superman is a character that represents the best of humanity and he is a character who shows mercy to his enemies as he fights for everyone. This moment could have worked if the film had better established Superman's moral code against killing but it was never built up to that point. A better example of a hero who had to make a moral compromise by going against his no-killing code was Trigun. Trigun was an aneme that heavily establishes Vash's qualm against killing and thus it had more of an impact when he finally had to take a life to save his friends. In this film's case however, the emotional impact of Superman's actions are never brought up again. Despite these glaring issues there are some good elements in this film. The opening scene on Krypton was well done as it shows the despair of the Kryptonions in their inevitable doom. The relationship with Clark and Martha Kent is also well done as she teaches Clark how to focus his powers. In short I do see how people enjoy this film but I cannot. This is a potentially profound film that doesn't live up to its potential. Expand
  3. Apr 6, 2016
    6
    At once frantically overblown and beautifully filigreed, “Man of Steel” will turn on everyone it doesn’t turn off. Summer blockbusters have a way of encouraging multiplex Manichaeism, though I propose a middle way. It won’t be easy. Even those who patiently ride out the bludgeoning excesses of the film’s final 45 minutes may wonder what happened to the movie — the one about human andAt once frantically overblown and beautifully filigreed, “Man of Steel” will turn on everyone it doesn’t turn off. Summer blockbusters have a way of encouraging multiplex Manichaeism, though I propose a middle way. It won’t be easy. Even those who patiently ride out the bludgeoning excesses of the film’s final 45 minutes may wonder what happened to the movie — the one about human and humanoid struggles — they watched for the first 100. They may also wonder why no one, anyone, smacked the director, Zack Snyder, in the head and reminded him that he was midwifing a superhero franchise, as the film’s first image, of a yelling, straining woman signals, not restaging the end of days.

    Apocalypse Now (a movie that Mr. Snyder nods at), Apocalypse Then: The 21st century has been tough for Superman, at least at the box office. After decades of saving the world on the screen and on the page, the movie character seemed stuck, particularly after the dreary 2006 reboot, “Superman Returns.” The Superman story had been told in so many ways and in so many moods in the comics — he has married and mourned, died and been reborn — but shaping these transformative cycles into a new film, much less a viable series, remained elusive. Christopher Nolan went dark and then darker with another DC Comics legend in the Dark Knight films, but this was Superman, idealism embodied. What was there left to say about the man in the primary-color suit, especially after Sept. 11?

    For starters, return to basics, and add a fighting-trim Russell Crowe, a howlingly mad Michael Shannon, that emotional guidepost Amy Adams and a superdude — the British actor Henry Cavill — so ripped that he’s nearly shredded. Much like “Batman Begins,” the first part of the Dark Knight trilogy, “Man of Steel” narrates the how and why of its character, tracing an existential arc from child to man. The difference is that while Batman has to journey into the world (with a layover in a bat cave) to acquire his particular skill set, Superman comes fully loaded. He just needs to burrow into his innermost self, hang out at the Fortress of Solitude and meet the right woman.

    He does all that in “Man of Steel,” which was written by David S. Goyer from a story that he created with Mr. Nolan that extracts the canonical account from 75 years of seemingly infinitely layered supermythology. To that end, the film begins at the beginning, back on Krypton where Jor-El (Mr. Crowe) attempts to persuade its council, wearing dour expressions and ornate headdresses evocative of Gothic tracery, that their planet is doomed. It’s a measure of the film’s striking design here that the headdress latticework is echoed in some of the pleated clothing, as well as in the curvilinear buildings, suggesting that someone behind the scenes (the production designer is Alex McDowell) is an admirer of the architect Zaha Hadid and her flowing organic forms.

    These graceful contours are further picked up in spaceships that float like jellyfish and in suits of armor that evoke crustaceans, adding to this alien world’s striking conceptual unity. Lovely and imperious, the headdresses are also emblems of the countervailing forces that have led to the ruin of Krypton, a civilization undone by its own advances. The resemblances to Earth are blunt enough for an eco-savvy kindergartner and pop off the screen like speech balloons. But, then, this is Superman, and Mr. Snyder, whose earlier movies include a stillborn adaptation of the graphic novel “Watchmen,” is here playing with different narrative forms as he toggles between cinematic realism and the kind of comic-book-style exaggeration that distills ideas into images.

    For roughly 100 minutes, or the running time of an average movie, Mr. Snyder is in control of his material. His handling of the story’s many flashbacks, which fill in piecemeal Superman’s Kansas childhood as Clark, is fluid and apt. Each return to the past becomes another tile in the mosaic, adding to the emerging portrait of the adult wanderer and seeker he has become. His adoptive parents, Martha (Diane Lane) and Jonathan (Kevin Costner), come into focus, as does the bewildered child (played by Cooper Timberline and Dylan Sprayberry), who doesn’t understand why he’s so different. Mr. Snyder borrows too many canted camera angles and too much sun-kissed fluttering laundry from Terrence Malick, but the Kansas scenes solidify the human foundation of a divided identity.

    The last 45 minutes is when Mr. Snyder piles on the hammering special effects, becoming yet one more director gone disappointingly amok.
    Expand
  4. Apr 2, 2016
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Zack Snyder's first outing with the DC Cinematic Universe shows some promise but it also faces major stumbling blocks. This reboot tries to depict a more humanized Superman as he tries to be the ultimate bridge between Earth and Krypton. I admire the film for its ambition and there are some good elements that are unfortunately balanced out by serious problems. The film is not your typical Superman movie for better and worse. For instance the entire movie is tinted in a greyish- blue kind of color which sucks the life out of the frame. This choice is supposed to reflect the somber mood but there is barely a balance of life in the frame. Another major failing on the technicals is the excessive use of Shaky cam. There are some scenes when it is called for such as Superman flying for the first time and a few of the crashes but there are other scenes when the shaky cam is used during quiet scenes. It especially got bad during the one scene when Johnathan Kent was trying to teach Clark a life lesson and the shaky cam got in the way of me trying to connect with the scene. On that note, Kevin Kosner played the worst portrayal of Johnathan Kent to this date as he is very apathetic and even encouraged his son to let his classmates die. Lois Lane appears to only be in this film out of obligation since her contribution to the film was very limited at best. Superman himself is very emotional detached and is reckless in his actions causing so much collateral damage that it would even make Michael Bay blush. General Zod is the one character who appears to have some depth to him as he wants to save Krypton at the cost of all life on Earth. The biggest scene that caused controversy is the scene when Superman snaps Zod's neck. This act goes against everything that the character stands for. Superman is a character that represents the best of humanity and he is a character who shows mercy to his enemies as he fights for everyone. This moment could have worked if the film had better established Superman's moral code against killing but it was never built up to that point. A better example of a hero who had to make a moral compromise by going against his no-killing code was Trigun. Trigun was an aneme that heavily establishes Vash's qualm against killing and thus it had more of an impact when he finally had to take a life to save his friends. In this film's case however, the emotional impact of Superman's actions are never brought up again. Despite these glaring issues there are some good elements in this film. The opening scene on Krypton was well done as it shows the despair of the Kryptonions in their inevitable doom. The relationship with Clark and Martha Kent is also well done as she teaches Clark how to focus his powers. In short I do see how people enjoy this film but I cannot. This is a potentially profound film that doesn't live up to its potential. Collapse Expand
  5. Apr 1, 2016
    5
    A silly and over-the-top action film. The cast is pretty good and I found the scenes on Krypton to be interesting. Flashbacks to Superman's younger years were good as well. The climax is so ridiculous and the action scenes have no tension due to it. The tone is too serious at times also which made it feel pretentious. The middle act is pretty boring as well. Man of Steel is a decentA silly and over-the-top action film. The cast is pretty good and I found the scenes on Krypton to be interesting. Flashbacks to Superman's younger years were good as well. The climax is so ridiculous and the action scenes have no tension due to it. The tone is too serious at times also which made it feel pretentious. The middle act is pretty boring as well. Man of Steel is a decent popcorn flick, but it really lacks the substance to make it anything more than that. Expand
  6. Mar 23, 2016
    5
    It has a lot of the same problems Superman Returns did, with more flaws to call it's own. No amount of punches or action can make up for a soulless attempt at making Superman into Batman for the modern audience. It's a boring, pretentious, drawn out film with dull, grim tone that hopes the audience will overlook it because there's a lot of punching going on.
  7. Mar 12, 2016
    6
    Man of Steel cannot be called "action film". And we gotta add that Superman's new aspect is not the real one. Could be better, developed, but it's not the Superman that we used to watch. Unfortunately, this film is also more violent than action-packed film, but it's able to be called "science-fiction" film, at least. It also brings a great short love story to the cinema, and powerfullyMan of Steel cannot be called "action film". And we gotta add that Superman's new aspect is not the real one. Could be better, developed, but it's not the Superman that we used to watch. Unfortunately, this film is also more violent than action-packed film, but it's able to be called "science-fiction" film, at least. It also brings a great short love story to the cinema, and powerfully moving scenes. Maybe it could have low-human characters, but, why do we spect about superheroes films? Expand
  8. Jan 28, 2016
    6
    Man of Steel, in my opinion, is a decent but not quite as better as the original Superman movie. I felt that Zack Synder tried to recapture the atmosphere and brilliance of Richard Donnor's 1978 version, but with little interest on why the DC Universe movies haven't been a gamechanger throughout the years (The Dark Knight Trilogy doesn't count). I was feeling a bit nervous why they choseMan of Steel, in my opinion, is a decent but not quite as better as the original Superman movie. I felt that Zack Synder tried to recapture the atmosphere and brilliance of Richard Donnor's 1978 version, but with little interest on why the DC Universe movies haven't been a gamechanger throughout the years (The Dark Knight Trilogy doesn't count). I was feeling a bit nervous why they chose Henry Cavill donning the red, yellow cape and spandex with the iconic "S" trademark because Superman just way past his prime. Even though Superman Returns was pretty good, but Man Of Steel is less but kinda bland Superman. The movie's ending went horribly wrong (I saw the whole thing, no spoilers), the whole CGI thing is pointless, Kevin Costner's performance as Clark Kent's own father sucked, the action scenes were inspired unless you make the movie for 2 1/2 hours long. And that's the problem.

    I'm a little worried for what's to come during 2016's sorta "Man Of Steel" sequel, "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn Of Justice." Will the movie be any good? Can Batfleck (Ben Affleck) be a better Batman than Christian Bale? Can the movie be as much darker as Marvel's "Captain America: Civil War"? Or can it become the highest-grossing movie of the year? I'm predicting that it's going to get near the 60's at Rotten Tomatoes (or below 50s), but 2016 is full of too much superhero movies. So I might have to wait on that, but as for Man Of Steel, good movie, flawed script, acting is pretty decent, but it's worth a shot.
    Expand
  9. Jan 26, 2016
    6
    "Man of Steel" was initially in a Superman movie but the trouble is that Superman should add title and it would calls "Superman : Man of Steel" , but the movie was amazing and very powerful.
  10. Jan 25, 2016
    6
    Man of Steel tries to impress fans of the DC universe. It actually worked.... what bothers me to say is that this movie tried so hard to impress people like me. The movie's still decent. What went wrong with it is that the movie went so slow after we head off to the middle.
  11. Dec 24, 2015
    6
    I could give it a 10, or I could give it a 0, but i give it a 6, why?
    The First part of the Movie is awesome!!! just awesome. For Fanatic fans like me who was born with Superman, and know about the REAL story will love that, but....
    Thats the problem.. once you reached the half of the movie, its nonsense, boring, and specially: SILLY... I understand they did it for making a kind of
    I could give it a 10, or I could give it a 0, but i give it a 6, why?
    The First part of the Movie is awesome!!! just awesome. For Fanatic fans like me who was born with Superman, and know about the REAL story will love that, but....

    Thats the problem.. once you reached the half of the movie, its nonsense, boring, and specially: SILLY...

