User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2690 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch 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
  1. Jun 14, 2013
    4
    Another super-hero reboot movie, however this one falls short. It's way too serious for its own good, trying to mimic the tone of the Christopher Nolan Batman movies to no success. It focuses too much on being melodramatic and that brings the whole movie down. The action is interesting at times, mostly when Super Man is fighting his foes in mid-air, but ends relying on huge explosions andAnother super-hero reboot movie, however this one falls short. It's way too serious for its own good, trying to mimic the tone of the Christopher Nolan Batman movies to no success. It focuses too much on being melodramatic and that brings the whole movie down. The action is interesting at times, mostly when Super Man is fighting his foes in mid-air, but ends relying on huge explosions and disasters rather than satisfying fights. It ends up being too noisy both visually and aurally. But by far the worst thing about this movie is how it doesn't feel like a super-hero movie, but rather some generic alien invasion flick. I never cared about what was going on, the characters failed to grab me in any way, and outside of the occasional cool action scene this movie ended up being a waste of time. It's all so disappointing because this was supposed to bring Super Man back with a new tone. If this is how the rest of the Super Man movies are going to turn out they need to just stop now. It even makes me worry that, if one ever gets made, the future Justice League movie will fail. Expand
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. Jun 15, 2013
    6
    While Man of Steel promises to have a good story and characters instead we get a lot of action and not enough story. Had the film given us a more character driven film and focused less on the action we could have really had something great here. As it is Man of Steel is good. It has some fun action, some epic moments, and a couple nice character moments. While it may not have wowed me asWhile Man of Steel promises to have a good story and characters instead we get a lot of action and not enough story. Had the film given us a more character driven film and focused less on the action we could have really had something great here. As it is Man of Steel is good. It has some fun action, some epic moments, and a couple nice character moments. While it may not have wowed me as much as I thought it was it did keep me more engaged than Superman Returns. If you are a fan of action movies and just want to see Superman beat the sh*t out of guys for the majority of the movie, or at least it feels like it, I think you will enjoy Superman. If you are looking for a more character driven superhero movie then go watch X-Men,Spider-Man 2,The Dark Knight Trilogy, and Superman I & II and even to a certain extent Superman Returns, which while lacking in action does have a story. As it is though Man of Steel is entertaining with enough action, epicness, and character development to make it worth a watch for any superhero fan. Expand
  5. 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
  6. Jun 15, 2013
    5
    “Man of Steel” could have/should have been called “Superman: Everything You Know About Him, Everything You Don’t Know About Him Along With Many Things You Didn’t Want To Or Need To Know About Him!” Should you be familiar with the comic book Superman or his many TV shows and movies the only reason for seeing this movie is to feast your eyes on a new, hunky, extremely well built, dazzling“Man of Steel” could have/should have been called “Superman: Everything You Know About Him, Everything You Don’t Know About Him Along With Many Things You Didn’t Want To Or Need To Know About Him!” Should you be familiar with the comic book Superman or his many TV shows and movies the only reason for seeing this movie is to feast your eyes on a new, hunky, extremely well built, dazzling actor, named Henry Cavill, who flies into stardom with this role which will lead to interesting comparisons of Cavill versus Christopher Reeve. Along those lines I can picture a panel at a future Superman convention not only discussing the Supermans but Margot Kidder versus Amy Adams as Lois Lane, and Marlon Brando versus Russell Crowe as Jor-El, Phyllis Thaxter, Eva Marie Saint versus Diane Lane as Martha Kent and who would win as the better adopted father Glenn Ford or Kevin Costner, the latter in the latest version. Perry White has gone from Jackie Cooper to Frank Langella and now Laurence Fishburne not to forget the question of how does the latest film score by Hans Zimmer stand up against John Williams scores?

