Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: June 14, 2013
7.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 3289 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
2,356
Mixed:
572
Negative:
361
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
6
loadstone007Aug 5, 2013
I didn't like the movie, which is a real shame since I really love Superman. The story told has a nice twist to it but the potential was left dead on the floor. Henry Cavill was a really bad casting choice he's just not good at this partI didn't like the movie, which is a real shame since I really love Superman. The story told has a nice twist to it but the potential was left dead on the floor. Henry Cavill was a really bad casting choice he's just not good at this part (and come on close shots of him with his chest hair flowing out of his suit?).

Superman Returns was a much better film that made me feel really excited about Superman and the people he protects. The new film is just a disappointment. Watch this at home.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
JacobJun 15, 2013
While Man of Steel promises to have a good story and characters instead we get a lot of action and not enough story. Had the film given us a more character driven film and focused less on the action we could have really had something greatWhile Man of Steel promises to have a good story and characters instead we get a lot of action and not enough story. Had the film given us a more character driven film and focused less on the action we could have really had something great here. As it is Man of Steel is good. It has some fun action, some epic moments, and a couple nice character moments. While it may not have wowed me as much as I thought it was it did keep me more engaged than Superman Returns. If you are a fan of action movies and just want to see Superman beat the sh*t out of guys for the majority of the movie, or at least it feels like it, I think you will enjoy Superman. If you are looking for a more character driven superhero movie then go watch X-Men,Spider-Man 2,The Dark Knight Trilogy, and Superman I & II and even to a certain extent Superman Returns, which while lacking in action does have a story. As it is though Man of Steel is entertaining with enough action, epicness, and character development to make it worth a watch for any superhero fan. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
adhamhanyAug 22, 2013
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) byIt 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
EmuChickenSep 14, 2013
Superman for the new age, how does it rate? Honestly, quite good- but I feel that this movie shot itself in the foot.
The story is pretty much a reboot of Superman, how Krypton blew up, a baby was put on a rocket and fired away. Nothing
Superman for the new age, how does it rate? Honestly, quite good- but I feel that this movie shot itself in the foot.
The story is pretty much a reboot of Superman, how Krypton blew up, a baby was put on a rocket and fired away. Nothing new really, but I liked how it replayed "Supermans" life through arty flashbacks. Nice.
Great cast, no complaints, all good. Russell Crowe and Kevin Costner (both who played Robin Hood!) also added to well played roles.
My main complaints are them stretched out blurry action sequences that have no real reason for being there. It reminded me of the sequels to the 00's Spiderman movies where nothing much really happens. I watch movies to see good acting, not sub-par blurred CG with lots of explosions and smashing windows... These sections droll on so it gets monotonous rather than stays "fun".

All in all, its a "good" movie, but it could have been made GREAT!
A lot of movies seem to fall into the same trap, more quality control is definitely needed to cut down on these 2 hours 30 minute bore fests. Cut off 30 minutes, make a "directors cut" and leave it, PLEASE!
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
rmz76Jun 14, 2013
If you like action films and could care less about character development, pacing or good acting you'll love Man of Steel. If however you cringe when seeing trite motifs then you will likely come to hate Man of Steel before baby Kal-El evenIf you like action films and could care less about character development, pacing or good acting you'll love Man of Steel. If however you cringe when seeing trite motifs then you will likely come to hate Man of Steel before baby Kal-El even launches off Krypton… Knowing the power and past works of the creative minds at the top of this project I just expected a lot more than was delivered. The positive take away is that it's not a bore, the action does not stop. Just don't expect to really care much at the end. Expand
7 of 25 users found this helpful718
All this user's reviews
6
KadeemluvmusicJan 28, 2016
Man of Steel, in my opinion, is a decent but not quite as better as the original Superman movie. I felt that Zack Synder tried to recapture the atmosphere and brilliance of Richard Donnor's 1978 version, but with little interest on why the DCMan of Steel, in my opinion, is a decent but not quite as better as the original Superman movie. I felt that Zack Synder tried to recapture the atmosphere and brilliance of Richard Donnor's 1978 version, but with little interest on why the DC Universe movies haven't been a gamechanger throughout the years (The Dark Knight Trilogy doesn't count). I was feeling a bit nervous why they chose Henry Cavill donning the red, yellow cape and spandex with the iconic "S" trademark because Superman just way past his prime. Even though Superman Returns was pretty good, but Man Of Steel is less but kinda bland Superman. The movie's ending went horribly wrong (I saw the whole thing, no spoilers), the whole CGI thing is pointless, Kevin Costner's performance as Clark Kent's own father sucked, the action scenes were inspired unless you make the movie for 2 1/2 hours long. And that's the problem.

I'm a little worried for what's to come during 2016's sorta "Man Of Steel" sequel, "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn Of Justice." Will the movie be any good? Can Batfleck (Ben Affleck) be a better Batman than Christian Bale? Can the movie be as much darker as Marvel's "Captain America: Civil War"? Or can it become the highest-grossing movie of the year? I'm predicting that it's going to get near the 60's at Rotten Tomatoes (or below 50s), but 2016 is full of too much superhero movies. So I might have to wait on that, but as for Man Of Steel, good movie, flawed script, acting is pretty decent, but it's worth a shot.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
grandpajoe6191Aug 27, 2015
"Man of Steel" is a refreshing new reboot of the old superman days with flashing action and eye-catching visuals. The plot does wander off to uncharted territory at times, but overall a good movie to watch during one's spare time.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
hoops2448Jul 9, 2013
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 hadMost 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
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
6
BossukJun 24, 2013
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
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
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
6
KimomarudotcomJun 14, 2013
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
1 of 11 users found this helpful110
All this user's reviews
6
LokathorApr 20, 2014
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 funIt'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. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
a7xfanJul 7, 2013
I felt that they built this movie up too much to really enjoy thoroughly. It felt like they were trying to use the Dark Knight Trilogy's style but it didn't work for this movie. The story flashbacks were too short and happens every so often.I felt that they built this movie up too much to really enjoy thoroughly. It felt like they were trying to use the Dark Knight Trilogy's style but it didn't work for this movie. The story flashbacks were too short and happens every so often. The new superman: Henry Cavill, makes it better than Brandon Routh did that is for sure. It is too long of a film to really pay attention too, for it's quality. I will still see the sequel if they make one which they probably will. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
6
FozzyJul 3, 2013
Man of Steel is a fairly good film. There's no saying that it's a great film, because it undeniably isn't. Some of the acting is somewhat wooden and flat, and it jumps from scene to scene, plot point to plot point, rather absent-mindedly andMan of Steel is a fairly good film. There's no saying that it's a great film, because it undeniably isn't. Some of the acting is somewhat wooden and flat, and it jumps from scene to scene, plot point to plot point, rather absent-mindedly and not in a memorable fashion. This results in the film falling down slightly from what it could have been. The fact that this film had Christopher Nolan (of The Dark Knight fame) involved meant that some people were expecting more, another Dark Knight, but that doesn't happen in this film because of the cast, both main and supporting, and the way it casually jumps between plot points without anything really holding them together, making it a rather difficult film to follow. However, on the whole this is a good film and, though it doesn't live up to expectations, it isn't exactly unwatchable and, as well as being a solid entry in the franchise, may very well be one of the best films of the lot. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
OnAnarchyJul 2, 2013
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 thei 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
1 of 10 users found this helpful19
All this user's reviews
6
DodgerJun 21, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is by far the best superman movie, but to be fair that not saying much. There are moments in this movie that are very good, like the battle in Smallville. But the story line in places could of been much better like destroying the world to re-colonise it...why? If they left it as it was they would of been unstoppable as they would all be as powerful as superman... Also Zod is a trained soldier who has been bred and trained his entire life to fight and yet was beaten by somebody who has actively avoided fighting his entire life...