    I understand they did it for making a kind of interconnection Superman vs Batman... something i Hate by the way...
    So, everything is good, even Clark Kent/Superman, I like very much since Christopher Reeve (the second one), this new Actor, Henry Cavill. He was awesome...
    Russel Crowe well, he was good because he act very good, but they shouldnt put heavy well known actors, it takes you away of the movie and yo raelised its a movie.. hard to explain what i meant in english...
    So, this Movie is goo, but it could be better...
    5/10
    Special effects 10/10
    Sound 7/10 (some library sounds from other moviebanks)
    Soundtrack 8/10 (good choice, good emotive selection, except the end, it doesnt fit well during the fight
    Edited 10/10 (good narrative pace)
    Story 5/10 (good begining and its the rael Kal-El Story, but the end sucks.
    Expand
  12. Nov 28, 2015
    4
    I guess the DC fans are working very hard to improve the score of this movie. Notice all of the recent glowing reviews for a movie that's a couple years old. Truth is, that it is a very average movie. Usually when I rate a movie I think of a list of things I 'like" against things I "dislike." With this movie I can only think of 2 likes. Henry Cavill is a great Superman and I like theI guess the DC fans are working very hard to improve the score of this movie. Notice all of the recent glowing reviews for a movie that's a couple years old. Truth is, that it is a very average movie. Usually when I rate a movie I think of a list of things I 'like" against things I "dislike." With this movie I can only think of 2 likes. Henry Cavill is a great Superman and I like the art style and design choices for things like the opening act on Krypton. Other than that I can list many things that don't make sense but a fan online will just argue with you or make grand assumptions. How can Superman be negatively affected by atmospherics (is that a word?) when he can survive in space without breathing? How is Superman powered by our "yellow" sun when it is actually white but our atmosphere changes it's color throughout the day? How does his father just conveniently disappear into a tornado instead of gets tossed around like a semi-truck? How can Zod adjust to Earth in mere hours when it took Clark years of his life? How can Lois Lane survive Arctic weather in a small coat when the Army guy said she would easily freeze overnight?
    Too many silly questions that get an easy pass by the super fans.
    Expand
  13. Aug 27, 2015
    6
    "Man of Steel" is a refreshing new reboot of the old superman days with flashing action and eye-catching visuals. The plot does wander off to uncharted territory at times, but overall a good movie to watch during one's spare time.
  14. Aug 24, 2015
    5
    A Superman film that focuses on the Alien aspect of the story, with more exposition on him home planet than the person that is Clark Kent/Superman. While that may suit viewers that have seen the origin of Superman told over and over again, it means there's little to relate to with this particular Superman.

    In fact the Kent family in general are quite heavily de-emphasised in this
    A Superman film that focuses on the Alien aspect of the story, with more exposition on him home planet than the person that is Clark Kent/Superman. While that may suit viewers that have seen the origin of Superman told over and over again, it means there's little to relate to with this particular Superman.

    In fact the Kent family in general are quite heavily de-emphasised in this movie, and while they have as little screen on time as 1978's Superman, they lack the charm of that family, and merely serve as plot devices.

    Russell Crowe steals this film, bursting with charisma and presence, whilst making this more a Gladiator in Space than a Superman film. Zod is a shallow character, nothing more than a war machine, and the alien vs alien battle scenes are impressive but overwhelming. I found Man Of Steel a better film than I expected, and an improvement over the gloomy and desaturated Superman Returns, but the writing is lackluster, and the impact is weak.

    I hope Superman v Batman is able to have more heart.
    Expand
  15. Jul 18, 2015
    6
    Man of Steel, the first film in the new DC Cinematic Universe, is certainly a very flawed film, but for me, I think there is enough in the "pro" category to outweigh those negatives. Firstly, I really liked the acting and the casting throughout. Some were unhappy with Amy Adams' Lois Lane, for both the way she was portrayed and for her not looking like Lois Lane, but as a person who is notMan of Steel, the first film in the new DC Cinematic Universe, is certainly a very flawed film, but for me, I think there is enough in the "pro" category to outweigh those negatives. Firstly, I really liked the acting and the casting throughout. Some were unhappy with Amy Adams' Lois Lane, for both the way she was portrayed and for her not looking like Lois Lane, but as a person who is not a huge comic book guy, I did not really care. She's a great actress and it is able to show in this film to a degree. In addition to the acting, the special effects were spectacular and the cinematography was stupendous at times. There were some seriously gorgeous shots in this one and it is one of the few superhero movies where I really noticed that area. However, I will say that it does try to do a lot and struggles from typical origin story pitfalls. The pacing can be extremely bad at times and the dialogue is pretty horrendous at times and middling at best. Overall, Man of Steel is a slightly above average film that succeeds in some areas and fails in others, but overall does a nice job setting up the new Superman story and the new universe. Expand
  16. Jun 25, 2015
    6
    "Man of Steel" is not a masterpiece, it is just okay. It's slightly better than Superman Returns, but I wish it had more brighter colors... I do think Henry Cavill is a brilliant choice for Superman, and I hope future installments can improve upon this film.
  17. Jun 20, 2015
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man of Steel isn't a bad film by any means. It's just not the thrilling adventure film it should have been. Everything starts off well. The opening 20 minute retelling of Kal-el's escape from dying Krypton plays like its own epic action short. The setting is so wildly rendered and Jor-el (Russel Crowe) makes for such a compelling hero that I found myself wishing that was the focus of the picture, particularly after I'd seen the rest of it.

    The rest of the film's first hour focuses on young Clark Kent's upbringing, and his struggle to discover, control and conceal his powers, and it's less successful. Part of this has to do with director Zack Snyder's (and producer Christopher Nolan's) gritty, realistic approach. Kevin Costner and Diane Lane do great work portraying Clark's adoptive parents, but something just doesn't feel right about Pa Kent telling Clark that "maybe" he should have let his schoolmates drown rather than risk revealing what he could do, or Clark's allowing his father figure to sacrifice himself years later in a twister rather than use his powers to save him in front of a crowd of people.

    However, it's the third part of the film that really comes off the rails. I actually enjoyed watching Superman and Lois Lane confront Zod and his minions right up to the point where Supes lost his cool, the result being the leveling of Smallvile. The Superman I know wouldn't have put all those lives at risk by bringing his fight to main street. Then, when the proverbial feces really hits the fan, Metropolis itself is heedlessly decimated. Finally, the ridiculous scenario staged to "make" Superman kill Zod actually made me laugh out loud.
    Expand
  18. Jun 14, 2015
    5
    Save the world with destruction type plot really hurt this film, I somewhat enjoyed the deeper knowledge given from the characters, not there actions.
  19. May 31, 2015
    6
    I am probably going to get some hate for giving this movie such a low score, but here's what I think of 'Man of Steel', the superhero reboot of the "Superman" character.

    Directed by Zack Snyder ("300" and "Watchmen") and produced by Christopher Nolan ("Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight"), the movie stars Henry Cavill in the title role as he attempts to fight his greatest enemy,
    I am probably going to get some hate for giving this movie such a low score, but here's what I think of 'Man of Steel', the superhero reboot of the "Superman" character.

    Directed by Zack Snyder ("300" and "Watchmen") and produced by Christopher Nolan ("Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight"), the movie stars Henry Cavill in the title role as he attempts to fight his greatest enemy, General Zod (Michael Shannon).

    The movie opens pretty much similar to the original 'Superman' (1978) which starred Christopher Reeve, in that Krypton is about to be destroyed and Jor-El (Russell Crowe) is the father of a newborn Kal-El who is sent to Earth while the original home planet is destroyed. An angry Zod is sent away but plans to stop Kal at his tracks and wants to bring Krypton back.

    The movie is told straightforward in present day, but there are a lot of flashbacks in the first two acts of this movie. We see Clark as a young child trying to adapt and get used to his powers, he can hear voices, his vision goes out of control...the lot.

    Kevin Costner and Diane Lane play Jonathan and Martha Kent respectively, in committed performances, they care for their young, adopted son and want him to be okay and fit in.

    Oscar-nominated actress, Amy Adams plays Lois Lane, a Pulitzer prize winning reporter who meets Clark when she is in danger and instantly wants to know more about him.

    That's the most development we get from this movie. I think it's fair to say that 'Man of Steel' is probably the most controversial "Superman" movie since Bryan Singer's 'Superman Returns' (2006), in that it has divided many people who have seen it.

    This movie, I feel, delivers all too well on its promise to show us some spectacular action scenes, they occur early and often, and while this proves that there is no shortage of special effects artistry, it's amazing as to how I grew tired and impatient, just exhausted from watching everything getting destroyed in its path. There is a total of three action scenes in this movie, and they go on for roughly 20 - 30 minutes (at least that's how they felt), I couldn't help but feel like asking myself "When will this movie end?", and couldn't Zack Snyder just sacrifice at least one, long action scene for more character development? Just asking.

    All in all, this is NOT a bad reboot, but it will divide many audiences who watch it. If you either grew up with or loved the Christopher Reeve "Superman" installments, you are more than likely to feel underwhelmed with this movie. However, if you are a teenager who has never seen any "Superman" movies before and you want to see your very first "Superman" movie, then this could win you over.

    I feel like this movie was better than the bleak 'Superman Returns' (2006), but this movie didn't have to be dark and serious like 'The Dark Knight' (2008), Batman needed a dark and gritty movie, Superman is too light-hearted for this tone. It felt very depressing and underwhelming, and the action scenes were just exhausting to watch after you've seen it for five minutes.

    Too much action layered over better story-writing, and far too serious to even have fun. 6/10.
    Expand
  20. May 17, 2015
    6
    The film is good, the story so that is good, the action is kind of exaggerated, it may be a negative point of the film, and lacked a bit of concern Superman with Metropolis, he destroyed a great part of town with their struggle with Zod, that I also found another negative point of the film.
  21. Apr 28, 2015
    4
    In short:
    -First half of the movie is crammed with too many plots, it jumps from age to age and doesn't tell a story clearly, it fails at building up Clark Kent as an emotional character or as a character at all
    -Second half is action with Superman already established and it's mostly fine if a little silly sometimes In long: I didn't think "The Krypton Wars" was this movie's
    In short:
    -First half of the movie is crammed with too many plots, it jumps from age to age and doesn't tell a story clearly, it fails at building up Clark Kent as an emotional character or as a character at all
    -Second half is action with Superman already established and it's mostly fine if a little silly sometimes

    In long:
    I didn't think "The Krypton Wars" was this movie's undertitle, but it apparently was. Krypton is going to die in the first place, but this movie apparently didn't want to spend 5 to 10 mins showing us the planet, its inhabitants, and making us feel the loss and destruction that they were facing, instead we got an honestly pointless coup d'état from General Zod which was...just stupid. It makes the time on Krypton both too long and something you just want to get over with because of all the unwanted side plots.

    Then you get to Clark Kent as a ...young adult? Just straight up, we go from Krypton burns to Clark Kent as an adult. That's it. No backstory, no buildup. Booya.

    The cut is BAD. Just outright incompetent. And it's not the only one.

    Man of Steel spends over 40 minutes telling Clark's life by chasing off his life experiences one by one, in the most disorderly fashion. You zip from adult to late teenager to kid to adult to teenager to adult to early teenager to younger adult to adult and the worst is, not only are those scenes insufficient because they're all short and don't really mean much, not only are they difficult to really care about because they're shown in a puzzle fashion and you're supposed to put them all in order in your head, but the real absolute worse is that they're ALL having bad cuts!

    It's not a fade to black or a clever "I now speak of this person or this experience in my life" and it cuts to said person like in Game of Thrones, no, it's just a hard cut that is an outright false note!

    Every time I'm beginning to get interested in one of Clark's instances, I get a cut that not only breaks my interest, but takes me out of the movie because the frame ends on adolescent Clark and suddenly the moment after I'm looking at kid Clark.

    Besides the incompetent cuts and unreasonable storytelling, the fact is that the time spent on Krypton's subplots should've been used to show more of Clark Kent the child. Take out 10 mins from Krypton, just show it dying and Kal El being sent out, and spend those 10 mins to build up Clark more competently than it was, with a timewise storytelling and longer scenes.

    I'm giving this movie a 4(it could just as easy be a 3) because of one specific scene though. When (spoilers) Clark's dad dies. The scene was so forced, the death was so irrational and stupid, the reactions and acts of the characters so silly, that I burst out laughing.

    If your most defining, character-building, emotional scene makes me burst out laughing, you are a terrible movie.

    I pushed myself to watch the rest of the movie though, and I didn't regret that. Once Superman gets revealed, the action is nice, Zod is a good foe, lots of elements from the movie work well and unlike a lot of people, I find the murder scene/execution scene of Zod to be perfect for this movie. It adds a layer of depth to Superman's character and succeeds at making him a better character.

    With that said, I wouldn't watch this again, ever. Besides all I've listed, the number of plot stupidities is quite high(kudos on Lois Lane for discovering the exact location of one man under a mountainside, hundreds of meters away from her, in the middle of the night, WHILE AN ENTIRE MILITARY CAMP AROUND HER DIDN'T FIND THE GUY), and it makes the movie just silly.