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

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

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

    Oh yes, a reason for seeing this movie may be that you don’t know what you think is an S on his costume and if Lois Lane knows who Superman is. You may or may not know the answer to the first and you may not be sure of the answer to the second but do you really want to know?
    Expand
  7. 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.
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. Jul 29, 2014
    5
    "Man of Steel" is undeniably an interesting take on Superman's character, but the film eventually fails in delivering much more than superhero muscle and impressive visuals.
  11. 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!
  12. Jun 21, 2013
    5
    “Man of Steel” is, as everyone knows, the new Warner Bros. entry using this previously tried and true franchise about the native from the planet Krypton who finds a new home on Earth. Unfortunately, wearing a cape and an S on the front of his shirt is where the similarity ends. Starring Henry Cavill in the title role (an intentional Chrstopher Reeve look-alike), the film also boasts of a“Man of Steel” is, as everyone knows, the new Warner Bros. entry using this previously tried and true franchise about the native from the planet Krypton who finds a new home on Earth. Unfortunately, wearing a cape and an S on the front of his shirt is where the similarity ends. Starring Henry Cavill in the title role (an intentional Chrstopher Reeve look-alike), the film also boasts of a cast consisting of Kevin Kostner, Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishbourne and Michael Shannon. Directed by Zack Snyder and co-written by Christopher Nolan and David Geyer, the failure for the film to work must rest with one or all of the aforementioned gentlemen.. Certainly the writing is the main culprit with a plot that is too complicated and a story that lacks total credibility. As a result, the viewing experience is deeply marred by this overly long movie.. The film’s action scenes are excessive and don’t allow for the story, what there is of it, to be told. Being a fan of the old Superman comics and films, I found this movie to do a tremendous disservice to the property and the image of this almost legendary and timeless superhero. I give the film a 5 because it just doesn”t live up to the potential and hype which preceded its opening day. Expand
  13. 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.
  14. 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
  15. Jun 22, 2013
    5
    Man of Steel is a new reboot for the next Superman series which was done by director, Zack Snyder and the production was hold by Christopher Nolan after he accomplished his Dark Knight trilogy. Before I discuss about the new reboot, this movie is very different like most other classic Superman films. Superman and Superman II are very memorable and most other three Superman movies are quiteMan of Steel is a new reboot for the next Superman series which was done by director, Zack Snyder and the production was hold by Christopher Nolan after he accomplished his Dark Knight trilogy. Before I discuss about the new reboot, this movie is very different like most other classic Superman films. Superman and Superman II are very memorable and most other three Superman movies are quite disappointing and pretty weak. I would say that the movie is very underwhelming. The new story is about Jor-El (Russell Crowe) from Krypton is sending his son Kal-El (known as Clark Kent/Superman) to the planet Earth, which he'll turn into a super strength superhero with energy source, until General Zod (Michael Shannon) will capture the son and the planet Krypton is been destroyed. After that, the son grows up as a new Superman (Henry Cavill) to fight over General Zod and his men to destruct the entire world. As a follow up like most other Superman movies, this movie is pretty weak. The situation is that the story is too complex with too many cut scenes, the acting wasn't that great, and the plot is too rushed. The characters are also forgettable and I would say that the Superman movies or the animated series from the 90's are well done with memorable characters, take time with their motivation, and acting is good. But the new characters in this reboot are too cliché with throwing too much stereotypes into a wooden dialogues. Henry Cavill portrays the new Superman is okay, but not that memorable and this protagonist is an obvious hero who is here to find some answers and act like he is brave or what? There is an obvious Lois Lane (Amy Adams), there is an obvious military soldiers, there is an obvious henchmen, and there is an obvious people from the city or in the small town of Smallville. That is except for two characters like Jor-El play by Russell Crowe and General Zod play by Michael Shannon. Russell Crowe did very well as the father of Superman with good character development and some good back story about him. Michael Shannon is having fun for playing the over the top villain and acting like Terrence Stamp's performance. But like I say the story and the characters are kind of bland and too forgettable. The movie is not that horrible or bad, it's just that the movie is too underwhelm with confusing back stories, the shaky cams are too fast, and the characters are pretty weak. At the same time, this movie is a minuscule of average superhero flicks. Thumbs Down. Expand
  16. 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.
  17. Jul 4, 2013
    4
    Es algo básico teniendo en cuenta que es el super heroe mas importante de todos los tiempos, tiene sus momentos de gran accion y entretenimiento sin embargo aun falta mas trabajo no en efectos porque eso si lo destaco si no en el trayecto como tal de la pelicula
  18. 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
  19. 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.
  20. Jun 18, 2013
    5
    This movie had great special effects, but the plot, the characters, the acting, the rest was all just meh. I don't ever feel like I care about any of the characters. There was no amazing performance by any of the actors to blow someone away like Heath Ledger as The Joker. This was just a summer blockbuster to make money, not a good movie and kickoff of a franchise.
  21. 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.
  22. 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
  23. 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
  24. Jun 29, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Apart from the impressive effects really nothing to watch in this movie .First half is more like a documentary that totally mismatch to comic book. Christopher Nolan is always poor and he did great part of ruining the superman as well.Its so stupid that miss Lane appears right after superman kill the General Because before that they were fighting and moved away from her in a lightning speed.I believe Super man returns is far more better movie than this.Also absence of defense Secretary and President is a mistake,Writers were assumed that target audience is brain dead and that a kind of mock to their awareness. Expand
  25. 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
  26. 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.
  27. 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.
  28. 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
  29. Jul 2, 2013
    6
    i had rather high expectations for this, and I must concede myself disappointed. The movie does not flow as a well-made film should, and there are many innaccuracies and oversights that make the fi;m difficult to watch. Coupled with the overlong running time, ridiculously extended battle scenes, and the 3 separate 'final' battles, you end up feeling like you just want it to end. As ani had rather high expectations for this, and I must concede myself disappointed. The movie does not flow as a well-made film should, and there are many innaccuracies and oversights that make the fi;m difficult to watch. Coupled with the overlong running time, ridiculously extended battle scenes, and the 3 separate 'final' battles, you end up feeling like you just want it to end. As an action movie, it's a decent one at best. Expand
  30. Jun 24, 2013
    5
    There is one word that best describes this movie. Disappointing.
    Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie. It's actually quite good. The issue is that this movie was meant to be a revival for the Superman franchise, one that excited its audience and built a lot of anticipation for a soon to follow sequel. Instead, it just acts as another normal superhero movie. That's all.
    There are a
    There is one word that best describes this movie. Disappointing.
    Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie. It's actually quite good. The issue is that this movie was meant to be a revival for the Superman franchise, one that excited its audience and built a lot of anticipation for a soon to follow sequel. Instead, it just acts as another normal superhero movie. That's all.