But anyway not a bad movie, worth a watch, but not the best superhero movie.
Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
6
ConnKonAug 2, 2013
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 aCritics 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. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
Tbrown15Jun 17, 2013
Man of Steel

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

Director: Zack Snyder

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See this movie as a matinee showing.
Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
6
reddave2Jun 29, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Man of Steel is by no means a bad film but it clearly is too loaded, especially for a film which is bound to have the benefit of one or more sequels. Imagine the batman trilogy but with all the plot points established in a week. Clark Kent (well played in all fairness by Henry Cavill) goes from saving kids on a bus as a teen, to saving workers on an oil rig to... destroying towns and cities while battling a small army of similar strengthed supermen. Entertaining, yes, but its all too much. The film suffers from some silliness in trying to get its emotional beats particularly during the final scene where Zod is about to kill four innocent people despite both he and Superman levelling much of metropolis without a care in the world during a (has to be said) visual stunning fist fight.

All that said, Man of Steel is an enjoyable re-spin of Superman and sets up the main characters well. Maybe I would have warmed more to it if the threat of Zod (Michael Shannon is quite good in the few scenes we get with him) was merely introduced, and left for the sequel. But its overlong and I cant help but feel that maybe DC or Warners wanted something to rival Avengers a bit too much. I look forward to a sequel but part of me wonders how they can up the stakes on what happens in this first movie.
Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
moonman1994Jul 15, 2013
This movie is certainly entertaining but it's actions sequences are so long that it begins to become boring. Honestly my criticism of this film can be summed up to the fact that it takes itself far to seriously.
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
SpangleJul 18, 2015
Man of Steel, the first film in the new DC Cinematic Universe, is certainly a very flawed film, but for me, I think there is enough in the "pro" category to outweigh those negatives. Firstly, I really liked the acting and the castingMan of Steel, the first film in the new DC Cinematic Universe, is certainly a very flawed film, but for me, I think there is enough in the "pro" category to outweigh those negatives. Firstly, I really liked the acting and the casting throughout. Some were unhappy with Amy Adams' Lois Lane, for both the way she was portrayed and for her not looking like Lois Lane, but as a person who is not a huge comic book guy, I did not really care. She's a great actress and it is able to show in this film to a degree. In addition to the acting, the special effects were spectacular and the cinematography was stupendous at times. There were some seriously gorgeous shots in this one and it is one of the few superhero movies where I really noticed that area. However, I will say that it does try to do a lot and struggles from typical origin story pitfalls. The pacing can be extremely bad at times and the dialogue is pretty horrendous at times and middling at best. Overall, Man of Steel is a slightly above average film that succeeds in some areas and fails in others, but overall does a nice job setting up the new Superman story and the new universe. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
Gamed2longJun 16, 2013
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
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
6
JcdbengalsJun 29, 2013
Hmm. My opinion may not be the popular one, but here goes. I can't say in words how excited I was for this movie. Previews were epic, cast is amazing....this movie just didn't seem to have a soul. My girlfriend hated it, but I thought it wasHmm. My opinion may not be the popular one, but here goes. I can't say in words how excited I was for this movie. Previews were epic, cast is amazing....this movie just didn't seem to have a soul. My girlfriend hated it, but I thought it was good, just not great. I just didn't care much for many of the characters I was seeing, such as the reporters who somehow seemed to be the only people who survived the entire city being destroyed...too much action and not enough character for me. Also, this movie seemed very corny in spots. It was more Avengers popcorn fun than Batman serious fun, if that makes sense. I WANT to love this movie but I just don't. I do however think the sequel set up was great and looking forward to seeing the other half of the superman alter ego that was missing from this one and provide maybe SOME comic relief. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
revealer99Jun 14, 2013
The Good: Occasional realism, and I repeat... OCCASIONAL. Cool special effects. The Bad: Bad Actors, plot scenes that should be rushed are dragged, and plot scenes that should be taken slower are rushed. Overall, I it's clear by watching theThe Good: Occasional realism, and I repeat... OCCASIONAL. Cool special effects. The Bad: Bad Actors, plot scenes that should be rushed are dragged, and plot scenes that should be taken slower are rushed. Overall, I it's clear by watching the movie what Nolan was "trying" to do, and for that I applaud him... But somewhere it all got lost. I really wanted this movie to be the best, unfortunately it is an OK movie. I think the main flaw of the movie is the bad acting, and the plot rushes... Expand
3 of 20 users found this helpful317
All this user's reviews
6
jamessNov 13, 2013
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.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 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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
ThatJimmyBondJun 14, 2013
The acting is universally good. The script is choppy as hell. The action is well staged, though the devastation wrought and Superman's indifference to it is horrifying. WBros obviously took to much to heart from the criticism of SupermanThe acting is universally good. The script is choppy as hell. The action is well staged, though the devastation wrought and Superman's indifference to it is horrifying. WBros obviously took to much to heart from the criticism of Superman Returns.