    2 for the first half, 5 for the latter, I'll give it a 4.
    Expand
  22. Apr 28, 2015
    6
    More space opera than superhero movie, Man Of Steel, Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot, focuses almost exclusively on the DC Comics icon’s alien backstory. This gamble doesn’t entirely pay off; by effectively denying Superman his defining traits—his complex relationships to duty and humanity—the movie robs the character of any depth or agency. Decisions, not daring, shape heroes, and since ManMore space opera than superhero movie, Man Of Steel, Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot, focuses almost exclusively on the DC Comics icon’s alien backstory. This gamble doesn’t entirely pay off; by effectively denying Superman his defining traits—his complex relationships to duty and humanity—the movie robs the character of any depth or agency. Decisions, not daring, shape heroes, and since Man Of Steel’s Superman never has a chance to make a decision, he never registers as anything more than a handsome, inscrutable alien with a smug smirk.

    Man Of Steel opens on planet Krypton, a Roger Dean prog-rock album cover filtered through the sensibilities of David Lynch’s Dune. There, tough-guy scientist Jor-El, played by Russell Crowe, pleads with the planet’s government to take action against a coming environmental cataclysm. (This is the first of the movie’s many half-hearted attempts at political relevance, which culminate in Superman punching out a Predator drone.) However, a coup by Michael Shannon’s General Zod interrupts the proceedings, leaving Crowe no choice but to steal a MacGuffin called the Codex and launch it into space along with his newborn son, Kal-El. As Krypton implodes, Kal-El’s spacecraft crash-lands in a field in Kansas.

    The movie then leaps forward 33 years to find the adult Kal-El, now played by Henry Cavill, aimlessly drifting around Nova Scotia and working odd jobs. The discovery of an ancient Kryptonian spacecraft in Northern Canada brings Cavill into contact with Amy Adams’ Lois Lane; it also alerts Shannon, who survived the destruction of Krypton, to Cavill’s location. The rest of the film is set over a couple of days, as Cavill fights Shannon and his gang in a series of superpowered battles, all of which are admittedly pretty cool-looking; interspersed throughout are flashbacks to Cavill’s childhood as well as comically insistent product placement for IHOP.

    Man Of Steel eschews the usual trappings of Superman stories—right down to the word “Superman,” which is uttered only once. There’s no Lex Luthor, no Kryptonite, no glasses, no mild-mannered reporter, very little Daily Planet, and even less Metropolis. However, the movie is anything but stripped down; like Snyder’s Sucker Punch, it’s a confused but fascinating mishmash of religious, military, and sexual imagery. One scene finds Cavill framed with a stained-glass Jesus behind him. In another, he—robbed of his powers by a gaping hole in narrative logic—races around a Kryptonian spaceship seemingly designed by H.R. Giger, vulvar doorways and all.

    Cavill—whose performance involves more posing than acting—is alternately presented as an alien messiah, a superweapon, and an American flag flapping in the wind; the one thing he never gets to be is a character. As a result, Man Of Steel sometimes feels like arty advertising—the tentpole movie equivalent of a car ad that invokes images of freedom or luxury without ever mentioning the price or specifications.
    Expand
  23. Apr 22, 2015
    6
    More space opera than superhero movie, Man Of Steel, Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot, focuses almost exclusively on the DC Comics icon’s alien backstory. This gamble doesn’t entirely pay off; by effectively denying Superman his defining traits—his complex relationships to duty and humanity—the movie robs the character of any depth or agency. Decisions, not daring, shape heroes, and since ManMore space opera than superhero movie, Man Of Steel, Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot, focuses almost exclusively on the DC Comics icon’s alien backstory. This gamble doesn’t entirely pay off; by effectively denying Superman his defining traits—his complex relationships to duty and humanity—the movie robs the character of any depth or agency. Decisions, not daring, shape heroes, and since Man Of Steel’s Superman never has a chance to make a decision, he never registers as anything more than a handsome, inscrutable alien with a smug smirk.

    Man Of Steel opens on planet Krypton, a Roger Dean prog-rock album cover filtered through the sensibilities of David Lynch’s Dune. There, tough-guy scientist Jor-El, played by Russell Crowe, pleads with the planet’s government to take action against a coming environmental cataclysm. (This is the first of the movie’s many half-hearted attempts at political relevance, which culminate in Superman punching out a Predator drone.) However, a coup by Michael Shannon’s General Zod interrupts the proceedings, leaving Crowe no choice but to steal a MacGuffin called the Codex and launch it into space along with his newborn son, Kal-El. As Krypton implodes, Kal-El’s spacecraft crash-lands in a field in Kansas.

    The movie then leaps forward 33 years to find the adult Kal-El, now played by Henry Cavill, aimlessly drifting around Nova Scotia and working odd jobs. The discovery of an ancient Kryptonian spacecraft in Northern Canada brings Cavill into contact with Amy Adams’ Lois Lane; it also alerts Shannon, who survived the destruction of Krypton, to Cavill’s location. The rest of the film is set over a couple of days, as Cavill fights Shannon and his gang in a series of superpowered battles, all of which are admittedly pretty cool-looking; interspersed throughout are flashbacks to Cavill’s childhood as well as comically insistent product placement for IHOP.

    Man Of Steel eschews the usual trappings of Superman stories—right down to the word “Superman,” which is uttered only once. There’s no Lex Luthor, no Kryptonite, no glasses, no mild-mannered reporter, very little Daily Planet, and even less Metropolis. However, the movie is anything but stripped down; like Snyder’s Sucker Punch, it’s a confused but fascinating mishmash of religious, military, and sexual imagery. One scene finds Cavill framed with a stained-glass Jesus behind him. In another, he—robbed of his powers by a gaping hole in narrative logic—races around a Kryptonian spaceship seemingly designed by H.R. Giger, vulvar doorways and all.

    Cavill—whose performance involves more posing than acting—is alternately presented as an alien messiah, a superweapon, and an American flag flapping in the wind; the one thing he never gets to be is a character. As a result, Man Of Steel sometimes feels like arty advertising—the tentpole movie equivalent of a car ad that invokes images of freedom or luxury without ever mentioning the price or specifications.
    Expand
  24. Jan 17, 2015
    4
    Man of Steel is more of an action film, not a superhero film, and departs a lot from the Superman character. Yes, Krypton is there, the Kents are there and the Daily Planet is there but the film does nothing to develop Superman or Clark as a character; only really being fleshed out when we see Clark growing and using his powers for the first time.

    The first half of Man of Steel, though
    Man of Steel is more of an action film, not a superhero film, and departs a lot from the Superman character. Yes, Krypton is there, the Kents are there and the Daily Planet is there but the film does nothing to develop Superman or Clark as a character; only really being fleshed out when we see Clark growing and using his powers for the first time.

    The first half of Man of Steel, though too dark in tone for my liking and especially for Superman, is quite good, showing the building of character relationships and some emotional moments between them. Any sign of 'heart', however, is just thrown out of the window and through several buildings in Metropolis at the very moment that Zod begins his 'alien invasion', leaving the viewer to sit through mindless action that just goes on and on, with little to no progression, making the story go nowhere.

    My biggest issue with Snyder's film is that it just does not feel like a Superman film. Where is that Superman magic that the first Donner film entailed? I appreciate the "updated" origin story and that we're essentially seeing Superman starting out but we never get to see him save someone in the suit. Henry Cavill was a great choice for Superman but he was just not given enough to do in the film, making his character, and a lot of the characters in the film, very empty, never letting the audience care for any of them (apart from perhaps Mama and Papa Kent).

    Man of Steel is all style and no substance.
    Expand
  25. Dec 13, 2014
    5
    If we are upholding Superman standards as we should be, this is a let down. Henry Cavill's performance is mediocre and the fact that it is a remake is an anti-climax. I never felt overly involved in the action nor the story, and for a Superman film, that is saying something. If we were being kind we could say that it plays it safe, or we could tell the truth and say that it is just notIf we are upholding Superman standards as we should be, this is a let down. Henry Cavill's performance is mediocre and the fact that it is a remake is an anti-climax. I never felt overly involved in the action nor the story, and for a Superman film, that is saying something. If we were being kind we could say that it plays it safe, or we could tell the truth and say that it is just not that good. Fans will be generous and applaud it's efforts, but heed my warning, don't go into it with big expectations. Expand
  26. Oct 27, 2014
    5
    this film doesn't really do enough for me as a superman fan despite the fact it is clearly based on the Superman Earth One comic . it has it's moments but it's mostly disappointing with characters that are only identifiable because of their names rather than their actions and behaviour and i think the dialogue can be real off at times in a similar way that certain moments in the Darkthis film doesn't really do enough for me as a superman fan despite the fact it is clearly based on the Superman Earth One comic . it has it's moments but it's mostly disappointing with characters that are only identifiable because of their names rather than their actions and behaviour and i think the dialogue can be real off at times in a similar way that certain moments in the Dark Knight Trilogy were Expand
  27. Aug 31, 2014
    5
    "A good death is its own reward" - Faora

    A superhero movies ..not really what i like.Maybe this is why i give score "5".I don't know, not caught my attention.
  28. Aug 7, 2014
    5
    After the witty, cinematic "Iron Man 3", I was even more excited for "Man of Steel" that was the most awaited summer blockbuster in 2013. Unfortunately, the movie leaves too much to be desired. Superman is one of the most iconic super heroes in the America history but the director Zack Snyder transforms him into a violent, self pretentious **** I'll explain.

    Back in 1978, Superman was
    After the witty, cinematic "Iron Man 3", I was even more excited for "Man of Steel" that was the most awaited summer blockbuster in 2013. Unfortunately, the movie leaves too much to be desired. Superman is one of the most iconic super heroes in the America history but the director Zack Snyder transforms him into a violent, self pretentious **** I'll explain.

    Back in 1978, Superman was an intelligent and sympathetic gentleman who was willing to make sacrifices for other people. The first movie was a masterpiece and it still remains a classic, the second was not as good as the first film but still pretty cool, the third was partly boring and unfunny and the the final movie in the franchise reached its peak, providing obviously poor special effects, meaningless plot and dull action. While "Man of Steel" is not as bad as "Superman IV", it still have tons of disadvantages.

    Am I the only one who feels that Snyder rips off too many things from other films and games and puts in his movie? Assassins Creed, Star Wars, The Avengers, Inception's theme, Taken, Avatar? Why couldn't he be original? Just saying...

    The story (which was told several times) is back again but in a way more modernized and realistic. Who needs realism in a movie where you can see men flying around and destroying countless of buildings? That worked perfectly in Nolan's Batman trilogy because the characters didn't have super powers or superhuman strength. They just resorted to advanced technology. Of course, the cast is there to support the film (Michael Shannon outstands as General Zod) and the chilling music also helps it, yet, all the plot holes and lack of character development prevent the story from scaling the heights.

    The dialogue is horrendous. Numbers of times that Jonathan had to say something stupid and uninspiring to Clark like "You're not from this world Clark; When the world finds out what you can do, is gonna change everything;You are my son. But somewhere out there you have another name. And he sent you here for a reason, Clark. And even if it takes you the rest of your life you owe it to yourself to find out what that reason is.; You are the answer to 'Are we alone in the universe?'; And I don't blame you, son. It'd be a huge burden for anyone to bear; but you're not just anyone, Clark, and I have to believe that you were... that you were sent here for a reason. All these changes that you're going through, one day... one day you're gonna think of them as a blessing; and when that day comes, you're gonna have to make a choice... a choice of whether to stand proud in front of the human race or not." You see what I'm trying to say? As much poetic these lines can be, they are extremely stupid.

    To summarize: Man of Steel provides shinning performances but they aren't enough to make this flick entertaining, due to its overlong
    Expand
  29. Jul 23, 2014
    5
    Man of Steel is essentially the post origin story of Super Man, his origin is also included but this film primarily focuses on whether or not he should announce himself to the human race or live his life in secrecy. As the movie progresses it eventually evolves into the story of how Super Man is on a quest to save earth's genocide from the classic superman villain General Zod.

    Henry
    Man of Steel is essentially the post origin story of Super Man, his origin is also included but this film primarily focuses on whether or not he should announce himself to the human race or live his life in secrecy. As the movie progresses it eventually evolves into the story of how Super Man is on a quest to save earth's genocide from the classic superman villain General Zod.

    Henry Cavill plays the role of Clark Kent/Kal-El, or in other words Super Man. His performance doesn't stand out but it is worthy in its own right. Amy Addams also stars as the infamous reporter Louis Lane. Adams performance was better than mediocre but it certainly does not exemplify her true talent.

    Zach Snyder (300) directed Man of Steel, which is a decision I highly disagree with. If DC wanted to make Man of Steal into the movie the Dark Knight was or even what the first trailer promised, Warner Brothers would need a new director. Zach Snyder brings his signature style with him but it translates very poorly to Super Man universe. His over stylized action sequences accompanied by the lackluster script reveal a major feeling of mediocrity.