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

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

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

    All in all, the movie is definitely worth seeing. It is a good movie, no doubt, hence the score of a 7. It just doesn't quite live up to the quality of other movies in the same genre.
    Expand
  31. 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
  32. 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.
  33. 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
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. Jun 16, 2013
    5
    Man of Steel is finally here and what can I say… it was as entertaining as it was disappointing. In this film Clarke Kent seeks answers about t his home world, Krypton, and tries to grapple with his responsibilities here on Earth. Of-course, while all this is going on, the evil (and programmed) General Zod threatens Earth’s very existence. The first part of the film is filled with someMan of Steel is finally here and what can I say… it was as entertaining as it was disappointing. In this film Clarke Kent seeks answers about t his home world, Krypton, and tries to grapple with his responsibilities here on Earth. Of-course, while all this is going on, the evil (and programmed) General Zod threatens Earth’s very existence. The first part of the film is filled with some excellent Clarke Kent and Krypton back stories that were elevated by the performances of Kevin Costner (Jonathon Kent) and Russell Crowe (Jor-El); the two father’s of this film. I must give Henry Cavill a hand for maintaining the win streak of fantastic Superman performances. While Christopher Reeve captured the charm of Superman and Brandon Routh did a slightly brooding interpretation, Cavill excelled at capturing the physicality of the Man of Steel. With all these high marks remaining constant; the beautiful introduction gave way to bloated, explosive action sequences. The action was unhinged and needed some serious taming, because it didn’t afford the filmmakers anytime to develop our other characters or elevate the plot. And the story itself, as effective as it may be, didn’t really cover any new ground. This Zack Snyder is a director who can always create a nice looking film, the world of Krypton in particularly is brought beautifully to the screen. He’s also always able to focus on those minute visual details like those frame-for-frame shots from Watchmen and 300 that were taken straight from the comic book. In this case I-Hop restaurants and other familiar settings litter the background of every scene to make the audience aware of the ‘real world’ setting in which this movie takes place. These are all nice splashes, but ultimately he is never able to look at the big picture: Story, Plot and Character! These are the things that truly determine the strength of a film, everything else is secondary. It’s unfortunate that the action and aesthetics took precedence, but this was decent summer entertainment that should be seen on the big screen. Expand
  37. 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.
  38. 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.
  39. Jun 16, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have never been a big fan of Superman. I even would go so far as to say he is my least favorite superhero. Is it being heroic to risk nothing to save an ant? Not quite. And to superman we would all be ants. So any movie about him has traditionally played up his two weaknesses most of the time. This movie does a good job of not making Lois Lane a weakness at all. As to the krypton stuff. There were no glowing green rocks in this one although that got substituted for a "foreign atmosphere" thing which, in a way, is more believable.
    The villain general Zod is both logical and convincing. His "evil" plot is not overly complex and is rational at all times. So even if the actor brought nothing extra to the role it would be "good enough" in the villain department. Certainly a lot better than some previous films that don't deserve mention.
    The bulk of the film is a smash fest with Superman and general Zod's army of 5 or 6 loyal henchmen duking it out. Quite often while they are being shot at by people from the army who don't realize after the first clip how ineffective bullets are. People who came to watch destruction are sure to get their fill.
    I also have to give top marks to the scenes at the beginning with Krypton. They do a good job making the world alien but still familiar. The technology and politics are top notch sci fi and not some cheesy throw away as they have been previously.
    With regards to supporting cast Kevin Costner does a good job playing Superman's "dad." He almost gives more to the roll than Russel Crowe puts into his surprisingly large roll as Jor-El. Both of them are a credit to the film. Laurence Fishburne is also a surprising face playing Lois's boss (name?) though he is little more than a bit player in the film he adds warmth to it. Him and Costner are the only two to do so.
    That would be my main criticism of the film. It's cut together OK. Shot a bit stylistically, but visually quite good CG'd up the wazoo. Top marks to the 600+ artists who worked full time on that. But in the end all the flashbacks add sadness and darkness for the most part and are not the inspirational warmth they are intended to be.
    It may be the impossible, a "good" superman movie. But it isn't great and I have a hard time imagining it spawning any sequels. Although I wouldn't mind seeing a prequel starring Russel Crowe.
    Expand
  40. 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
  41. 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.
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. Jun 29, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man of Steel is by no means a bad film but it clearly is too loaded, especially for a film which is bound to have the benefit of one or more sequels. Imagine the batman trilogy but with all the plot points established in a week. Clark Kent (well played in all fairness by Henry Cavill) goes from saving kids on a bus as a teen, to saving workers on an oil rig to... destroying towns and cities while battling a small army of similar strengthed supermen. Entertaining, yes, but its all too much. The film suffers from some silliness in trying to get its emotional beats particularly during the final scene where Zod is about to kill four innocent people despite both he and Superman levelling much of metropolis without a care in the world during a (has to be said) visual stunning fist fight.