I wanted more Clark Kent, and Pa Costner. Amy Adams is robbed of screen time.

I wanted less CGI fighting, and more reasons to care. I was aghast at the casual treatment of the terrible destruction wrought and Superman's indifference to it. Oh look, I'll just punch General Zod through a building and murder thousands of people. WITHOUT BLINKING AN EYE.

Still, Russell Crowe is very good, even with the ridiculous hand waving at doors. Michael Shannon is very impactful as Zod. Cavill is great as Supes and I rooted for him. The flashbacks are where the lost heart of the movie reside.

Not sure if I want Snyder back for MoS 2. Perhaps Brad Bird might be available?
Expand
1 of 11 users found this helpful110
All this user's reviews
6
MarkEMarkJun 15, 2013
Just going to say it was an okay movie. I had a high expectation with man of steel but this movie is good to see it once, and i say that because story line was confusing, boring and the actors were bad. especially The actress who play luisJust going to say it was an okay movie. I had a high expectation with man of steel but this movie is good to see it once, and i say that because story line was confusing, boring and the actors were bad. especially The actress who play luis clark amy Adams) i almost slept the whole movie. But the positive part about the movie is the action. The fighting part got me awake and got me interested. it was good. other than that my last sentence to say is that man of steel movie was okay.. I would only see the movie once, to only see superman but to be honest NO DC comic Super hero Movie can top the batman movie the Dark knight. Thats why i gave it a 6 Expand
4 of 16 users found this helpful412
All this user's reviews
6
cylackJun 15, 2013
Well shot and beautiful to look at. However, as a superhero action movie it did not keep me entertained. The basic problem being Superman is basically a god on Earth, so how do you give him a weakness? How do you make him relatable; at leastWell shot and beautiful to look at. However, as a superhero action movie it did not keep me entertained. The basic problem being Superman is basically a god on Earth, so how do you give him a weakness? How do you make him relatable; at least you could relate to Batman. MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD: I was really bored in the last 30 minutes when it was basically just a slugfest between Superman and General Zod. Expand
0 of 7 users found this helpful07
All this user's reviews
6
HJRodrigoJun 16, 2013
I feel this movie was lacking in heart and wholesomeness, something that I would have expected to find in a Superman origin story. This movie also failed to properly immerse me into, or even introduce me to, the world of Superman... and byI feel this movie was lacking in heart and wholesomeness, something that I would have expected to find in a Superman origin story. This movie also failed to properly immerse me into, or even introduce me to, the world of Superman... and by "world" I mean Metropolis and Smallville. However, neither of these are my primary complaint. For a first installment of a franchise, this movie went overboard on its plot and action. My main complaint is that they needed to start on a smaller scale and give the sequels room to up the ante. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
6
JordReimerJun 23, 2013
I have been anticipating this movie for sometime now and can't help but feel disappointed. For those wanting a solid story look elsewhere. The action/special effects made up for what could've been a disaster.

Pros: + Action + Special
I have been anticipating this movie for sometime now and can't help but feel disappointed. For those wanting a solid story look elsewhere. The action/special effects made up for what could've been a disaster.

Pros:

+ Action
+ Special Effects
+ Good Casting For Superman

Cons:

- Story
- Plot Holes
Expand
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
6
OckthnielJun 25, 2013
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
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
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
6
roger202Jun 30, 2013
Man of Steel is a decent beginning to a new series of films. The film is action packed, with a semi-boring back story and a Superman that does not feel quite like Superman
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
6
JohnnyStephensAug 31, 2013
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.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
joshbeldonJul 5, 2013
What the film does well is set tone and deliver a story that is equally grounded, interesting, and enjoyable. Unfortunately, the film suffers from a number of technical shortcomings that may break the experience for some. After the film'sWhat the film does well is set tone and deliver a story that is equally grounded, interesting, and enjoyable. Unfortunately, the film suffers from a number of technical shortcomings that may break the experience for some. After the film's opening sequence on Krypton, the Man of Steal focuses on Clark's journey to find a place in the only world he has ever known. To show the hardships that young Clark endured, flashbacks are used, generally showing different points in Clark's youth as he struggled to deal with his differences. The film then jumps back to adult Clark, as he wonders the United States, looking for some clue as to his origins and what his purpose in life may be. While both the past and present stories are interesting, the movie never stops to allow the audience time to really take in what is happening on screen. The scenes between young Clark and his Earth father are particularly endearing, but the audience is never really afforded time to absorb and appreciate the importance of their relationship. Instead, viewers are allowed a small sequence of dialogue, before they are jarred back in the present where adult Clark is in a completely different situation than he was the last time we saw him. In fact, the film plays leap frog over itself through half of the movie, trying to tell two stories at the cost of making both of them feel hollow.
The second half of the movie is much more focused but highlights another major flaw in The Man of Steel: The action was disappointing. Some time in the production of the Man of Steel, Snyder and Co. decided that they needed action. Lots and LOTS of action. Bigger is better right? In this case, no. What starts off as over the top fighting, soon becomes a series of monotone action sequences lost in a white noise of fallen buildings and explosions. There came a point in the film's final battle where I became completely bored with the demi-gods that were battling on screen. Instead of fighting hand to hand, the Man of Steel's Superman (and its villains) generally just throw each other around. Usually through sky scrapers and chain restaurants. Seriously, if you watch it, count how many times somebody throws someone else through, into, or at a building. Though there is always a place for over the top action in the Super Hero genre, the inclusion of more technical hand-to-hand fighting (In addition to the 'splosions) would have broken up the action while making Superman seem like more of a fighter and less of a brutish brawler.
So, action and story aside, who is the Man of Steel's Superman? To my surprise, he was surprisingly human. Though he is 100% good guy, Superman is not the virtuous boyscout you may know from other versions of the hero. TMOS presents a Superman that is man first and extraterrestrial super-hero second. He isn't completely sure of himself nor his actions. This leads to one of the most surprise (and controversial) endings to a Super Hero movie to date. Superman's ability to be fallible adds a texture to the character that is rarely seen and becomes easily one of the most enjoyable parts of the film.
All in all, The Man of Steel is an Okay movie. It gets a lot of things right but never seems to overcome its glaring flaws. Superman has never been more relatable and perhaps with the origin out of the way, the next outing by Snyder and DC will be much more enjoyable.
Expand
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
6
SegaSailorJul 6, 2013
The terrible hype machine has played to much into this movie for me. I watched the movie in 2d and thank god I did the shaky and mass debris really put me off the action in man of steel, the story was done differently than expected and hasThe terrible hype machine has played to much into this movie for me. I watched the movie in 2d and thank god I did the shaky and mass debris really put me off the action in man of steel, the story was done differently than expected and has its up and downs some good some bad, i felt the story tried to do to much and cram in way more than it could chew and clearly can see some rushed parts if they spaced it out and kept in one story mode, basically its the original Christopher reeves movies 1 and 2 meshed up and it suffers from being crammed into one movie. The acting was solid and holds the movie together and the cast deserves praise especially Antje Traue who completely stole it for me, while it would make a great blu-ray movie I cannot say this was the rip roaring summer blockbuster it was meant to be and if they didn't fill so much in so little time it would of made a great superman movie however my biggest memory of this movie was the debris factor so much flew around i couldn't make out what was happening to whom and where and since superman is about action i felt quite disappointed in what should be its strongest sequences and scenes the biggest problem is reviewing what is most likely going to be a series of movies and the development of Louis and Superman or Clark Kent not alot was hit upon on its starting settings which will be built upon in its blatant sequels. This isn't a bad movie but it isn't the new awesome superman that seemed to be promised this isn't what the dark knight movies did for batman but its not to far off but if a definitive sequel is made it will have to surely deliver more or suffer the same fate as the transformers. Expand
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
6
UnknownCriticJul 7, 2013
This was a movie I wanted to like, and the acting, story, and special effects were all good. That being said, it was missing something I assumed would be a given for a superhero film, that feel good feeling you get when the hero wins. I'mThis was a movie I wanted to like, and the acting, story, and special effects were all good. That being said, it was missing something I assumed would be a given for a superhero film, that feel good feeling you get when the hero wins. I'm not sure if it was the script, or the editing, but I found myself not caring if Superman would win (and it felt like he didn't care either). Lois was in only because she needs to be but didn't add the film. Overall I am glad I seen it, and you may love it, but it could should have been better. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
6
smaug87Jul 22, 2013
A movie filled with repetitive action which got boring very quickly. The first hour was good as we saw a gradual build in Clark's character as well as flashbacks but once the action starts it does not cease and kept me looking at my watch andA movie filled with repetitive action which got boring very quickly. The first hour was good as we saw a gradual build in Clark's character as well as flashbacks but once the action starts it does not cease and kept me looking at my watch and relieved once the film was over. Russell Crowe and Kevin Kosnier are great as well as Diane Lane but no one else really stood out to me.