    I am going to divide this film in half, the first half exemplified everything I wanted in a Super Man movie; it was gritty, Super Man felt vulnerable (as much as a character such as him can), and everything was down to earth. The second half completely through out what the first had accomplished and put two immortal beings fighting each other for the better part of an hour. It was explosion after explosion that soon wore me out and lost the bulk of my attention.

    The overwhelming feeling I got when I came out of the theater was how it completely wasted its potential. The first half set the premise in such a high fashion for it to only be ruined in the second and third act. The whole film just came off as disappointing which is a huge shame because it could have been so much more.
    Expand
  30. Jun 17, 2014
    6
    Prior to watching this: I have watched all the 5 previous Superman films. Superman II was the best, followed by I, III, Returns and IV.
    Review: This is unfortunately another failure at rebooting the franchise as had happened with Superman Returns. The problem with this film, as with Returns is that it is simply DULL. OMG! Things move so slowly! There is poor chemistry between Superman and
    Prior to watching this: I have watched all the 5 previous Superman films. Superman II was the best, followed by I, III, Returns and IV.
    Review: This is unfortunately another failure at rebooting the franchise as had happened with Superman Returns. The problem with this film, as with Returns is that it is simply DULL. OMG! Things move so slowly! There is poor chemistry between Superman and Lois and the action scenes were overdone till they were boring.
    3/5
    Expand
  31. May 12, 2014
    5
    When I heard of Man of Steel, I got really excited. It was directed by the guy who did the new Batman series. It was to have great special effects and best of all, no kryptonite! To me, this was going to make the worlds most powerful superhero get a movie he finally deserves.

    The movie began like how I thought it would. Very well. It was setting up a great movie. However, after that
    When I heard of Man of Steel, I got really excited. It was directed by the guy who did the new Batman series. It was to have great special effects and best of all, no kryptonite! To me, this was going to make the worlds most powerful superhero get a movie he finally deserves.

    The movie began like how I thought it would. Very well. It was setting up a great movie. However, after that whole moment, and we begin to follow Superman on his quest, it all goes downhill.

    The movie will leave you emotionless, unattached, and possibly bored. The movie clearly focused more on it's amazing special effects and top-notch graphic artists then it's plot and character development. Throughout the movie, I wanted to feel attached towards one character, but it never happened. The movie is incredibly fast paced, and gives you no time to breathe. The entire movie is just a long blur of violence and mass destruction. For those who just like to see whole cities destroyed, extended battle sequences, this is the movie for you. And you know what, it was cool. However, it was to much of a good thing. It was like the producer/director/who ever made the movie just began to play around with affects and decided that is was going to carry the whole movie.

    It was unbelievable, the amount of destruction. The one thing you could connect with was the cringes the government felt with all the money they will have to pay to repair the city. The plot was predictable, and felt forced.

    Also, the movie includes a romance which makes no sense at all, perfect hair even when being thrown through cities and mountains, and... more cities and mountains being destroyed.... and more death... and a lot of destruction... and crying... and screaming... and special effects... and more buildings and cities being destroyed...

    For those who love action movies, special effects, and Superman, you should watch this. For those who want a more realistic superhero movie, relate-able characters and plots, great acting and movie that will leave you WITH emotion AND still with some great action and destruction? Watch the Dark Knight series.
    Expand
  32. May 11, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie pulls us in with a captivating new design and story for Krypton and then pulls the rug from under us as quickly as the film cuts to some 20 or 30 years later. "Man of Steel" suffers from poor writing, poor characterization, a loud, but bland musical score (of course, by Hans Zimmer, the king of loud and bland), an over reliance on CGI (which isn't all that great anyways), illogical tornadoes, and cheesy scenes.

    The only thing the film had going for it in the end was the increasingly human portrayal of Superman. Henry Cavill looked the part, and acted his best given his very inconsistently written character, in fact, basically all the characters flop about changing their minds and what makes them...them...constantly throughout the film. Lois Lane's first line is a dick joke...and the next..."Where do I tinkle?". Can we get anymore inconsistent? Make a choice for who a character is and STICK TO IT unless you're gradually changing them over time.

    My other main issue is the organization of the story. The Krypton sequence goes on far too long to cut to 20 years later. Either keep your pace and continue on with his childhood helping us figure out who he is and how he became who you want us to follow- OR- START with the present day him and stick with the flashbacks and let us figure out his Krypton origins when HE does. The sequence in which he finds out his origin feels redundant because guess what...We've seen it already. It just feels like they shot a bunch of random, unconnected scenes and had to find some way to stitch them together.

    Overall, "Man of Steel" is inconsistent, jarringly disorganized, bland, and filled with bad CGI...all disguised with beautiful imagery and cinematography.
    Expand
  33. May 8, 2014
    4
    Oh, man, this film... I was looking forward to this from the point in time when I saw the first trailer. I couldn't wait for it's release. But damn, it dropped the ball low. Very low. I was beyond disappointed by it Over complicated plot, that really starts to fall apart when you start to think about it, weird, overwhelming and just obvious symbolism and lifeless characters - that's "ManOh, man, this film... I was looking forward to this from the point in time when I saw the first trailer. I couldn't wait for it's release. But damn, it dropped the ball low. Very low. I was beyond disappointed by it Over complicated plot, that really starts to fall apart when you start to think about it, weird, overwhelming and just obvious symbolism and lifeless characters - that's "Man of Steel". I wouldn't mind of that flaws if the characters wouldn't have been one dimensional cardboard cutouts of a bare minimum of what a character is. Besides that, the dialogue is about 80 percent of exposition. Secondary characters were wasted, Superman was just emotionless. But it isn't all bad. I enjoyed the visuals, the way Krypton was presented. The fights were... Good.. Just good, because at the end it becomes repetitive.
    Overall "Man of Steel" was a disappointing action flick without humanity.
    Expand
  34. May 4, 2014
    5
    Man of Steel: 5/10 "Regular"

    Película regular que no logra ser buena por ser muy simple y por momentos aburrida, con una historia ya conocida y poco aprovechada.
  35. Apr 20, 2014
    6
    It's not really fantastic, it's not really bad. If you love the explosions and lights and things flying around, this is a good way to spend 2 hours. The plot is basic, the characters are all kinda flat and one dimensional, but it was fun seeing a lot of smaller actors as side roles.
  36. Apr 16, 2014
    4
    The number of 10 reviews on here is a perfect example as to why so many Hollywood movies suck nowadays. All the studios have to do is create a minimal plot and then destroy a bunch of stuff for the third act and fanboys will slobber all over themselves. The problem with this specific movie, though it isn't all that different than every other superhero movie, is psychotic overdirecting byThe number of 10 reviews on here is a perfect example as to why so many Hollywood movies suck nowadays. All the studios have to do is create a minimal plot and then destroy a bunch of stuff for the third act and fanboys will slobber all over themselves. The problem with this specific movie, though it isn't all that different than every other superhero movie, is psychotic overdirecting by Zach Snyder. Snyder is more interested in showing us an artsy action scene than in ever allowing us to connect to a character. The first half of the movie is all backstory, then there's OVER AN HOUR of non-stop destruction. Yawn. Watching one skyscraper after another after another get destroyed becomes a mind-numbing display of endless repetition. The Dark Knight proved a superhero movie doesn't have to be about destroying a bunch of buildings to be exciting. Which may explain why that's possibly the best superhero movie and this is a minimal Avengers ripoff. Expand
  37. Apr 4, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A good superhero movie...

    But a terrible Superman movie.
    Look up on Google "Truth Justice" or "Truth Justice and the American Way", and you will see Superman connected to the 3rd auto finish. Both the top two sites are also linked with Superman.
    Early on in the movie you see "Superman" lie, steal, and you see Superman's Earth dad ,Jonathan Kent( Kevin Costner), infer that saving a school bus of kids wasn't a good choice. Those are some great morals this "new superman" has been brought up on.
    Throughout the 45-minute-bashfest-ending it seemed like this new superman had almost no regard for where fights would happen. One scene Zod and cohorts come to confront Mrs. Kent and what does superman do? Drive one away while leaving the other two to do whatever they wished with his Earth mother.
    As if all this isn't bad enough. No matter superman's intentions, the death toll has been estimated by a disaster expert as being between 139,000 and 389,000 and over a million injured. Though he may have fought to protect them, how can they not lay some of the blame upon him? A dubious start to a 'hero' and not Superman.
    Expand
  38. Mar 31, 2014
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man of Steel was a pretty good retailing of Superman, even though I'm not that much of a Superman fan, however I think it was mostly the beginning of this film that I enjoyed. It did a very good job at telling the origin story of Superman and I thought it had some actually really good scenes; it had some nice emotional moments and other moments that I really liked. Unfortunately this movie that was going alright fell a bit flat around the middle. I mainly thought some of the action shown near the ending was a little to much. I mean that city near the end was a little over done. There were tons of explosions and destroyed buildings and I just thought that is mainly where the film was struggling, just trying to do way too much at the end. So the beginning was going well but that ending is kind of what killed the movie overall for me. However, it may just be because I'm not much of a Superman fan; so I'll leave it up to you to decide whether you should see this movie or not. Expand
  39. Mar 18, 2014
    5
    well,this movie's action really beats every action movie i've ever seen,the 3d effects were awesome and the suit is cool.the theme was not bad but did not fit a superman movie.I did not really like the fact that people thought superman was a villain at first.it was also weird to see zod jumping all the time. it also missed 2 iconic symbols of superman. 1. Suit change 2. Supes savingwell,this movie's action really beats every action movie i've ever seen,the 3d effects were awesome and the suit is cool.the theme was not bad but did not fit a superman movie.I did not really like the fact that people thought superman was a villain at first.it was also weird to see zod jumping all the time. it also missed 2 iconic symbols of superman. 1. Suit change 2. Supes saving people. nonetheless this movie is not bad Expand
  40. Mar 2, 2014
    4
    Ugh just no It was aweful I hated it.................save yourself the time...................and don't watch it.............don't lie to me ****......gurl
  41. Mar 1, 2014
    4
    This movie had good things and bad. I'm a fan of Superman in general, so there's always something I'd like about a Superman movie. It had some exciting moments. However, this adaptation was missing a lot of the classic elements that make superhero stories so likable. The biggest thing that bugged me is that he never has a secret from Lois. She knows that he has super powers from theThis movie had good things and bad. I'm a fan of Superman in general, so there's always something I'd like about a Superman movie. It had some exciting moments. However, this adaptation was missing a lot of the classic elements that make superhero stories so likable. The biggest thing that bugged me is that he never has a secret from Lois. She knows that he has super powers from the night she meets him, and she knows him as Clark soon after. Also, the two of them had little dialogue during the movie, so it was weird when they got together at the end. I kept thinking "but you don't even really know her..." and we really didn't as the audience either. We got the Kal-El/Clark Kent backstory, but other than that, there was little character development. They didn't feel like real people we cared about. This movie focused a lot on action and didn't have time for dialogue or characters...and some people like the action scenes, but I personally am not into that. I care more about the characters and that they have believability as real people. One of the critiques I hear a lot from people comparing super heroes is that they don't like superman because he's too perfect and inhuman. This movie has more of a gritty, dark Clark Kent, so I guess he's more human in a way, but he seemed like a cold, brooding jerk, and not like someone I wanted to know. I would prefer to see the Superman franchise go for more of a likable, relatable Clark Kent. Expand
  42. Feb 27, 2014
    5
    Movie Is Not That Great But Its Good !!!

    ** Man Of Steel ** Positive : * This movie brings out the origin stories of the most iconic character of all the time " Super Man " .The movie display life of superman as he survives with so much hardship among the people he is living with . Since he is different from others he must try to hide himself until the time arrives and finally
    Movie Is Not That Great But Its Good !!!

    ** Man Of Steel **

    Positive :

    * This movie brings out the origin stories of the most iconic character of all the time " Super Man " .The movie display life of superman as he survives with so much hardship among the people he is living with . Since he is different from others he must try to hide himself until the time arrives and finally becoming a hero and savior when trouble arrives that will put lives in danger .The Story Arc that surrounds super man is complete dark theme you can say this by simply watching the movie during screen play its done perfectly .

    * This Movie has a cast of good actors and they have done great job of acting . Henry Cavill has done a good job of portraying super man in this movie but there are also other actors who were perfect in their respective roles such as Amy Adams as Lois Lane , Michael Shannon as General Zod and Russell Crowe as Jor-El etc .. This Movie has advantage of having good actors which they performed excellent in terms of acting .

    * The Hans Zimmer once again did a great job of composing back ground theme for this movie its very fantastic !! he is simply great !! .