    All that said, Man of Steel is an enjoyable re-spin of Superman and sets up the main characters well. Maybe I would have warmed more to it if the threat of Zod (Michael Shannon is quite good in the few scenes we get with him) was merely introduced, and left for the sequel. But its overlong and I cant help but feel that maybe DC or Warners wanted something to rival Avengers a bit too much. I look forward to a sequel but part of me wonders how they can up the stakes on what happens in this first movie.
    Expand
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. 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
  49. 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
  50. 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
  51. Jun 17, 2013
    6
    Man of Steel

    Director: Zack Snyder Starring: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner Runtime/Rated: 2hr. 28min/PG-13 ‘Man of Steel’ was my very first Superman movie I have ever seen. So, how did it far with me? Did I enjoy it? Can it be better then ‘The Dark Knight’ films? Well, let’s get started! The story starts at Superman’s home
    Man of Steel

    Director: Zack Snyder

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    See this movie as a matinee showing.
    Expand
  52. 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
  53. Apr 27, 2015
    6
    This is a film that is ridden with flaws, but the breathtaking spectacle and innovative approach Zack Snyder takes with the classic superhero narrative is undeniably brilliant.
  54. Jun 14, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have a very love/hate relationship with this movie.

    This movie was by no means bad, but it was definitely held back by character and environmental inconsistencies. For example: Faora, the female Kryptonian, claims their race is superior due to the evolutionary loss of morality with the blatantly false comment, "We have no morality". This completely reduced the complexity of the Kryptonians character and was borderline contradictory to their main purpose, to preserve Kryptonian culture.

    There was a lot of moments in the film that were extremely contrived. I kept thinking, "Gee, it sure is convenient Superman is RIGHT there, otherwise that could have been bad." or, "Man, it sure is great that machine with tentacles stopped attacking Superman long enough for him to destroy it." OR EVEN "Wow! It sure is amazing that the laws of gravity CEASE to exist when Lois is being sucked into this vortex at the end of the movie." Seriously, with that last one Superman even has a difficult time breaking free from the vortex, but for some reason when Lois was free falling it was like it had zero effect on her (she has gravity powers?).

    Also at the end of the movie was a retarded comment made by a certain government agent who says, "You caused over $2,000,000 dollars in damage to that drone you brought down!" Forget the fact that he completely decimated an entire city of idiots (who stare at buildings falling on them) causing probably billions of dollars worth of damage. Forget the fact that Earth owes him a life debt. Same freaking thing with that dumb broad at the end, "He's kinda hot"? Really? Forget the fact that you've probably never seen this magnitude of incredibly not-human feats.

    Don't even get me started on that ridiculous tornado scene.

    The ONLY redeeming factor for this movie was the incredible fight scenes. Even the villain's fighting styles were super dynamic and versatile. When Zod was wearing that heavy armor, he reflected that with an almost beast-like fighting style. That was awesome!

    Overall I'm glad I went to see it, but if I was given a chance to go back in time, I probably wouldn't have gone to the midnight showing. It was ok; it was Super-over-hyped.
    Expand
  55. 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
  56. 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
  57. Jun 29, 2013
    4
    Hmm. A mixed bag, this one. The Lord of the Rings style Krypton in the Prologue came as a bit of surprise but not an unwelcome one. The film really came alive, however, once baby Kal-El made it to earth. The growing pains and adoption issues of the first act were beautifully handled and the relationship between Clark and his (human) father and mother was really very touching. But then...Hmm. A mixed bag, this one. The Lord of the Rings style Krypton in the Prologue came as a bit of surprise but not an unwelcome one. The film really came alive, however, once baby Kal-El made it to earth. The growing pains and adoption issues of the first act were beautifully handled and the relationship between Clark and his (human) father and mother was really very touching. But then... well. What happenedin the next two acts? I'll tell you what happened. What happened was that chauvanist arse of an executive producer, Jon Peters (ex-hairdresser to Barbara Streisand) finally got his way after trying to screw up the Superman franchise with his lame-ass, ill-conceived ideas and lack of any real love for the Superman mythology. Peters has wanted for years to re-jig Superman's suit ("too apparently) and have Kryptonians bashing the hell out of each other (and Kansas... and Metropolis...) for a whole hour or more of my (and your) paid-for cinema-going time. The second and third acts of this film are like Independence Day kicking seven bells out of Battleship while Transformers stamps on the Matrix Revolutions' head. This might be a 14 year old boy's idea of a good movie. But it ain't mine. Come back Bryan Singer, all is forgiven. Expand
  58. 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
  59. 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
  60. Jun 21, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is by far the best superman movie, but to be fair that not saying much. There are moments in this movie that are very good, like the battle in Smallville. But the story line in places could of been much better like destroying the world to re-colonise it...why? If they left it as it was they would of been unstoppable as they would all be as powerful as superman... Also Zod is a trained soldier who has been bred and trained his entire life to fight and yet was beaten by somebody who has actively avoided fighting his entire life...