Hopefully the sequel can bring someone a bit new and refreshing.
Expand
2 of 11 users found this helpful29
All this user's reviews
6
jjvanderlindeJul 14, 2013
I really looked forward to the movie especially when I saw Christopher Nolan was involved. The big problem for me is the big time lapses that occur in the film. It almost felt that they had this great story to tell us but the film would haveI really looked forward to the movie especially when I saw Christopher Nolan was involved. The big problem for me is the big time lapses that occur in the film. It almost felt that they had this great story to tell us but the film would have been too long so they deleted a few scenes which left a few holes for me. I really enjoyed the filming techniques the used especially in the flight scenes. Overall it was an enjoyable film. Just expected a bit more. Enjoyed the childhood scenes and felt Kevin Costner did an outstanding job in the portrayal of Clarke's dad. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
KhalakkaJul 15, 2013
Man Of Steel Is visually nice the scenario is ok not over the top but it's ok the script was the messy point for me i laughed my ass off sometime some battle or extremely long for no reason

Cool movie to watch but aint that good
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
6
tubguyinloveJul 30, 2013
Man of Steel attempts to tackle profound and interesting concepts in a world with a realistic, overly emotional Superman, yet in the process scorches some of the character's foundation. There are some truly touching scenes, but it all feelsMan of Steel attempts to tackle profound and interesting concepts in a world with a realistic, overly emotional Superman, yet in the process scorches some of the character's foundation. There are some truly touching scenes, but it all feels like trailer content making these feel like a sizzle reel for a possible Superman movie. These are the golden source to an otherwise disjointed construction of cinematic stupidity, but there is enough pretty visuals and those touching scenes do help carry the final product. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
6
FranzHcriticNov 12, 2013
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 thanDevoid 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. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
JonjonjSep 11, 2013
This film could have been a great movie had they cut half of the action scenes which, by the way, were poorly directed and clumsily paced. I left the theater with a weird feeling of confusion...was it Superman or did I end up going to aThis film could have been a great movie had they cut half of the action scenes which, by the way, were poorly directed and clumsily paced. I left the theater with a weird feeling of confusion...was it Superman or did I end up going to a Godzilla movie by mistake... Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
PulpNonFictionSep 16, 2013
remember a time when having your main character make jokes wasn't something just reserved for iron man? sigh... me too

is man of steel a good movie? yes. is it THE superman movie? no. in my opinion, the best superman movie will probably be
remember a time when having your main character make jokes wasn't something just reserved for iron man? sigh... me too