    * The Director of this movie is Zack Snyder did a marvelous job of bringing super man in big screen by giving all the excitement and fire works but not only that this movie quite dramatic it clearly sparkles with all advantages its has gathered .

    * The Visual Effect did a perfect job in this movie during screen play we can even see how well this film utilized visual effects to its core and its beautiful to watch and enjoy .

    Negative :

    * The Story has multiple amount of errors or holes .The story for this movie should have been simple but they tried make it look very complex by adding more special features yet it didn't work out instead it made so much errors or plot holes !! .

    * The entire movie is very much predictable its destroys the surprise and mystery !!. You can even predict the outcome of the certain screen play when you are watching this movie which is a huge let down !! .

    * The Action Sequence in this movie is very hard to observe . The fighting scene in this movie like when a video is fast forwarded the scenes skips so fast like that !! its happens so fast its gets even difficult to watch a certain fight scene .

    * The Chemistry between super man and lois lane is so overly pushed their chemistry did not worked out during screen play .

    * The Movie is secretly agrees that is an updated version Superman(1978) and Superman 2(1980) since it has more visual effect and fireworks than these previous movies .

    Overall Result :

    * This movie worst for some people and huge entertainer for others i say its mixture of both !!!

    Man Of Steel :*****

    (5/10) Stars
    Expand
  43. Feb 17, 2014
    5
    Great cast, brilliant effects, bad plot. Man of Steel is a rather generic superhero movie. We see his origins and randomly dive into the future, then constantly back and forth to his childhood and back to a fully grown Kal-El. It would've been interesting to see if the movie had actually brought these flashbacks in randomly for a reason, but unfortunately, the flashbacks usually happen andGreat cast, brilliant effects, bad plot. Man of Steel is a rather generic superhero movie. We see his origins and randomly dive into the future, then constantly back and forth to his childhood and back to a fully grown Kal-El. It would've been interesting to see if the movie had actually brought these flashbacks in randomly for a reason, but unfortunately, the flashbacks usually happen and are then completely forgotten about. The writing also consistently talks about how special Superman is to the world, it's the only thing they ever seem to talk about throughout the entire movie leaving very little time for character development. While the ending is what most fans tend to rip apart, to me it seemed an interesting take on the dark role Superman now has to take in this much more serious adaptation of the comic books. Superman is put to the true test of questioning what is truly right and if he has the courage to pay the price to save the planet he was raised on. I felt this was the strong point of the movie, there should've been more focus on it. However, I found Johnathan Kent in this movie to be extremely frustrating. He often told Clark to do one thing, then sometime later he'd say to do the exact opposite. Like in the flashback when Clark saves kids from drowning in his school bus, one minute John tells Clark he could let them die to keep his identity safe, then he shows him the ship he arrived in and tells him 'You're the answer to "Are we alone in the universe?" and describes how big a change he will make to the world when he reveals himself, then in a later flashback he tells him he should never reveal himself and become a farmer as he is, *spoiler* his demise is pointless and feels terribly done as Superman reveals himself a few years later. Some see the point of what Johnathan was telling Superman, but I struggle to understand why he told him so many different things at once. The action sequences are gripping and blood pumping, this makes them extremely enjoyable to watch for any Superman fan, but these can't be used to sugarcoat the whole movie. Promotions are also used all the way through, for example when Superman and Zod fly into Sears for no apparent reason, it just demonstrates advertisers desperation to promote their products. Overall, the film isn't terrible, but neither is it the masterpiece it was promising many hopeful movie goers. It gives me very little hope for the Justice League movie (if it ever actually happens) if the makers keep following this formula. Expand
  44. Feb 13, 2014
    6
    Man of Steel is highly overrated, it's a decent film at best because it's not the definitive Superman movie. Henry Cavill is no Christopher Reeve but at least he's an improvement over Brandon Routh. It's a long-overdue reboot for the franchise but I'm really disappointed by the lack of character development and the movie spends nearly an hour and a half retelling the origins of SupermanMan of Steel is highly overrated, it's a decent film at best because it's not the definitive Superman movie. Henry Cavill is no Christopher Reeve but at least he's an improvement over Brandon Routh. It's a long-overdue reboot for the franchise but I'm really disappointed by the lack of character development and the movie spends nearly an hour and a half retelling the origins of Superman that we all know to well. Kal-El is born, Krypton gets destroyed, Kal-El is sent to Earth to save their species, ponders his existence, finds out who and what he is, finds out about his parents and where he comes from, finally has a purpose in life, becomes Superman, saves people, Lois, people generally accepts him. There's really no need to spends hours telling a story that everyone is already familiar with, even the reboot of Spider-Man got the origin story over and done with within minutes and we got to see all the other characters in action. This is the problem with Man of Steel, it spends so much time telling this story that they completely forget about all the other characters in the film; even Lois feels diminished. On the other hand, I do like how the story is told. Whereas most action or superhero movies go from one action sequence to another (which can abruptly interrupt with the story), Man of Steel tells the whole story first before they overload on set pieces and CGI effects. I just don't understand how at the end of the fight, the whole city looks like an apocalypse and they're able to fix it so quickly. But I'm guessing with the help of Superman, anything is possible. The amount of action is absurd and buildings falling down is so cheesy but I enjoyed every minute of it, especially when Zod uses some machine that can lift up cars and smashes them back down (that was pretty epic). But obviously, the special effects doesn't any significance to the film. Overall, it's an above-average film. I was a bit disappointed though because we were long-overdue for a Superman film and I really expected better. Whoever tells you that it's better than the first two Superman films, and even Superman Returns, is lying to you. That's how overrated this movie is because a lot of people would go as far as to say that. Man of Steel is better than Superman 3 and 4 obviously (because those were terrible) but it's the weakest "good" Superman entry in the franchise. Expand
  45. Jan 31, 2014
    6
    Unfortunately, Man of Steel has severe structural problems amidst it's wonderful coming of age and child story of Clark, and rockets with nearly half a film of yawning action lacking emotion and motivation to care. It's an inspiring vision breaded for 14 & under, but the editing and execution in post-production squanders the potential for a smoothly paced, build-up to heroism and theUnfortunately, Man of Steel has severe structural problems amidst it's wonderful coming of age and child story of Clark, and rockets with nearly half a film of yawning action lacking emotion and motivation to care. It's an inspiring vision breaded for 14 & under, but the editing and execution in post-production squanders the potential for a smoothly paced, build-up to heroism and the mystery within. Altogether, it's no Kinder Surprise. Expand
  46. Jan 30, 2014
    4
    In the year's biggest disappointment Man Of Steel manages to give us the trailers, hype and intimate story we like being from Chris Nolan. However everything you saw in the trailers have been mashed into a superhero epic that has pacing problems, narrative problems and it's an unfortunate mess. There are a few things to like here, but it's in the final hour of excrutiating overlong actionIn the year's biggest disappointment Man Of Steel manages to give us the trailers, hype and intimate story we like being from Chris Nolan. However everything you saw in the trailers have been mashed into a superhero epic that has pacing problems, narrative problems and it's an unfortunate mess. There are a few things to like here, but it's in the final hour of excrutiating overlong action that is the regurditation of a draining party. Expand
  47. Jan 28, 2014
    5
    I loved the first half of the movie, it introduces a nice and smart story in a dynamic way. The second half, on the other hand, includes extremely exaggerated situations and actions scenes that make you believe the director forgot about the main message of the film and became only concern about the visual effects.
  48. Jan 23, 2014
    4
    Man of Steel was a great entertainer, but the logic and the common sense part of me just really didn't cope with this film logic. This is one of those films which has a solid story line but under not great direction. This Team spent so much time creating the planet Kerpton with no logic into it. If you can build hovercraft and space ship and crap I don't think any one would ever want toMan of Steel was a great entertainer, but the logic and the common sense part of me just really didn't cope with this film logic. This is one of those films which has a solid story line but under not great direction. This Team spent so much time creating the planet Kerpton with no logic into it. If you can build hovercraft and space ship and crap I don't think any one would ever want to choose a dragonish creature, it is like a choice between the fastest car and a pony, that is just one aspect of it. The other is the dialogues they must have spent more time writing more creative once, rather than "Your are monster! I must save the Earth from you." what crap was that, so much of traditional heroish one. Lastly, he returns to work after a week or so, I mean which society would accept a Super-Man, even after he saving the globe.

    However I really did not critic but this film is recommended for those who don't find mistakes or complain.
    Expand
  49. Dec 29, 2013
    4
    Plot holes everywhere really story with some absolutely unbelievably good action sequences. Lois Lane should of been cut from the movie altogether her unlikely appearance at top secret military outposts, poorly written script and general blandness make her a totally forgettable character. You need to decide on the man your going to be??? you're going to be the sort of man that could savePlot holes everywhere really story with some absolutely unbelievably good action sequences. Lois Lane should of been cut from the movie altogether her unlikely appearance at top secret military outposts, poorly written script and general blandness make her a totally forgettable character. You need to decide on the man your going to be??? you're going to be the sort of man that could save you earth father and doesn't? a man that stands their and does nothing and watches him die??? really???? WTF????? who writes this sh*t.