    But anyway not a bad movie, worth a watch, but not the best superhero movie.
    Expand
  61. 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
  62. Jun 21, 2013
    4
    Making a movie for Superman must be very hard but I think that they did a pretty good job at it. It is great to see a next gen Superman but to be honest I don't think fans of the original Superman movies are gonna like this as Superman does not keep his identity much of a secret. It was great to see what Superman's younger life was like as I don't think that has ever been addressed before.Making a movie for Superman must be very hard but I think that they did a pretty good job at it. It is great to see a next gen Superman but to be honest I don't think fans of the original Superman movies are gonna like this as Superman does not keep his identity much of a secret. It was great to see what Superman's younger life was like as I don't think that has ever been addressed before. The fight scene effects where great but after seeing him fly threw 3 building it quickly gets dull and this really makes the movie drag. The movie is not terrible but you could easily give it a miss. Expand
  63. 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
  64. 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.
  65. 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.
  66. 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.
  67. 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
  68. 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.
  69. 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
  70. Jun 14, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I became of Zack Snyder fan with Watchmen, a film that is very near and dear to my heart. I was totally excited when I heard that he was making MOS, and became more so as the trailers were trickled out. MOS is an unusual movie and part of that feeling may come from its otherworldly music score. It wastes no time at all and gets to the meat of the story quickly, giving it a kind of dense feel. However, there are points in the movie that are hard to digest. The plot always finds a contrived way of getting Lois Lane in all of Superman's set pieces on board a space ship, in the tundra, in Kansas she never far behind. She might as well have been in the Zod fights. Also, Superman's never flown until the events of this movie?! I give Snyder huge credit for making this movie all his own, it's different in the same way Tim Burton made Batman in his own vision. I had fun, see this movie but don't nit pick its odd parts. Expand
  71. Jul 3, 2013
    6
    Man of Steel is a fairly good film. There's no saying that it's a great film, because it undeniably isn't. Some of the acting is somewhat wooden and flat, and it jumps from scene to scene, plot point to plot point, rather absent-mindedly and not in a memorable fashion. This results in the film falling down slightly from what it could have been. The fact that this film had Christopher NolanMan of Steel is a fairly good film. There's no saying that it's a great film, because it undeniably isn't. Some of the acting is somewhat wooden and flat, and it jumps from scene to scene, plot point to plot point, rather absent-mindedly and not in a memorable fashion. This results in the film falling down slightly from what it could have been. The fact that this film had Christopher Nolan (of The Dark Knight fame) involved meant that some people were expecting more, another Dark Knight, but that doesn't happen in this film because of the cast, both main and supporting, and the way it casually jumps between plot points without anything really holding them together, making it a rather difficult film to follow. However, on the whole this is a good film and, though it doesn't live up to expectations, it isn't exactly unwatchable and, as well as being a solid entry in the franchise, may very well be one of the best films of the lot. Expand
  72. Jun 19, 2013
    5
    Find the postivie reviews by users odd for this one. I had high hopes for the picture however the story fell very very short. Michael Shannon as Zod was amazing. Great acting. The story regarding Lois Lane was awful (knowing how to shoot a gun, from another planet, 2 seconds after being handed to her is just one example). Special effects were amazing, however movie was an easy 30 toFind the postivie reviews by users odd for this one. I had high hopes for the picture however the story fell very very short. Michael Shannon as Zod was amazing. Great acting. The story regarding Lois Lane was awful (knowing how to shoot a gun, from another planet, 2 seconds after being handed to her is just one example). Special effects were amazing, however movie was an easy 30 to 45 minutes too long. The only way I can see users liking this is because it is a "Superman Movie". I think in 3-4 years people will look back and say this is a disappointment. Expand
  73. Jun 16, 2013
    5
    Strength: Visual Effects
    Weak: Kyptonian Society Premises.
    The has the best Kypton Myth and i concur but it could have been better if the script writers made kept closer adherence to the concepts of Plato, which would have made the Kyptonian Society much more viable. Instead, we have Russel Crowe mouthing haphazardly a single line, without justification, about the demerits of Krypton,
    Strength: Visual Effects
    Weak: Kyptonian Society Premises.

    The has the best Kypton Myth and i concur but it could have been better if the script writers made kept closer adherence to the concepts of Plato, which would have made the Kyptonian Society much more viable. Instead, we have Russel Crowe mouthing haphazardly a single line, without justification, about the demerits of Krypton, like a sales person brushing off claims of excellence of his rival's products, and Superman, with visible lack of compunction, ripping apart Krypton's solution to the questions asked by all intelligent being about existence (the Genesis chamber ship) with his EYES (who can blame him? It is unlikely for twelve-year olds to be able to read beyond Plato's words). Anyone with a smattering of understanding about Plato's thoughts would have winced and railed at such scenes.

    Of course, it is the intention of the script writers to pitch freedom against societal pre-destination, with Superman, bastion of freedom, choosing to do Good and besting the best warrior of the totalitarian Krytonian society, who did 'Evil' in his attempts to fulfill his purpose of protecting his people.

    In the end, General Zod's death speech bespeaks a grander character in the man than in that of an alien in tights parroting about freedom and choice, as he is brought up to do.
    Expand
  74. 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
  75. 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
  76. Jun 15, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Easy steps to a better movie:

    1. Don't try to pack so much stuff in on Krypton. Put the societal and environmental decay in the background, as context. Then, have Zod and Maximus argue about the best way forward, give us some touching dialog between the man and his wife with the mismatched accent, and then have Kal's Superpod lift off to a backdrop of the pseudo-nuclear beginnings of civil war. That way we don't see Zod LOSING both militarily and in a fist fight against a scientist in the first 20 minutes of film. Fill in the other stuff with the hologram and Zod's speeches later.

    2. Have little Clark try to help, somehow, and screw up. If the bully had bothered other kids, and Clark had decided to scare him or respond when nobody was looking only to accidentally almost seriously injure the kid...it would have added a lot of weight and gravitas to both Bill Durham's otherwise alarming speeches and the kid's later frustrated efforts to remain passive. The oil rig would then be a pivotal moment in his character growth. "Oh, wow....I really can save these people, if I'm careful."