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

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

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

in the end of the day, if you are a fan of superman (of steel), there could be worse superman films to watch (looking at you, superman returns...), but if you were really waiting for something great and original, better wait for the sequel.
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
ThatCooperGuyJun 25, 2015
"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"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. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
FreedomFightersJan 3, 2017
You win some, you lose some, I guess. Not every superhero film can come out and be a well-received, outstanding film, a la "The Dark Knight." And it's a shame, because after seeing the film multiple times, I really don't want to say that "ManYou win some, you lose some, I guess. Not every superhero film can come out and be a well-received, outstanding film, a la "The Dark Knight." And it's a shame, because after seeing the film multiple times, I really don't want to say that "Man of Steel" is just okay. I really want to give the film a higher score and I want to say that I loved the film, but unfortunately, I just can't bring myself to say that. Visually, it's stunning, and it's also well-acted, action-packed and generally exciting. That said, the writing and the characters just aren't as amazing as the pretty visuals and the action, and it's a shame. I really really want to say that "Man of Steel" is an amazing Summer blockbuster film that everyone will enjoy, but I just can't say that. I can say that "Man of Steel" is a decently entertaining superhero film, just nothing extremely spectacular. Go in with your expectations tempered. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
mrjoneseznDec 1, 2013
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,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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
KaptainHutchinoDec 12, 2013
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.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
Laekerson95Jan 31, 2014
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 visionUnfortunately, 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
kaizidokillerFeb 13, 2014
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 theMan 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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
DrewtheDude85Mar 31, 2014
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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
SpiderPlayerMay 17, 2015
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, thatThe 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. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
43in2014Jun 17, 2014
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
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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
adpirtleJun 20, 2015
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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
LinttaFlamingoNov 25, 2016
Man of Steel looks and sounds good, and it has some very well directed action, but it has some pacing issues and a lot of weird information pours that felt a bit off in my opinion, but I would say that it's a successful way to introduceMan of Steel looks and sounds good, and it has some very well directed action, but it has some pacing issues and a lot of weird information pours that felt a bit off in my opinion, but I would say that it's a successful way to introduce Superman to the DC Extended Universe. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
MattBrady99Mar 26, 2015
This movie is more stronger then steel. This movie was far better then superman returns, I mean the actor who played superman was really good and the score was epic.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
MrMovieBuffMay 31, 2015
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
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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
MovieManiac83Apr 22, 2015
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 definingMore 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
moviemayhemApr 28, 2015
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 definingMore 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
CineAutoctonoJan 26, 2016
"Man of Steel" was initially in a Superman movie but the trouble is that Superman should add title and it would calls "Superman : Man of Steel" , but the movie was amazing and very powerful.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
TinoTrivinoDec 24, 2015
I could give it a 10, or I could give it a 0, but i give it a 6, why?
The First part of the Movie is awesome!!! just awesome. For Fanatic fans like me who was born with Superman, and know about the REAL story will love that, but....
Thats
I could give it a 10, or I could give it a 0, but i give it a 6, why?
The First part of the Movie is awesome!!! just awesome. For Fanatic fans like me who was born with Superman, and know about the REAL story will love that, but....

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

I understand they did it for making a kind of interconnection Superman vs Batman... something i Hate by the way...
So, everything is good, even Clark Kent/Superman, I like very much since Christopher Reeve (the second one), this new Actor, Henry Cavill. He was awesome...
Russel Crowe well, he was good because he act very good, but they shouldnt put heavy well known actors, it takes you away of the movie and yo raelised its a movie.. hard to explain what i meant in english...
So, this Movie is goo, but it could be better...
5/10
Special effects 10/10
Sound 7/10 (some library sounds from other moviebanks)
Soundtrack 8/10 (good choice, good emotive selection, except the end, it doesnt fit well during the fight
Edited 10/10 (good narrative pace)
Story 5/10 (good begining and its the rael Kal-El Story, but the end sucks.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
EpicLadySpongeJan 25, 2016
Man of Steel tries to impress fans of the DC universe. It actually worked.... what bothers me to say is that this movie tried so hard to impress people like me. The movie's still decent. What went wrong with it is that the movie went so slowMan of Steel tries to impress fans of the DC universe. It actually worked.... what bothers me to say is that this movie tried so hard to impress people like me. The movie's still decent. What went wrong with it is that the movie went so slow after we head off to the middle. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
FuturedirectorMar 12, 2016
Man of Steel cannot be called "action film". And we gotta add that Superman's new aspect is not the real one. Could be better, developed, but it's not the Superman that we used to watch. Unfortunately, this film is also more violent thanMan of Steel cannot be called "action film". And we gotta add that Superman's new aspect is not the real one. Could be better, developed, but it's not the Superman that we used to watch. Unfortunately, this film is also more violent than action-packed film, but it's able to be called "science-fiction" film, at least. It also brings a great short love story to the cinema, and powerfully moving scenes. Maybe it could have low-human characters, but, why do we spect about superheroes films? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
MovieMasterEddyApr 6, 2016
At once frantically overblown and beautifully filigreed, “Man of Steel” will turn on everyone it doesn’t turn off. Summer blockbusters have a way of encouraging multiplex Manichaeism, though I propose a middle way. It won’t be easy. EvenAt once frantically overblown and beautifully filigreed, “Man of Steel” will turn on everyone it doesn’t turn off. Summer blockbusters have a way of encouraging multiplex Manichaeism, though I propose a middle way. It won’t be easy. Even those who patiently ride out the bludgeoning excesses of the film’s final 45 minutes may wonder what happened to the movie — the one about human and humanoid struggles — they watched for the first 100. They may also wonder why no one, anyone, smacked the director, Zack Snyder, in the head and reminded him that he was midwifing a superhero franchise, as the film’s first image, of a yelling, straining woman signals, not restaging the end of days.