    Russell Crow as Jor-El however was epic
    Expand
  50. Dec 22, 2013
    5
    A typical American movie. Crazy budget, great visuals, lots of explosions but no real substance. The direction is fantastic and the explosions look great in high definition. The underlying premise isn't too shabby but lacks major development. Most of the time anything exciting which happens does so for the sake of it. There seems to be no connection between any of the characters, theA typical American movie. Crazy budget, great visuals, lots of explosions but no real substance. The direction is fantastic and the explosions look great in high definition. The underlying premise isn't too shabby but lacks major development. Most of the time anything exciting which happens does so for the sake of it. There seems to be no connection between any of the characters, the action is far too OTT and there are a number of unexplained events. All that aside, Man of Steel certainly doesn't lack funding. It does however, lack a compelling story and is far too unrealistic to take seriously. Even though it's not bad, you quickly become bored with it all. Expand
  51. Dec 20, 2013
    5
    Man of Steel is a nice little round of CGI fisticuffs. Explosions go bang, buildings go crash and super-people get smashed through all manner of concrete items. But where's the fun? And more importantly, where's the heart? Whilst not a terrible film, Man of Steel could have (and should have) been a lot better.
  52. BKM
    Dec 17, 2013
    5
    The final hour or so of Zack Snyder's Superman reboot nearly results in sensory overload with its relentless action sequences and eye popping special effects. But before it reaches that point, a solid foundation has been built for future installments of the franchise which will hopefully focus more on The Man of Steel's internal conflict and serve up more worthy villains. Bring on Lex Luthor!
  53. Dec 14, 2013
    5
    A subpar reboot of an amazing film franchise. The effects and acting are quite good however the story is too complex and Superman is not a sympathetic character.
  54. Dec 13, 2013
    4
    Unfortunately, this Superman reboot was an enormous disappointment. I had relatively high hopes from Zack Snyder, director of the highly underrated Watchmen, which I enjoyed immensely. However, as the movie demonstrated, the premise of portraying Superman in a serious and dramatic tone turned out to be a completely ludicrous idea given the inherent camp of the source material. The Man ofUnfortunately, this Superman reboot was an enormous disappointment. I had relatively high hopes from Zack Snyder, director of the highly underrated Watchmen, which I enjoyed immensely. However, as the movie demonstrated, the premise of portraying Superman in a serious and dramatic tone turned out to be a completely ludicrous idea given the inherent camp of the source material. The Man of Steel has always been the most comically overpowered and cheesy superhero. It simply doesn't make sense to place such a dramatic tone on this kind of story. It might have worked had it been handled by a more capable screenwriter, since the wooden nature of the dialogue and terrible characterization of everyone including Superman/Clark Kent himself. Not to mention a very thin plot and overindulgent violence and destruction that bored the audience to death by taking up the final forty five minutes of the film only to lead to an unsatisfying and anticlimactic final act. This colossal movie that was a colossal bummer. Expand
  55. Dec 12, 2013
    6
    May not have much heart or many surprises, but the outstanding visuals and pummeling fight scenes make up for that. It's a well deserved modern reboot for the hero.
  56. lox
    Dec 10, 2013
    4
    Not sure if I'm in the minority on this one, but this movie was overall a disappointing mess. Being at least produced by Chris Nolan, I expected so much more. Instead what I got was a snobby Lois Lane who had terribly modest and even cheesy dialogue, a "Superman" who was developed in a rather sloppy way, unintentionally hilarious moments, and a villain who yelled at the camera half of theNot sure if I'm in the minority on this one, but this movie was overall a disappointing mess. Being at least produced by Chris Nolan, I expected so much more. Instead what I got was a snobby Lois Lane who had terribly modest and even cheesy dialogue, a "Superman" who was developed in a rather sloppy way, unintentionally hilarious moments, and a villain who yelled at the camera half of the time. Not to go overboard, I will simply say that I did not like this movie. I can acknowledge some pros though: the Super suit was cool, Zod's "purpose for which I was born" monologue in the final act was cool, and the sequences in space were breathtaking. Still, Man of Steel had nearly NO CROWD PLEASING MOMENTS....the comic relief moments spread in the movie were a hit-or-miss and would gain maybe one chuckle or a laugh out of the audience. And don't get me started on the action sequences....don't get me wrong, I love a good action movie, when it's well served. I highly enjoyed Fast 6 because it didn't try to be more than what it was, a simple mindless action-packed popcorn flick with well-placed humor and overall solid pacing. However Man of Steels action....boy was I bored by it. Explosions and skyscrapers collapsing left and right and even some annoying shaky cam in certain sequences that voided any chances of my investment. One of my friends mentioned two Easter eggs in the film: A Luthor truck and a satellite in space owned by Wayne Industries...BUT... since I WASN'T invested in the movie thanks to a sloppy and awkwardly paced script, I didn't notice these Easter eggs at all unfortunately. I personally felt also that the opening in Krypton was cool at first, but soon became over-extended. Am I the only one who felt that the special effects in this film weren't that impressive? If I am, so be it. Clark Kent/Kal-El's development was rather modest...it could've been done much better and more depth could've been put into it. Instead, the scenes of his upbringing would come in awkwardly and they felt kind of intrusive at times. This movie felt very inconsistent in terms of writing. Man of Steel's pacing was incredibly sloppy. One scene Kal-El was in a ship, then he was in a bar, then he was in the north pole, then he was suddenly Superman. Yeah, not very consistent pacing if you ask me. Overall, I was incredibly disappointed by this film. I really wanted to love Man of Steel. I wanted an excellent Superman flick with a terrific origins story that resembled the quality of Batman Begins. Man of Steel was hyped up well, but terribly under-delivered. Expand
  57. Dec 8, 2013
    5
    Very overrated movie. Henry Cavill does a great job as Superman, but the character Zod lacks the depth that he had in smallville and is overall very bland. The thing that surprised me most was the extreme death count of innocent bystanders, it was ridiculous and not in keeping with Superman's history at all. Superman is supposed to do everything he can to keep the innocent people safe (toVery overrated movie. Henry Cavill does a great job as Superman, but the character Zod lacks the depth that he had in smallville and is overall very bland. The thing that surprised me most was the extreme death count of innocent bystanders, it was ridiculous and not in keeping with Superman's history at all. Superman is supposed to do everything he can to keep the innocent people safe (to the point of risking his own life), but in this movie he did not seem to care at all. Overall the plot is hardly immersing and the actress that played Lois was a horrible choice. It's an "ok" movie like most Superman movies, but not great. Expand
  58. Dec 1, 2013
    6
    Others have described this film as having a "businesslike" tone, and I would agree. there are numerous plot holes, enough to keep this from a rating of 7 or 8. As a comic-book nerd, I'm used to seeing different takes on Superman's origin, and I really enjoyed that aspect of this film. The first 30-40 minutes are less superhero flick and more sci-fi.
    If you can deal with something
    Others have described this film as having a "businesslike" tone, and I would agree. there are numerous plot holes, enough to keep this from a rating of 7 or 8. As a comic-book nerd, I'm used to seeing different takes on Superman's origin, and I really enjoyed that aspect of this film. The first 30-40 minutes are less superhero flick and more sci-fi.
    If you can deal with something different than the Christopher Reeve films, and can ignore some holes and inconsistencies in storytelling, you'll enjoy this one.
    Expand
  59. Nov 30, 2013
    5
    This movie is a great new look on Superman, this movie is a terrible look at superman. This movie is a great new look at cinema while it also is said to have killed movie. This movie is so controversial that I say it is just meh. The people who like it don't see the problems while the people who hate it don't see the good side. To me with every good thing there is a bad thing. This is aThis movie is a great new look on Superman, this movie is a terrible look at superman. This movie is a great new look at cinema while it also is said to have killed movie. This movie is so controversial that I say it is just meh. The people who like it don't see the problems while the people who hate it don't see the good side. To me with every good thing there is a bad thing. This is a movie I shall 4 times and never again. Expand
  60. Nov 29, 2013
    5
    man of steel was the most over-hyped movie of the entire year,
    so was it worth it you might ask and the answer is very easy, NO.
    i actually felt bad and disappointing because i was so anticipating this movie, and i felt stupid afterward, cause there is so much plots mistakes it's almost unwatchable, unless you the kinda guy who ignore major details to have fun, i can't do that, cause
    man of steel was the most over-hyped movie of the entire year,
    so was it worth it you might ask and the answer is very easy, NO.
    i actually felt bad and disappointing because i was so anticipating this movie,
    and i felt stupid afterward, cause there is so much plots mistakes it's almost unwatchable,
    unless you the kinda guy who ignore major details to have fun, i can't do that, cause for me everything have to make sense
    and this movie unfortunately does not make any, i mean i felt mad after watching iron man 3 because of plot mistakes,
    after this i can gladly make iron man 3 my favorite movie of 2013.
    Expand
  61. Nov 19, 2013
    5
    Yeah, this was not very good at all, and a borderline Turd. I payed $5.99 to watch it, and I'm still not able to look in the mirror. Too many cheeseball lines, that couldn't be saved by good actors. In the middle of a catastrophic battle with aliens on a main street, was it necessary for Superman to say "Stay inside, it's not safe"?. No, it wasn't. Also, Dad...if you ever read this review,Yeah, this was not very good at all, and a borderline Turd. I payed $5.99 to watch it, and I'm still not able to look in the mirror. Too many cheeseball lines, that couldn't be saved by good actors. In the middle of a catastrophic battle with aliens on a main street, was it necessary for Superman to say "Stay inside, it's not safe"?. No, it wasn't. Also, Dad...if you ever read this review, I want you to know that you can count on me to save you from dying in a tornado I don't care if they find out I'm really fast. Expand
  62. Nov 14, 2013
    4
    This looks like a (similar) job for Superman! Look, up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's Super… Excuse me. For a big budget motion picture remake of perhaps the most recognizable comic book superhero Man of Steel is a tamely run-of-the-mill effort. It is generic blockbuster personified, and is a bleak, characterless, lacklustre, uninspiring, disjointed and overly rigid entry inThis looks like a (similar) job for Superman! Look, up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's Super… Excuse me. For a big budget motion picture remake of perhaps the most recognizable comic book superhero Man of Steel is a tamely run-of-the-mill effort. It is generic blockbuster personified, and is a bleak, characterless, lacklustre, uninspiring, disjointed and overly rigid entry in an intermittent franchise, which ironically struggles to take off. What's the "S" stand for? Well in my world it stands for Super-Serious as opposed to Superman. Never before has a superhero been so unwilling to express any discernible passion for their cause, simply maintaining an impassive poker face the whole time. The fate of mankind hangs in the balance, Superman to the rescue! Screams excitement right; however, Zack Snyder has somehow turned this tried and tested premise into a dreary, rather monotonous exploit, even if the visuals and set pieces verge on stunning; more dull and lifeless than dark and gritty. Henry Cavill is cool, calm and collected as Superman; however, he comes across overly reserved and emotionless far too often. Cavills' steely resolve is rarely visibly tested even if the goings-on impart otherwise, rendering his portrayal of Superman a tad difficult to adhere to on a humanistic level. In addition to this, he appears sound in the fabled suit but his rendering of the celebrated superhero comes across too deliberate and noticeably premeditated, although he does find his feet towards the end when the movie is given a much-needed shot of adrenaline. Man of Steel lacks fluidity, it is apportioned with often brisk and abrupt scene changes, and provides an unkempt collation and abstract composition of extracts and gestures to scenes from other movies. It is also complacent on character introduction, being naive in thinking we all know about the characters enough to not have to shed too much light on them; notably a lackadaisical introduction to Lois Lane and her backstory, further marred by a romance kindled out of thin air. All in all, Man of Steel supplies a moderately attention-grabbing experience, albeit unhurried and void of any palpable sentiment. In addition, it does not break any new ground and sets an overstatedly grim-faced tone that future installments in the notoriously up-and-down series that has experienced its fair share of highs and lows in the past will have to address if they are to garner the widespread approval of the audience.

    Maybe somebody should have gave Superman's cape a tug and told him you're doing it wrong.

    For more movie reviews visit: http://toddsmoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk
    Expand
  63. Nov 13, 2013
    6
    Talk about failing upward. Zack Snyder's three previous films got exponentially worse. From 300, to Watchmen, to the almost unwatchable Sucker Punch, how Mr. Snyder was given the brass ring of rebooting the Superman franchise is beyond me. His visual style is unquestionable. There are frames that could be hung as artwork, but as a storyteller Snyder is ponderous and dull. Granted, Man OfTalk about failing upward. Zack Snyder's three previous films got exponentially worse. From 300, to Watchmen, to the almost unwatchable Sucker Punch, how Mr. Snyder was given the brass ring of rebooting the Superman franchise is beyond me. His visual style is unquestionable. There are frames that could be hung as artwork, but as a storyteller Snyder is ponderous and dull. Granted, Man Of Steel is his best work since 300 (I feel Dawn Of The Dead his best so far), and the set pieces are spectacularly staged, but 2 and a half hours of earnest, EARNEST material about a flying alien Christ figure is a bit much. The only hint of humor is the refusal to even say the name "Superman" (maybe spoken twice during the whole movie). I'm not saying we have to dive into the overdrawn characters of the Donner version, or people speaking in witty banter like The Avengers, but a little humor goes a long way. The acting across the board was fine..hey, I actually didn't hate Crowe, as I have most of his roles lately. And the technical credits were all first class. Expand
  64. Nov 12, 2013
    6
    Devoid of any real relation with the previous Reeve classics,but Amy Adams and Henry Cavill are an interesting couple for future films, and Michael Shannon's decent dramatic role helps with the scripts plot holes, which are more numerous than should be, and tedious pacing. I liked it, didn't love it.
  65. Nov 12, 2013
    4
    As much as I wanted to like this movie, it was terrible. Not a funny terrible, but a forgettable atrocious experience. Acting's off in many scenes, green screen is large and destroys the epic flight scenes, everything about this movie that could've been good is squandered by this need to go beyond what was necessary. The saving grace is it's potential, but it ultimately falls flat. I goAs much as I wanted to like this movie, it was terrible. Not a funny terrible, but a forgettable atrocious experience. Acting's off in many scenes, green screen is large and destroys the epic flight scenes, everything about this movie that could've been good is squandered by this need to go beyond what was necessary. The saving grace is it's potential, but it ultimately falls flat. I go with the critics on this one; it wasn't great by any means. Expand
  66. Oct 27, 2013
    5
    for me this was the most awaited film this year, my expectation about this movie was on top, but this movie was another big disappointment for me as it was iron man 3.
  67. Oct 25, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Incredibly average reboot that relies on excessive CGI (a' la Transformers) to try to make an impact, but misses the mark script wise in so many ways.

    Zod is badly cast and nowhere near villainous enough to be a compelling main enemy, Kent's parents are shocking role models, and Lois Lane was wetter than a mermaid's brassiere...

    Also, I still don't quite get why they felt the need to cast Laurence Fishburne in the role of Perry White, he was criminally underused and the job could just as easily have been played by any old actor they'd simply pulled off the street and thrown a script!

    Whilst the CGI is ok, the plot and overall pacing just don't work, with the laughably poor 'disguise' to end the film, being the crowning turd in the water bowl.