    3. Make it rain. Even in Kansas, tornado out of nowhere is not a typical event. Why was it deemed a bad idea to have it be raining? Also, when has there even been that much traffic in a place where a Kevin Costner character might believably live? I grew up in South Dakota, and not even a high school football game creates that much traffic (and that's about the biggest thing that happens in those areas). Does he have a field of dreams opening up nearby, perhaps? Put a storm in there, lose half the cars from the shot, and have his foot get caught when the approaching disaster whips a car while he's helping the mother...the whole "going back at the last minute to save the dog" stuff is as tired as it is corny. Please.

    4. Shoo the kids away from the closet. It's bad enough that the teachers just let them stand around gossiping while the child has a breakdown....but then his mom doesn't care, either? It's a weird backdrop for what could be a very touching scene. It's not like Clark couldn't HEAR and SEE them mock him if they were in the classroom, right? You gained nothing from having them there.

    5. Have somebody else kill Zod. Maybe, as Zod taunts and dares him to finish him off and Superman howls in frustration, torn between not wanting to kill and needing to save that family, Lois Kryptoknifes the guy and resolves the issue. That gives us somewhere to go in the next film. If Superman is willing to kill when the need arrives, you've really just ditched one of the primary psychological facets that informs his internal drama (the other being his loneliness, which you've also ditched). Now, all he has is a fear of cloudy days and a whole lot of superpowers.

    6. Reduce the destruction by 50%. If you only wrecked 11 buildings, and only killed a baker's dozen of soldiers and civies, none of us would have walked out going "Wow...lame!" How are you going to up the stakes in a sequel? You've killed thousands (at least), had Superman purposefully end a villain with his bare hands and make choices in battle that intentionally put humans at risk (including grabbing a bad guy from a remote location and willingly hurling him through various populated buildings in a nearby town). What's left to do?

    7. Don't explain everything. The scene with the scientist looking at the circle (earth, natch) and the squiggly lines and immediately intuiting (with lots of scientific babble) that they were terraforming earth was a Michael Bay-level cheeseball of a moment, and unneeded. The machine is called something like a World Engine or something. You've already told us what it does. Don't try to explain how...please. And don't tell us how Zod modded his ride to get to earth, either. It's a spaceship, built by a race that colonized the stars. We wouldn't have rolled our eyes if you'd left that out. All the explaining helped make "alien weird" look and feel a lot more just "future earth"y.

    Do these things, and you'd have a much better movie methinks.
    Expand
  77. 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
  78. Jun 17, 2013
    4
    When the teaser trailer hit, i was interested. When the full trailer hit, i was really excited. Then i saw the movie, which I was looking forward to as being one of the best of the summer. What a disappointment. The action is boring and overly-long. The plot is only there when it needs to be. The acting is sub-par at points. The writers took the plot from The Matrix, added in some AvengersWhen the teaser trailer hit, i was interested. When the full trailer hit, i was really excited. Then i saw the movie, which I was looking forward to as being one of the best of the summer. What a disappointment. The action is boring and overly-long. The plot is only there when it needs to be. The acting is sub-par at points. The writers took the plot from The Matrix, added in some Avengers action scenes and called it a day. This movie is mediocre at best. Expand
  79. 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
  80. Jun 16, 2013
    4
    Poorly paced, poorly directed mess of a film. Snyder was a bad choice for this. The CGI battle scenes were gratuitous and unnecessarily long, the Clark/Lois Lane romance felt forced and rushed, and Snyder's use of the shaky-cam was distracting and silly. If you want to watch Superman fly around and punch people into buildings without any care or consequence to anyone, you're in for aPoorly paced, poorly directed mess of a film. Snyder was a bad choice for this. The CGI battle scenes were gratuitous and unnecessarily long, the Clark/Lois Lane romance felt forced and rushed, and Snyder's use of the shaky-cam was distracting and silly. If you want to watch Superman fly around and punch people into buildings without any care or consequence to anyone, you're in for a treat. Otherwise, wait till DVD/Blu Ray. Oh, and please see it in 2D, 3D is not worth the extra cost for this. Expand
  81. Jun 15, 2013
    5
    (Has minor spoilers:) Zero emotion, no humor, no soul, you care about absolutely no one in this film except Clark as a boy that kid damn near carried the film. Cavill is totally unconvincing. Its a combo of maudlin flashbacks and boring effects sequences. After you've seen 4 or 5 skyscrapers topple over (LOL, F science) you just don't care anymore. Every FX gimmick is stolen directly(Has minor spoilers:) Zero emotion, no humor, no soul, you care about absolutely no one in this film except Clark as a boy that kid damn near carried the film. Cavill is totally unconvincing. Its a combo of maudlin flashbacks and boring effects sequences. After you've seen 4 or 5 skyscrapers topple over (LOL, F science) you just don't care anymore. Every FX gimmick is stolen directly from an earlier film or video game. The Kryptonians apparently contracted a Reaver from Mass Effect, because they have one. Jor-El the great scientist is somehow also a badass who can take on a platoon of soldiers singlehanded. The Kryptonians haven't discovered color TV yet they use low-res liquid metal for their communications.The horrible "action news" cinematography has no place in a superhero film...or ANY film, honestly. While there were a few clever effects shots, mostly it was Michael Bay levels of CG for 3D's sake here. So many things go unexplained that it feels like Dark Knight Rises all over again. When we DO get cause-and-effect, the story contradicts itself so many times that its obvious Snyder and Nolan had no idea which version they wanted to go with. I heard so many "huhs??" from the audience at each new realtime reconning that it I couldn't help laughing at it after a while. The mood at credit role was somber. The loyalists in their capes walked out staring at the floor wondering the same as myself if we'll ever get another good DC superhero film, let alone a good Superman one. Oh, and did I mention that there was a MAKING OF mini-documentary that ran right before the movie started?? I kid you not. At my Regal Cinema they also ran the Pacific Rim trailer *twice*. It was a painful experience that gave me a greater appreciation of Smallville. Bottom line: everything this film contains you've seen before and done better. I truly hope this movie starts a backlash against gratuitous CG. Mark Hamill is right: its a big reason that Hollywood refuses to do anything original. Expand
  82. 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
  83. 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
  84. 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
  85. 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
  86. Jun 14, 2013
    5
    The cinematography was excellently done, with beautiful sweeping shots of gorgeous environments and very professionally done CGI. The soundtrack was fairly well done by Hans Zimmer, but was nothing too spectacular in comparison to some of his other efforts.