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

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

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

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

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

The last 45 minutes is when Mr. Snyder piles on the hammering special effects, becoming yet one more director gone disappointingly amok.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Muskrat147Aug 15, 2016
Though infused with substantial action sequences and mild bits of emotion, Man of Steel still can't make up for its over-the-top direction, thinly-written story, and controversial finale.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
BHBarryJun 21, 2013
“Man of Steel” is, as everyone knows, the new Warner Bros. entry using this previously tried and true franchise about the native from the planet Krypton who finds a new home on Earth. Unfortunately, wearing a cape and an S on the front of his“Man of Steel” is, as everyone knows, the new Warner Bros. entry using this previously tried and true franchise about the native from the planet Krypton who finds a new home on Earth. Unfortunately, wearing a cape and an S on the front of his shirt is where the similarity ends. Starring Henry Cavill in the title role (an intentional Chrstopher Reeve look-alike), the film also boasts of a cast consisting of Kevin Kostner, Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishbourne and Michael Shannon. Directed by Zack Snyder and co-written by Christopher Nolan and David Geyer, the failure for the film to work must rest with one or all of the aforementioned gentlemen.. Certainly the writing is the main culprit with a plot that is too complicated and a story that lacks total credibility. As a result, the viewing experience is deeply marred by this overly long movie.. The film’s action scenes are excessive and don’t allow for the story, what there is of it, to be told. Being a fan of the old Superman comics and films, I found this movie to do a tremendous disservice to the property and the image of this almost legendary and timeless superhero. I give the film a 5 because it just doesn”t live up to the potential and hype which preceded its opening day. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
5
BKMDec 17, 2013
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 futureThe 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! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
dijavantewowJun 18, 2013
This movie had great special effects, but the plot, the characters, the acting, the rest was all just meh. I don't ever feel like I care about any of the characters. There was no amazing performance by any of the actors to blow someone awayThis movie had great special effects, but the plot, the characters, the acting, the rest was all just meh. I don't ever feel like I care about any of the characters. There was no amazing performance by any of the actors to blow someone away like Heath Ledger as The Joker. This was just a summer blockbuster to make money, not a good movie and kickoff of a franchise. Expand
8 of 24 users found this helpful816
All this user's reviews
5
DarkCriticJun 22, 2013
Man of Steel is a new reboot for the next Superman series which was done by director, Zack Snyder and the production was hold by Christopher Nolan after he accomplished his Dark Knight trilogy. Before I discuss about the new reboot, thisMan of Steel is a new reboot for the next Superman series which was done by director, Zack Snyder and the production was hold by Christopher Nolan after he accomplished his Dark Knight trilogy. Before I discuss about the new reboot, this movie is very different like most other classic Superman films. Superman and Superman II are very memorable and most other three Superman movies are quite disappointing and pretty weak. I would say that the movie is very underwhelming. The new story is about Jor-El (Russell Crowe) from Krypton is sending his son Kal-El (known as Clark Kent/Superman) to the planet Earth, which he'll turn into a super strength superhero with energy source, until General Zod (Michael Shannon) will capture the son and the planet Krypton is been destroyed. After that, the son grows up as a new Superman (Henry Cavill) to fight over General Zod and his men to destruct the entire world. As a follow up like most other Superman movies, this movie is pretty weak. The situation is that the story is too complex with too many cut scenes, the acting wasn't that great, and the plot is too rushed. The characters are also forgettable and I would say that the Superman movies or the animated series from the 90's are well done with memorable characters, take time with their motivation, and acting is good. But the new characters in this reboot are too cliché with throwing too much stereotypes into a wooden dialogues. Henry Cavill portrays the new Superman is okay, but not that memorable and this protagonist is an obvious hero who is here to find some answers and act like he is brave or what? There is an obvious Lois Lane (Amy Adams), there is an obvious military soldiers, there is an obvious henchmen, and there is an obvious people from the city or in the small town of Smallville. That is except for two characters like Jor-El play by Russell Crowe and General Zod play by Michael Shannon. Russell Crowe did very well as the father of Superman with good character development and some good back story about him. Michael Shannon is having fun for playing the over the top villain and acting like Terrence Stamp's performance. But like I say the story and the characters are kind of bland and too forgettable. The movie is not that horrible or bad, it's just that the movie is too underwhelm with confusing back stories, the shaky cams are too fast, and the characters are pretty weak. At the same time, this movie is a minuscule of average superhero flicks. Thumbs Down. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
5
gunnyartJul 10, 2013
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 itYawn... 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. Expand
0 of 7 users found this helpful07
All this user's reviews
5
BairdoNov 19, 2013
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 withYeah, 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
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
ScrawnyPunkJul 26, 2013
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 lackA 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
Super-Evil-DOOMMar 23, 2016
It has a lot of the same problems Superman Returns did, with more flaws to call it's own. No amount of punches or action can make up for a soulless attempt at making Superman into Batman for the modern audience. It's a boring, pretentious,It has a lot of the same problems Superman Returns did, with more flaws to call it's own. No amount of punches or action can make up for a soulless attempt at making Superman into Batman for the modern audience. It's a boring, pretentious, drawn out film with dull, grim tone that hopes the audience will overlook it because there's a lot of punching going on. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
TokyochuchuDec 20, 2013
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 aMan 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. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
spiljJun 14, 2013
This film explored the emotional issues of Kal-El very nicely. This is a signature mark of crafting by the awesome producer, Nolan. Somehow, the interaction between the alien world and humanity is a little less entertaining. This story canThis film explored the emotional issues of Kal-El very nicely. This is a signature mark of crafting by the awesome producer, Nolan. Somehow, the interaction between the alien world and humanity is a little less entertaining. This story can be hard to adapt to more realistic terms like Batman so, do not expect that. I'm not a big fan of Snyder. His vision doesn't bringing to life the challenges that Superman faces. Expand
4 of 28 users found this helpful424
All this user's reviews
5
McParadigmJun 15, 2013
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
9 of 27 users found this helpful918
All this user's reviews
5
sinadoomDec 22, 2013
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.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, 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
nascentAug 24, 2015
A Superman film that focuses on the Alien aspect of the story, with more exposition on him home planet than the person that is Clark Kent/Superman. While that may suit viewers that have seen the origin of Superman told over and over again,A Superman film that focuses on the Alien aspect of the story, with more exposition on him home planet than the person that is Clark Kent/Superman. While that may suit viewers that have seen the origin of Superman told over and over again, it means there's little to relate to with this particular Superman.

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

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

I hope Superman v Batman is able to have more heart.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
notaworryJun 17, 2013
Quick Review:

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

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

There are plenty of awesome action scenes in this movie, but if you want to see this movie because of the story, you are going to leave the theater empty handed.
Expand
4 of 17 users found this helpful413
All this user's reviews
5
GreatMartinJun 15, 2013
“Man of Steel” could have/should have been called “Superman: Everything You Know About Him, Everything You Don’t Know About Him Along With Many Things You Didn’t Want To Or Need To Know About Him!” Should you be familiar with the comic book“Man of Steel” could have/should have been called “Superman: Everything You Know About Him, Everything You Don’t Know About Him Along With Many Things You Didn’t Want To Or Need To Know About Him!” Should you be familiar with the comic book Superman or his many TV shows and movies the only reason for seeing this movie is to feast your eyes on a new, hunky, extremely well built, dazzling actor, named Henry Cavill, who flies into stardom with this role which will lead to interesting comparisons of Cavill versus Christopher Reeve. Along those lines I can picture a panel at a future Superman convention not only discussing the Supermans but Margot Kidder versus Amy Adams as Lois Lane, and Marlon Brando versus Russell Crowe as Jor-El, Phyllis Thaxter, Eva Marie Saint versus Diane Lane as Martha Kent and who would win as the better adopted father Glenn Ford or Kevin Costner, the latter in the latest version. Perry White has gone from Jackie Cooper to Frank Langella and now Laurence Fishburne not to forget the question of how does the latest film score by Hans Zimmer stand up against John Williams scores?