    If you're into the typical action popcorn flick that seems to have taken over modern cinema these days, then chances are you'll find it fairly entertaining, but die hard comic fans and anyone who doesn't clap at the end of a movie in the cinema can find more interesting fare in many other places...
    Expand
  68. Oct 20, 2013
    5
    This movie is head on mediocre, there is nothing exceptional in it, no matter how the fan boys proclaiming it as the best superman movie ever. There is a big plot hole issue, and also a quite disturbing Stockholm Syndrome like connection between Superman and Lois Lane.
    Although the CGI is quite spectacular in this piece, it can't bare the weight of the entire production on its shoulders.
  69. Sep 16, 2013
    6
    remember a time when having your main character make jokes wasn't something just reserved for iron man? sigh... me too

    is man of steel a good movie? yes. is it THE superman movie? no. in my opinion, the best superman movie will probably be reserved for one of those DC films that they release every year. you know, the ones that they only have on netflix and are drawn by the guys who made
    remember a time when having your main character make jokes wasn't something just reserved for iron man? sigh... me too

    is man of steel a good movie? yes. is it THE superman movie? no. in my opinion, the best superman movie will probably be reserved for one of those DC films that they release every year. you know, the ones that they only have on netflix and are drawn by the guys who made the justice league show? the one where the black green lantern was in a relationship with hawkgirl?

    getting back on track, Man of Steel is the big movie for DC this summer, and boy does it fall flat on those accusations. from the very beginning of the movie, i was instantly hooked in. the shots that they showed of planet krypton were beautiful. i loved the creativity with such an alien world and how the technology and society had a very organic metallic feel. everything was fun to watch and even more fun to see other characters interact with them. after what you all expect to happen, spoiler krypton won't be found on any maps anytime soon, the movie takes a very intelligent step by making the next 20 minutes or so all about clark being the hero that he is supposed to be. it's about him realizing that his powers are meant for good and that he has the possibility to do great. he isn't in a costume, he isn't flying across the sky, he is just a man.... of steel (i couldn't help myself)

    after that however, the movie takes a turn for the worse. once supes gets into his new suit, you'll realize that the filmmakers had a fondness for the color gray. every shot, every scene, every character has a grey color pallet. i'm sorry, but this is superman. this is a figure known globally as a figure of freedom, justice, and the american way. seeing him in this dark and gritty world is extremely out of place. is it nice to see that man of steel (hey, the don't call him superman in the movie...) doesn't have to be as dull as a gallon of cement? yes, but it makes later scenes of man of steel doing uncharacteristically dark actions even more out of place and awkward.

    in the end of the day, if you are a fan of superman (of steel), there could be worse superman films to watch (looking at you, superman returns...), but if you were really waiting for something great and original, better wait for the sequel.
    Expand
  70. Sep 14, 2013
    6
    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
    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
  71. Sep 11, 2013
    6
    This film could have been a great movie had they cut half of the action scenes which, by the way, were poorly directed and clumsily paced. I left the theater with a weird feeling of confusion...was it Superman or did I end up going to a Godzilla movie by mistake...
  72. Aug 31, 2013
    6
    Always the same things. The Superman movies have to stop someday. Do not see it, because it has nothing new to show. I am very disappointed. That's my opinion.
  73. Aug 23, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I couldn't help but be disappointed. In all seriousness, the movie seemed eerily similar to the Transformers franchise. Apathy ensues as you stare at mindless action, minute-after-minute. What a shame that the producers made this movie so bland. One cannot help feel a sense of apathy when Clark Kent's father dies. Expand
  74. Aug 22, 2013
    6
    It has spectacular action sequences, thanks in part to Zack Snyder's (from 300) masterful directing. Unfortunately, i cannot say the same about the script and character development, which is a weird thing for a movie written (partly) by Christopher Nolan. It was trying to be complex like the Batman trilogy, but it wasn't. And Henry Cavill's acting is not good. And the actors who are, wereIt has spectacular action sequences, thanks in part to Zack Snyder's (from 300) masterful directing. Unfortunately, i cannot say the same about the script and character development, which is a weird thing for a movie written (partly) by Christopher Nolan. It was trying to be complex like the Batman trilogy, but it wasn't. And Henry Cavill's acting is not good. And the actors who are, were given underdeveloped characters. Overall, awesome action scenes is what saved this movie from being a total mess. They are that awesome. Expand
  75. Aug 18, 2013
    4
    I never really watched the previous Superman movies and I never read the comic books so my opinion of this movie, as a SF action movie, is unbiased by those or the hype. I am criticizing the movie alone. Although i knew it was directed by Snyder so I didn't expect much. I went to the theater with some friends thinking it would just be another average action movie and it was just that.I never really watched the previous Superman movies and I never read the comic books so my opinion of this movie, as a SF action movie, is unbiased by those or the hype. I am criticizing the movie alone. Although i knew it was directed by Snyder so I didn't expect much. I went to the theater with some friends thinking it would just be another average action movie and it was just that. However what I don't like about these average action movies is that they are bad. They have a weak plot, weak character development and are so full of nonsense. Those movies are just money machines. They have good SFX which can be showcased in the trailer to attract the audience but always fail to deliver. No wonder nearly half of the budget goes into marketing. Producers don't want to invest in an original or creative approach, that's too risky and why should they? People still paid to go, so did I. When you look at these years' big budget movies you'll see that they are either sequels, prequels, spin-offs, adaptations, remakes....etc. No original story. Man of Steel fits perfectly this section. Why bother making a good movie if it will sell anyway? This seems to be Hollywood's guideline nowadays. In conclusion, nearly no character development, boring dialogues, weak reused plot with many inconsistencies and holes, good to average imagery and average action. 4 out of 10. Expand
  76. Aug 5, 2013
    6
    I didn't like the movie, which is a real shame since I really love Superman. The story told has a nice twist to it but the potential was left dead on the floor. Henry Cavill was a really bad casting choice he's just not good at this part (and come on close shots of him with his chest hair flowing out of his suit?).

    Superman Returns was a much better film that made me feel really
    I didn't like the movie, which is a real shame since I really love Superman. The story told has a nice twist to it but the potential was left dead on the floor. Henry Cavill was a really bad casting choice he's just not good at this part (and come on close shots of him with his chest hair flowing out of his suit?).

    Superman Returns was a much better film that made me feel really excited about Superman and the people he protects. The new film is just a disappointment. Watch this at home.
    Expand
  77. Aug 4, 2013
    5
    One of the most disappointing movies of 2013. It started off brilliant, and quickly slipped into a barrage of pointless action that all seemed the same. Not looking forward to the sequel.
  78. Aug 2, 2013
    6
    Critics are right on this one. Uninspiring action movie of Snyder that doesn't deserve Nolan's name on it. Hans Zimmer made a great score which made me give it a 6 instead of a 5. The masses wil love a dumbed down Superman like this, it's a guaranteed summer cash cow.
  79. Jul 30, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I don't like when a movies are shouldn't be such blatant PR for Christianity at least not so drench in holy water. Over used main villain but praise to city busting fight scene finally superman has his powers back Expand
  80. Jul 30, 2013
    6
    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 feels like trailer content making these feel like a sizzle reel for a possible Superman movie. These are the golden source to an otherwise disjointedMan 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
  81. Jul 26, 2013
    5
    A horrible disappointment. Well-crafted enough to keep attention on the big screen, but I don't think this will translate well to TVs and other screens as time goes on. The back-story was very well done and touching in parts, but the lack of a real-time plot (they find him, a fight ensues, earth is saved) prevents it from paying off. This would have worked better as two separate moviesA horrible disappointment. Well-crafted enough to keep attention on the big screen, but I don't think this will translate well to TVs and other screens as time goes on. The back-story was very well done and touching in parts, but the lack of a real-time plot (they find him, a fight ensues, earth is saved) prevents it from paying off. This would have worked better as two separate movies one about the destruction of Krypton and the hunt for a new planet (including the show-down with Kal-El), and another with Superman discovering his place on earth. But the combined story doesn't work very well.

    The fight scene is ludicrous and boring.
    Expand
  82. Jul 25, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I don't think it's the worst Superman movie so far, but it certainly was the most disapointing. Maybe a real hardcore comic book nerd might rejoice in the details (origins and technical jargon) but I thought it went WAY overboard. Chris Nolan is a genius. If anyone could've breathed life back into this tired franchise, it would be him. He failed (at least in my opinion and by the low critic ratings.) So, it begs the question--Is this comic book character on his way out? My only saving hope is the fact that The Dark Knight was far and away a much better movie than Batman begins. However, Batman begins was a really good movie. The Man of Steel was not! I'm rooting for the next one to be good. Perhaps, they should stop promoting and teasing these flicks a year prior to releasing them. It would not have made this a better movie, but at the very least we might not feel such a strong sense of deceipt. I know the promos for The Dark knight began long before it's premeire date, but I was unaware of the movie until I saw the trailer when I went to see the first installment of Ironman. When I went back to the theatre about a month later, I had fairly modest expectations and was Blown Away by the greatest comic book movie ever. Of course you can't replicate the success of the Dark Knight just by limiting the exposure, but I think some lower expectations would work wonders! There were many things wrong with the Man of Steel. It was a bit scattershot, trying to tell an origins story and everything else all at once. For what it's worth, I found the psychogy of the young Clark Kent to be somewhat fascinating at times, and would have liked to have seen more of that. I don't like the fact that perhaps the most physically imposing villian of the franchise was trotted out in the first film (and there will BE another film!) Lex Luther is a criminal mastermind, but not super human. Come to think of it that may be the achilles heal of all superman movies. This character only has one weakness and it SHOULD be more difficult to come by. He could easily defeat any other super hero on the planet. So throwing out his only Kryptonian enemy in the first film may have been premature. I can't help but think their may have been a better way to execute it, but it's useless now since the fight is over and (SPOILER ALERT!!!)...Superman won! As I said before Chris Nolan is a genius. Despite this flop, there's still no one I'd rather see directing these movies. I will be rooting for him to have lightning struck twice in his 2nd effort. Well, That is if he is in fact the one directing it! Expand
  83. Jul 23, 2013
    4
    I went to go see Man of Steel with no expectation, mainly because of the last Superman movie. As hard as i tried to like Man of Steel, I just couldn't. There were some enjoyable parts of the movie, but overall, it wasn't worth the price of admission.

    The Good: The Casting- I thought that the actors that they chose to play the parts were perfect. Especially superman, Henery Cavill fit
    I went to go see Man of Steel with no expectation, mainly because of the last Superman movie. As hard as i tried to like Man of Steel, I just couldn't. There were some enjoyable parts of the movie, but overall, it wasn't worth the price of admission.

    The Good:

    The Casting- I thought that the actors that they chose to play the parts were perfect. Especially superman, Henery Cavill fit the role of superman very well. I thought Amy Adams and Michael Shannon were well placed as well. Including others

    FX- I thought the special effects were well done as well. They weren't spectacular, but the were good. Especially the fighting scenes. I really felt the power behind the punches. I thought they did that well. They flying scenes were pretty enjoyable too.

    The Bad:

    Script- Corning and uninteresting. It was hard to care about what was happening because first off there didn't seem to be any basis on why anything was happening in the movie. This was my biggest negative point in the whole movie. It was hard to get into because i didn't make the connection as to what is going on and why, and i think that is the scripts fault. Maybe there is back story in the comics, but i don't read those, so i have nothing to go off of. And there were several lines said in the movie that were like, really, you couldn't have thought of something better to say. The script wasn't all bad. There were moments in the story were I was engaged, but that didn't last long.

    Pacing- I felt like this movie was all over the place. Especially the fighting scenes. They were cool at first but the intensity slow faded, and i felt that nothing new was really offered to make any new encounter different. Another problem was the main spectacular fights happened at the middle of the movie making the final fight scene more of an annoyance then something i actually wanted to watch.

    In conclusion, this movie wasn't terrible, don't get me wrong. It just isn't the crazy awesome movie people are saying it is. It was mediocre at best. It did somethings right, but many wrong. I would recommend this movie as a RENTAL, just to experience the good moments of the movie, but do not waste the money to see it or buy it when it comes to DVD.
    Expand
  84. Jul 22, 2013
    5
    This movie suffers from piss poor pacing. It's slow in the beginning and at the flip of a dime becomes a massive in your face action spectacle. It's has some cool action scenes but ultimately goes way too far with it. Most of the characters are uninteresting (having an excess amount of supporting characters that don't go anywhere) and even Superman has no personality. EveryoneThis movie suffers from piss poor pacing. It's slow in the beginning and at the flip of a dime becomes a massive in your face action spectacle. It's has some cool action scenes but ultimately goes way too far with it. Most of the characters are uninteresting (having an excess amount of supporting characters that don't go anywhere) and even Superman has no personality. Everyone conversation to him is 'what it means to be a hero' or 'your purpose in life with these powers'. There is no real dialogue. The story does the Batman Begins approach having flashbacks to parts of his life, giving insight on the character's past and doing the beginnings of him becoming the hero. It doesn't do as well and while some flashbacks are well done, most become rather boring.