    The film was a origin story, and yet could have been so much more had Snyder and Nolan attempted to flesh out the character of
    The cinematography was excellently done, with beautiful sweeping shots of gorgeous environments and very professionally done CGI. The soundtrack was fairly well done by Hans Zimmer, but was nothing too spectacular in comparison to some of his other efforts.

    The film was a origin story, and yet could have been so much more had Snyder and Nolan attempted to flesh out the character of Kal-El, Clark Kent, and Superman. Instead the film and its makers settled for an action flick that required hardly any depth in dialogue or plot. Rather than creating a deep and engaging, character driven film complemented by the action that is to be expected from a Superhero film, Snyder relies on impressive explosions and fight sequences that leave much to be desired.

    The acting is to be praised. Henry Cavill does well enough with his character, but the most passionate performances come from Diane Lane and Kevin Costner as Ma and Pa Kent. Their relationship and the relationship with Clark could have been a fascinating story arc, but unfortunately was pushed aside for the action sequences and the "save the world" story arc that plagues superhero film tropes. Michael Shannon adequately fulfills his role as Zod, the villian.

    Ultimately this film will leave serious film goers disappointed, as it has little character driven story arcs and shallow dialogue. The film will attract those interested in a decent superhero story in comparison to Marvel's takes and who don't mind an action flick that relies on little else.
    Expand
  87. Jun 26, 2013
    5
    Went yesterday to see it, and i was very excited about it! But it was a disappointment! Two hours of useless fight and meaningless words! I mean there was a basic story which i liked no Lex Louthor, the bad guy Zod was from Krypton etc.), but there was no script! Even the fights were hyper. I did not like the music, there was not any flow in the story. I only save the effects, and ofWent yesterday to see it, and i was very excited about it! But it was a disappointment! Two hours of useless fight and meaningless words! I mean there was a basic story which i liked no Lex Louthor, the bad guy Zod was from Krypton etc.), but there was no script! Even the fights were hyper. I did not like the music, there was not any flow in the story. I only save the effects, and of course Kevin Costner, Russel Crow and Michael Shannon! The couple was not too convincing, and Henry Cavil was average but ''empty'' as Superman! Expand
  88. Jun 16, 2013
    5
    While I'd hoped for an intro to an outstanding trilogy to die for which director Christopher Nolan succeeded to do in his making of "The Dark Knight" Trilogy, I got in return a 143 minute movie that contained 60 minutes of origin story, 60 minutes of a plot outline, 20 lousy minutes of fighting, and 3 minutes of Clark Kent's future life as the lover of Lois Lane and a citizen ofWhile I'd hoped for an intro to an outstanding trilogy to die for which director Christopher Nolan succeeded to do in his making of "The Dark Knight" Trilogy, I got in return a 143 minute movie that contained 60 minutes of origin story, 60 minutes of a plot outline, 20 lousy minutes of fighting, and 3 minutes of Clark Kent's future life as the lover of Lois Lane and a citizen of Metropolis. All in all, I would say to wait for the movie to come out on DVD if you do however have interest of even seeing the movie at all. Expand
  89. Jun 24, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie was underwhelming considering the names associated with it. Much of the plot felt rushed and haphazardly pieced together. The relationship between Lane/Clark was severely underdeveloped, I really didn't feel their connection at all. There probably could have been about 30 minutes less of CGI in the ending.