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

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

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

Oh yes, a reason for seeing this movie may be that you don’t know what you think is an S on his costume and if Lois Lane knows who Superman is. You may or may not know the answer to the first and you may not be sure of the answer to the second but do you really want to know?
Expand
3 of 16 users found this helpful313
All this user's reviews
5
PaperThingJul 7, 2013
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
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
0 of 7 users found this helpful07
All this user's reviews
5
mexrangerJul 5, 2013
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 fromMan 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. Expand
0 of 6 users found this helpful06
All this user's reviews
5
DC4CardsJun 19, 2013
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 shootFind 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
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
5
Thebigdeal324Jul 6, 2013
I may be impartial because I never have been much of a Superman fan, but compared to other Super Hero genre movies in the last decade I don't thing Man of Steel was all that great. I think they could have done a lot more with the movie.I may be impartial because I never have been much of a Superman fan, but compared to other Super Hero genre movies in the last decade I don't thing Man of Steel was all that great. I think they could have done a lot more with the movie. Also Superman is supposed to be a bright vibrant "Good Guy" and they mad him way too serious and made the movie kind of dark and gloomy, which fits with Batman, but not Superman. They made the same sort of mistake with Amazing Spider-man. Expand
0 of 6 users found this helpful06
All this user's reviews
5
SlizzoDec 8, 2013
Very overrated movie. Henry Cavill does a great job as Superman, but the character Zod lacks the depth that he had in smallville and is overall very bland. The thing that surprised me most was the extreme death count of innocent bystanders,Very overrated movie. Henry Cavill does a great job as Superman, but the character Zod lacks the depth that he had in smallville and is overall very bland. The thing that surprised me most was the extreme death count of innocent bystanders, it was ridiculous and not in keeping with Superman's history at all. Superman is supposed to do everything he can to keep the innocent people safe (to the point of risking his own life), but in this movie he did not seem to care at all. Overall the plot is hardly immersing and the actress that played Lois was a horrible choice. It's an "ok" movie like most Superman movies, but not great. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
psycrosJun 15, 2013
(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(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
17 of 44 users found this helpful1727
All this user's reviews
5
crilstyJun 18, 2013
I had an amazing time watching it, all the action was far superior than any other movie I have seen, but what critics and some fans are saying that the movie is too "dark" and heavy it's true, but avoiding it would be wrong too, because life,I had an amazing time watching it, all the action was far superior than any other movie I have seen, but what critics and some fans are saying that the movie is too "dark" and heavy it's true, but avoiding it would be wrong too, because life, real life, is way darker than that, we all face heavy moments, impossible moments and that's what we have in the movie. What really have trashed superheroes movies is the way most companies have them done for kids. Expand
6 of 8 users found this helpful62
All this user's reviews
5
walterwJun 22, 2013
I liked Superman, Lois Lane, Perry White, Mama Kent, and a few of the supporting characters. Overall, the cast was not one of my issues with this movie. The exception being Zod, who was really one-note and shouty, despite having a prettyI liked Superman, Lois Lane, Perry White, Mama Kent, and a few of the supporting characters. Overall, the cast was not one of my issues with this movie. The exception being Zod, who was really one-note and shouty, despite having a pretty understandable motivation for doing what he was doing. He could have been an interesting character, but they didn't go that route, which is pretty disappointing. But he wasn't the sole disappointment. Another thing that didn't work for me was the prologue on Krypton. It was too long and way more science fiction-y than I was expecting, criticisms that I suppose could be extended to the entire movie. I'm fine with science fiction, but I really think they should have downplayed some of the alien-ness of Krypton. I don't think we needed Russel Crowe riding around on a dragon. It's already ludicrous enough that they're on a different planet yet are identical to us in appearance. You don't need to highlight that by showing the vastly different morphology of Krypton's wildlife. Makes suspension of disbelief a good deal harder. And to be honest, I'm not sure what level of reality they're shooting for in this movie. By making Lois aware of Superman's identity, they've basically conceded that it would be ludicrous for her to be fooled by a pair of glasses. But what about the rest of the world? We see in the last scene that he's working at the Daily Planet (It's real easy to become a reporter at a major metropolitan publication, right?). Not the sort of below-the-radar drifting that he had been doing previously. Seems like just about anyone who has seen Clark and Superman would put two and two together. And I know this is an inherited piece of ridiculousness. It's from the comic books, it's from the previous movies, and they couldn't tear everything to the ground. But the reason it wasn't an issue in previous media (I can only speak for the films as I've not read the comic books), is that they always had an air of campiness to them. Suspending your disbelief wasn't hard because it was clear that the world of Superman didn't really operate on anything resembling real world logic. That's not the case in the dour, self-serious world of Man of Steel. I feel like Superman's identity would be known in about 5 seconds flat. Okay, I'm out of good transitions, so another thing that bothered me was Pa Kent's death. I get that he didn't want his son to reveal himself by saving him, but why didn't he just let Clark get the dog in the first place? He could've done that without raising suspicions. It was just kind of a clumsy way of setting up his death. Also, though I liked Superman and Lois on their own, I thought they had very little chemistry together and their kiss was completely unearned. I'm sure there were other things that bothered me, but I'm not thinking of them right now. Expand
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
5
SimpleMethodAug 4, 2013
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.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
MaricaAug 31, 2014
"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.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
shpreaJun 24, 2013
There is one word that best describes this movie. Disappointing.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie. It's actually quite good. The issue is that this movie was meant to be a revival for the Superman franchise, one that excited its
There is one word that best describes this movie. Disappointing.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie. It's actually quite good. The issue is that this movie was meant to be a revival for the Superman franchise, one that excited its audience and built a lot of anticipation for a soon to follow sequel. Instead, it just acts as another normal superhero movie. That's all.