    The special effects and a few good action scenes before it becomes too much are the only things that hold this movie up. This movie fails to reach to the true potential of what it promised and what it could have been.
    Expand
  85. Jul 22, 2013
    6
    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 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
    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 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
  86. Jul 20, 2013
    4
    I will admit that the special effects are nice, ut overall the plot and dialogue is mess. The characters are made out of wood, and just boring action scenes. This movie was made for trailers not an actual cohesive movie.
  87. Jul 16, 2013
    4
    This movie could have been so much better if it was just played out straight like a regular superhero movie instead of serenading us with some emotional piece-of-ass. The beginning honestly got me wondering if i was watching an amateur college-student-budget film project rather than, hello, a Superman movie from a big Hollywood Studio. The timeline stuff was and it wasn't until theThis movie could have been so much better if it was just played out straight like a regular superhero movie instead of serenading us with some emotional piece-of-ass. The beginning honestly got me wondering if i was watching an amateur college-student-budget film project rather than, hello, a Superman movie from a big Hollywood Studio. The timeline stuff was and it wasn't until the action started that i felt a little comfortable. This movie did something I never thought possible: It made me dislike a superhero. Thanks a lot Zach Snyder. The whole emotional superhero thing worked for The Dark Knight Rises but only because Nolan was in charge and because Batman had been introduced to us earlier. In one word, let me summarize this movie: I only give it a 5 because the action was good and the back-story was nice as well. The execution- BLEH! Expand
  88. Jul 15, 2013
    6
    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.
  89. Jul 15, 2013
    6
    Man Of Steel Is visually nice the scenario is ok not over the top but it's ok the script was the messy point for me i laughed my ass off sometime some battle or extremely long for no reason

    Cool movie to watch but aint that good
  90. Jul 14, 2013
    6
    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 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 flightI 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
  91. Jul 10, 2013
    5
    Yawn... A typical graphics driven action flick, short on story. The fight sequences were far too long and contradictory. One moment someone is being crushed with a freight train, yet is easily choked out the next. I didn't hate it but it never made me care.
  92. Jul 10, 2013
    5
    'Man of Meh' in my opinion. Movie did not inspire much emotion to be honest, it feels like they took the recipe book for 'making a good comic type movie' ticked all boxes then moved on. The special affects were great as well as the sound, even though it was extremely loud at times. Overall the movie left me wanting some kind of connection with the character. It really does leave me'Man of Meh' in my opinion. Movie did not inspire much emotion to be honest, it feels like they took the recipe book for 'making a good comic type movie' ticked all boxes then moved on. The special affects were great as well as the sound, even though it was extremely loud at times. Overall the movie left me wanting some kind of connection with the character. It really does leave me thinking should there even be another one? To be honest I don't care either way. Expand
  93. Jul 9, 2013
    6
    Most people loathed Superman Returns, I didn't, I loved its symbolism and its attempt to carry on the Richard Donner universe despite its lack of fun loving heroics that made the originals so enjoyable. So I have to say Man of Steel had something to prove. The film tells the story of what happens when far away planet Krypton starts dying and Jor-El (Russell Crowe) sends his son Kal-ElMost people loathed Superman Returns, I didn't, I loved its symbolism and its attempt to carry on the Richard Donner universe despite its lack of fun loving heroics that made the originals so enjoyable. So I have to say Man of Steel had something to prove. The film tells the story of what happens when far away planet Krypton starts dying and Jor-El (Russell Crowe) sends his son Kal-El (Henry Cavill) to Earth so he may live. When he arrives he is raised in secret by Jonathan (Kevin Costner) and Martha Kent (Diane Lane) and learns to become a hero people can believe in as reporter Lois Lane (Amy Adams) gets closer to uncovering the truth behind this mysterious hero's true identity. The feeling I had when I left the cinema was one of disappointment sure but not for the reasons I expected. I expected an emotionless sequence of beautifully framed rubbish, what I got was so much more than that. Man of Steel is excellent science fiction, its smart, its beautifully realized and it shows a part of Superman's mythology that has never really been touched upon by the films. It's a good 30 minutes before we are introduced to the titular hero as we see the collapse of Krypton and how their society broke down enough for Jor-El to send Kal to Earth in the first place. The rest of the film is a pretty conventional origins story but unlike Zach Snyder's previous films Watchmen and Sucker Punch, Man of Steel has an understanding of its characters and the emotions that drive them and brings out some excellent performances in Henry Cavill, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner and Michael Shannon as fellow Kryptonian and lead villain General Zod. The film looks brilliant, it tells a captivating story and it has well thought out characters except for Adams' Lois Lane who pales in comparison to Margot Kidder's interpretation of the woman (although Adams is better than Kate Bosworth's version of the character but that's not hard as a reasonably well trained dog could play her better than Bosworth did.) The main downside however is not an acting problem its the films ending, not for the surprise twist I imagine a lot of people are talking about but because that final hour is just a long sequence of destruction that could be 20 minutes shorted and would still bore me to death. The action looks good and in sections of the film when there is actual story its good to see it accompany the story but the end of the film lacks any real reason for this ridiculous over the top violence and the story is nowhere as strong as it is in the first hour and a half. In fact that was my main qualm, the fact that the first hour and a half, the tale of how Clark Kent becomes Superman is almost perfect Sci-Fi and it is almost ruined by a blockbuster ending, a conclusion based on what other blockbuster superheroes have done recently and not what this character should do, something Snyder should have picked up on but unfortunately didn't. Expand
  94. Jul 8, 2013
    4
    What a disappointment, this film had such potential. Why is it the trailer contained all the beauty and humanity (and none of the inane action that the film did?) I should have known. There's a reason I don't see action movies (especially comic book ones) any more (I think the last one I saw was the first Iron Man). Story and great character development sacrificed to show us specialWhat a disappointment, this film had such potential. Why is it the trailer contained all the beauty and humanity (and none of the inane action that the film did?) I should have known. There's a reason I don't see action movies (especially comic book ones) any more (I think the last one I saw was the first Iron Man). Story and great character development sacrificed to show us special effect CG characters hitting and banging and crushing and so on. I mean, how many buildings do we have to see Superman and his enemies get thrown through? The action sequences are what ruins this movie hands down. And WHO decided a shaky, vomit-inducing hand held camera was the best choice for the earth family human sequences? Will we ever turn back? Oh wait..."Pacific Rim" is just around the corner. Yeah, let's rush out to get in line... Expand
  95. Jul 7, 2013
    5
    Superman is the 'Sonic the Hedgehog' of comic book characters.

    An extremely well designed, and well loved, object of intellectual property who ultimately isn't in many well done things. This movie is a pure example of this the character style is awesome, the art style is ok, and the plot is adequate at best. The current aggregate score of 55 is absolutely appropriate this is the
    Superman is the 'Sonic the Hedgehog' of comic book characters.

    An extremely well designed, and well loved, object of intellectual property who ultimately isn't in many well done things.

    This movie is a pure example of this the character style is awesome, the art style is ok, and the plot is adequate at best.

    The current aggregate score of 55 is absolutely appropriate this is the Sizzlers of comic book blockbusters.
    Expand
  96. Jul 7, 2013
    6
    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, forI 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
  97. Jul 7, 2013
    6
    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'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 wasThis 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
  98. Jul 6, 2013
    5
    I may be impartial because I never have been much of a Superman fan, but compared to other Super Hero genre movies in the last decade I don't thing Man of Steel was all that great. I think they could have done a lot more with the movie. Also Superman is supposed to be a bright vibrant "Good Guy" and they mad him way too serious and made the movie kind of dark and gloomy, which fits withI may be impartial because I never have been much of a Superman fan, but compared to other Super Hero genre movies in the last decade I don't thing Man of Steel was all that great. I think they could have done a lot more with the movie. Also Superman is supposed to be a bright vibrant "Good Guy" and they mad him way too serious and made the movie kind of dark and gloomy, which fits with Batman, but not Superman. They made the same sort of mistake with Amazing Spider-man. Expand
  99. Jul 6, 2013
    6
    The terrible hype machine has played to much into this movie for me. I watched the movie in 2d and thank god I did the shaky and mass debris really put me off the action in man of steel, the story was done differently than expected and has its up and downs some good some bad, i felt the story tried to do to much and cram in way more than it could chew and clearly can see some rushed partsThe terrible hype machine has played to much into this movie for me. I watched the movie in 2d and thank god I did the shaky and mass debris really put me off the action in man of steel, the story was done differently than expected and has its up and downs some good some bad, i felt the story tried to do to much and cram in way more than it could chew and clearly can see some rushed parts if they spaced it out and kept in one story mode, basically its the original Christopher reeves movies 1 and 2 meshed up and it suffers from being crammed into one movie. The acting was solid and holds the movie together and the cast deserves praise especially Antje Traue who completely stole it for me, while it would make a great blu-ray movie I cannot say this was the rip roaring summer blockbuster it was meant to be and if they didn't fill so much in so little time it would of made a great superman movie however my biggest memory of this movie was the debris factor so much flew around i couldn't make out what was happening to whom and where and since superman is about action i felt quite disappointed in what should be its strongest sequences and scenes the biggest problem is reviewing what is most likely going to be a series of movies and the development of Louis and Superman or Clark Kent not alot was hit upon on its starting settings which will be built upon in its blatant sequels. This isn't a bad movie but it isn't the new awesome superman that seemed to be promised this isn't what the dark knight movies did for batman but its not to far off but if a definitive sequel is made it will have to surely deliver more or suffer the same fate as the transformers. Expand
  100. Jul 5, 2013
    6
    What the film does well is set tone and deliver a story that is equally grounded, interesting, and enjoyable. Unfortunately, the film suffers from a number of technical shortcomings that may break the experience for some. After the film's opening sequence on Krypton, the Man of Steal focuses on Clark's journey to find a place in the only world he has ever known. To show the hardships thatWhat the film does well is set tone and deliver a story that is equally grounded, interesting, and enjoyable. Unfortunately, the film suffers from a number of technical shortcomings that may break the experience for some. After the film's opening sequence on Krypton, the Man of Steal focuses on Clark's journey to find a place in the only world he has ever known. To show the hardships that young Clark endured, flashbacks are used, generally showing different points in Clark's youth as he struggled to deal with his differences. The film then jumps back to adult Clark, as he wonders the United States, looking for some clue as to his origins and what his purpose in life may be. While both the past and present stories are interesting, the movie never stops to allow the audience time to really take in what is happening on screen. The scenes between young Clark and his Earth father are particularly endearing, but the audience is never really afforded time to absorb and appreciate the importance of their relationship. Instead, viewers are allowed a small sequence of dialogue, before they are jarred back in the present where adult Clark is in a completely different situation than he was the last time we saw him. In fact, the film plays leap frog over itself through half of the movie, trying to tell two stories at the cost of making both of them feel hollow.
    The second half of the movie is much more focused but highlights another major flaw in The Man of Steel: The action was disappointing. Some time in the production of the Man of Steel, Snyder and Co. decided that they needed action. Lots and LOTS of action. Bigger is better right? In this case, no. What starts off as over the top fighting, soon becomes a series of monotone action sequences lost in a white noise of fallen buildings and explosions. There came a point in the film's final battle where I became completely bored with the demi-gods that were battling on screen. Instead of fighting hand to hand, the Man of Steel's Superman (and its villains) generally just throw each other around. Usually through sky scrapers and chain restaurants. Seriously, if you watch it, count how many times somebody throws someone else through, into, or at a building. Though there is always a place for over the top action in the Super Hero genre, the inclusion of more technical hand-to-hand fighting (In addition to the 'splosions) would have broken up the action while making Superman seem like more of a fighter and less of a brutish brawler.
    So, action and story aside, who is the Man of Steel's Superman? To my surprise, he was surprisingly human. Though he is 100% good guy, Superman is not the virtuous boyscout you may know from other versions of the hero. TMOS presents a Superman that is man first and extraterrestrial super-hero second. He isn't completely sure of himself nor his actions. This leads to one of the most surprise (and controversial) endings to a Super Hero movie to date. Superman's ability to be fallible adds a texture to the character that is rarely seen and becomes easily one of the most enjoyable parts of the film.
    All in all, The Man of Steel is an Okay movie. It gets a lot of things right but never seems to overcome its glaring flaws. Superman has never been more relatable and perhaps with the origin out of the way, the next outing by Snyder and DC will be much more enjoyable.
    Expand
Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 47 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 47
  2. Negative: 3 out of 47
  1. Reviewed by: Glen Weldon
    Jun 14, 2013
    60
    What it fails to supply much of — surprisingly, it must be said — is fun. This is serious business, Snyder seems always to be saying. This is badass. And given the sheer logistical size of the spectacle on display, it's a position that's hard to argue with.
  2. Reviewed by: Matt Zoller Seitz
    Jun 14, 2013
    75
    The most striking and curious aspect of Man of Steel is the way it minimizes and even shuts out women.
  3. Reviewed by: Lawrence Toppman
    Jun 13, 2013
    75
    David Goyer, who wrote the script for Man of Steel from a story he concocted with Christopher Nolan, found a new way to make us care: The title character is disturbed by everything in his adopted home.