    It was still entertaining, which is why I still gave it a dead-smack-in-the-middle 5. Lots of action, a pretty interesting story. I just expected more from the likes of Nolan and co.
    Expand
  90. Jan 4, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was looking forward to a Superman reboot after the awful Superman Returns and the success of the Dark Knight. A modern, serious tone seemed like the best way to go after the latest Batman trilogy. However, I ended up finding this movie to be joyless, destruction porn. The amount of destruction is almost laughable. Superman and foes crash into buildings and they tumble to the ground like a house of cards. Having Superman fight a horde of Kryptonians at his own power level was a horrible way to restart the franchise. Fighting lesser foes while discovering some of his strengths and powers would have been a better way to go, but now I guess he's stuck fighting god-like enemies for the sequels. At least until someone finds some kryptonite. Expand
  91. 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
  92. Jun 14, 2013
    6
    If you like action films and could care less about character development, pacing or good acting you'll love Man of Steel. If however you cringe when seeing trite motifs then you will likely come to hate Man of Steel before baby Kal-El even launches off Krypton… Knowing the power and past works of the creative minds at the top of this project I just expected a lot more than was delivered.If you like action films and could care less about character development, pacing or good acting you'll love Man of Steel. If however you cringe when seeing trite motifs then you will likely come to hate Man of Steel before baby Kal-El even launches off Krypton… Knowing the power and past works of the creative minds at the top of this project I just expected a lot more than was delivered. The positive take away is that it's not a bore, the action does not stop. Just don't expect to really care much at the end. Expand
  93. Jun 24, 2013
    6
    This film felt like 2 completely different films mashed together and I'm still not sure if it worked.
    The first half dealing with Clark as a young boy and krypton was excellent. It felt well paced and gave depth to parts of the superman story previously ignored.
    But the 2nd half with the fights against Zod were I felt not handled as good as they could. The fight choreography was very
    This film felt like 2 completely different films mashed together and I'm still not sure if it worked.
    The first half dealing with Clark as a young boy and krypton was excellent. It felt well paced and gave depth to parts of the superman story previously ignored.
    But the 2nd half with the fights against Zod were I felt not handled as good as they could. The fight choreography was very poor and at no point did I really feel like I was getting into a true fight between 2 supermen. Camera angles were all over the place, and sometimes I didn't know who was hitting who and who was winning The focus on the destruction of the buildings took away from the true essence of the fight. Felt like the fight scenes in Transformers. If you are going to have a 1h long fight, then you need to make it a damn good one.
    I did enjoy the film for the most part, but it could have better.
    Expand
  94. Jun 17, 2013
    5
    Quick Review:

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

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

    There are plenty of awesome action scenes in this movie, but if you want to see this movie because of the story, you are going to leave the theater empty handed.
    Expand
  95. Jul 5, 2013
    5
    Man of Steel reaches no great heights. It is just a good film, not great, not a memorable film. It's failings are not the fault of cast or their performances. It has been let down in the editing department, the movie is jolted around from flashback to present day far to often. It spoils the flow. Worth seeing if you have nothing better to do.
  96. Jun 14, 2013
    6
    The Good: Occasional realism, and I repeat... OCCASIONAL. Cool special effects. The Bad: Bad Actors, plot scenes that should be rushed are dragged, and plot scenes that should be taken slower are rushed. Overall, I it's clear by watching the movie what Nolan was "trying" to do, and for that I applaud him... But somewhere it all got lost. I really wanted this movie to be the best,The Good: Occasional realism, and I repeat... OCCASIONAL. Cool special effects. The Bad: Bad Actors, plot scenes that should be rushed are dragged, and plot scenes that should be taken slower are rushed. Overall, I it's clear by watching the movie what Nolan was "trying" to do, and for that I applaud him... But somewhere it all got lost. I really wanted this movie to be the best, unfortunately it is an OK movie. I think the main flaw of the movie is the bad acting, and the plot rushes... Expand
  97. Jun 24, 2013
    4
    Action sequences drag on and are extremely repetitive. I watched identical looking buildings collapse and superman vs zod and company fight in seemingly identical action sequences too many times throughout the entirety of the movie. Plot was very cliché and acting was mediocre. If you are looking for high end cgi action sequences, that is about all you will get from watching this movie
  98. Jun 25, 2013
    6
    I went into this movie REALLY wanting to love it. All of the teasers made it seem like it was going to be the best Superman movie and possible one of the best comic book movies of all time. To my dismay, I was sadly mistaken.

    All of the changes that were made to the origin story didn't bother me like they did some people. That wasn't my gripe. My gripe was what seemed like a lack
    I went into this movie REALLY wanting to love it. All of the teasers made it seem like it was going to be the best Superman movie and possible one of the best comic book movies of all time. To my dismay, I was sadly mistaken.

    All of the changes that were made to the origin story didn't bother me like they did some people. That wasn't my gripe. My gripe was what seemed like a lack of character development and relationship development. The movie gave me no reason to care about the relationship between Clark and Lois. There was no development of it, just all of the sudden they are gazing into each other's eyes.

    There was a severe lack of development of the relationships between Clark and his parents. We get little snippets here an there, but again, not enough to make me believe they had any impact on him at all.

    Lastly, there was no development of Superman at all. Its like he just wakes up one day and he is Superman.

    Don't get me wrong. The world the movie takes place in is big, the scenes are big, the action is big. But Nolan set a new bar with the Dark Knight Trilogy on what it takes to make a good Comic book movie. You need all of the action with a great story that makes you connect with the characters and care about their relationships. This was all missing from Man of Steel.

    Here's hoping that the next one takes the time to do all of these things write. I believe they have all of the write pieces in place to make a truly Epic Superman Franchise, but I must say, I feel it is off to a slow start.
    Expand
  99. 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
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.