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

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

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

All in all, the movie is definitely worth seeing. It is a good movie, no doubt, hence the score of a 7. It just doesn't quite live up to the quality of other movies in the same genre.
Expand
4 of 13 users found this helpful49
All this user's reviews
5
Shanester16Feb 17, 2014
Great cast, brilliant effects, bad plot. Man of Steel is a rather generic superhero movie. We see his origins and randomly dive into the future, then constantly back and forth to his childhood and back to a fully grown Kal-El. It would'veGreat cast, brilliant effects, bad plot. Man of Steel is a rather generic superhero movie. We see his origins and randomly dive into the future, then constantly back and forth to his childhood and back to a fully grown Kal-El. It would've been interesting to see if the movie had actually brought these flashbacks in randomly for a reason, but unfortunately, the flashbacks usually happen and are then completely forgotten about. The writing also consistently talks about how special Superman is to the world, it's the only thing they ever seem to talk about throughout the entire movie leaving very little time for character development. While the ending is what most fans tend to rip apart, to me it seemed an interesting take on the dark role Superman now has to take in this much more serious adaptation of the comic books. Superman is put to the true test of questioning what is truly right and if he has the courage to pay the price to save the planet he was raised on. I felt this was the strong point of the movie, there should've been more focus on it. However, I found Johnathan Kent in this movie to be extremely frustrating. He often told Clark to do one thing, then sometime later he'd say to do the exact opposite. Like in the flashback when Clark saves kids from drowning in his school bus, one minute John tells Clark he could let them die to keep his identity safe, then he shows him the ship he arrived in and tells him 'You're the answer to "Are we alone in the universe?" and describes how big a change he will make to the world when he reveals himself, then in a later flashback he tells him he should never reveal himself and become a farmer as he is, *spoiler* his demise is pointless and feels terribly done as Superman reveals himself a few years later. Some see the point of what Johnathan was telling Superman, but I struggle to understand why he told him so many different things at once. The action sequences are gripping and blood pumping, this makes them extremely enjoyable to watch for any Superman fan, but these can't be used to sugarcoat the whole movie. Promotions are also used all the way through, for example when Superman and Zod fly into Sears for no apparent reason, it just demonstrates advertisers desperation to promote their products. Overall, the film isn't terrible, but neither is it the masterpiece it was promising many hopeful movie goers. It gives me very little hope for the Justice League movie (if it ever actually happens) if the makers keep following this formula. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
ExKingNov 29, 2013
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,
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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
Apotheosis34Jun 14, 2013
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 hisThe 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
1 of 12 users found this helpful111
All this user's reviews
5
MariaGalJun 26, 2013
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.),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 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
0 of 8 users found this helpful08
All this user's reviews
5
Prodigy2013Jun 16, 2013
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,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 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
8 of 21 users found this helpful813
All this user's reviews
5
callumjsouthDec 13, 2014
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 aIf 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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
zombox5000Jun 17, 2013
Lengthy, slow and toiling at the beginning the movie retells the Superman origin unnecessarily. Once the lead actually becomes Superman the movie picks up some steam, but by then I had already given up hope for being engaged. Further, this isLengthy, slow and toiling at the beginning the movie retells the Superman origin unnecessarily. Once the lead actually becomes Superman the movie picks up some steam, but by then I had already given up hope for being engaged. Further, this is a bleak, dark film which does not suit Superman thematically. The character is best used when he creates hope, justice and honesty. A reflection of the best ideals on humanity. While they took a stab at this it comes off as whiny and vacillating as opposed to firm and inspiring. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
5
aaronobrienJun 22, 2013
Man of Steel is a generic summer blockbuster with Superman attached to it. It was entertaining, but I didn't take much out of it. The characters & relationships are 2 dimensional, the story is uninteresting and the villain is just plainMan of Steel is a generic summer blockbuster with Superman attached to it. It was entertaining, but I didn't take much out of it. The characters & relationships are 2 dimensional, the story is uninteresting and the villain is just plain boring. The cast don't even bring anything interesting to the table, which is a surprise since the cast includes Michael Shannon and Amy Adams. The effects are amazing looking & the action was fun, but even the action felt repetitive and tedious after a while. Man of Steel fails to distinguish itself from other blockbuster films and just ends up being a shallow & generic, but entertaining film. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
5
Swishalicious29Apr 1, 2016
A silly and over-the-top action film. The cast is pretty good and I found the scenes on Krypton to be interesting. Flashbacks to Superman's younger years were good as well. The climax is so ridiculous and the action scenes have no tension dueA silly and over-the-top action film. The cast is pretty good and I found the scenes on Krypton to be interesting. Flashbacks to Superman's younger years were good as well. The climax is so ridiculous and the action scenes have no tension due to it. The tone is too serious at times also which made it feel pretentious. The middle act is pretty boring as well. Man of Steel is a decent popcorn flick, but it really lacks the substance to make it anything more than that. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
dannygroganJun 19, 2013
Man Of Steel shows some promising aspects but is flawed. the relationship between Kal-El Henry Cavil) and Lois Lane Amy Adams) seemed unnatural and forced the battle scenes were repetitive and the climax was exceedingly disappointing andMan Of Steel shows some promising aspects but is flawed. the relationship between Kal-El Henry Cavil) and Lois Lane Amy Adams) seemed unnatural and forced the battle scenes were repetitive and the climax was exceedingly disappointing and didn't stir any emotion within me apart from boredom Kevin Costner's touching performance as Jonathan Kent was the highlight of the film. Expand
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
5
IninteligibleJun 14, 2013
Con un inicio prometedor, la historia cae lentamente hasta el hastío, las peleas se tornan repetitivas y aburridas, el tema compuesto por Hans Zimmer queda muy lejos del que hizo el legendario Jhon Williams.

Para ser un reinicio, quizás
Con un inicio prometedor, la historia cae lentamente hasta el hastío, las peleas se tornan repetitivas y aburridas, el tema compuesto por Hans Zimmer queda muy lejos del que hizo el legendario Jhon Williams.

Para ser un reinicio, quizás debieron elegir una historia más breve, recuerda un tanto a Transformers 3, invasores extraterrestres queriendo recrear su mundo en el nuestro mientras de paso destruyen una ciudad.

"Easter Eggs" apenas si son visibles, hay que estar muy atentos.
Expand
1 of 10 users found this helpful19
All this user's reviews