Man of Steel

I've never been to a Superman movie; the capes, red panties, and blue leotard... well, it's not my cup of tea. So I went into it expecting nothing, and didn’t really get anything – just a nice guy acting like a savior. The effects didn't blow me away, the story didn't either, but in a way it was watchable (not so much to listen to, sometimes those speeches sound better on paper) and you were really interested in a scene here and there. I don't know why, but I enjoyed Kevin Costner the most. I must be getting old. A weaker 3 stars. (28/12/2014)

Whereas the Avengers movies are targeted at nerds and the Batman movies appeal to a broader audience that otherwise doesn’t go for comic-book flicks, Man of Steel is a superhero movie that tries to tread a path that is entirely atypical of the genre. The new Superman is conceived as a chick flick. In addition to the expected shots in which the handsome hero appears topless, this is demonstrated primarily by the narrative, which focuses exclusively on relationship motifs (the family and the hero’s roots, protectiveness, responsibility and sacrifice, as well as the relationship with Lois Lane starting on the basis of mutual respect and transforming into love). Lois Lane herself was characteristically conceived as a truly professional reporter, so this time she isn’t a fragile beauty waiting to be rescued, but an emotionally engaged character representing the ideal role model for today’s girls. The film’s targeting at a female audience is further evidenced by the form of the usual blockbuster shots, which have the purpose of confirming the appropriateness of the target audience’s reaction to the events being shown. Whereas in Transformers we have a boy who comments on the battle between giant robots by shouting “wow”, in Man of Steel we find a number of shots in which Lois Lane and, in particular, Air Force officer Carrie Farris dreamily gaze at Superman and comment directly on his attractiveness. The narrative is basically not arranged chronologically, but thematically, and Snyder’s opulent advertising aesthetics, with which he stylises every shot in order to have the maximum emotional impact on viewers and to stimulate their senses, which corresponds to the targeting of women, transform the comic-book story into an impressive spectacle aimed mainly at the heart. (29/06/2013)

If there were more skyscrapers in Manhattan, this film would’ve taken three hours. Man of Steel is megalomaniacal, overwhelming movie that arouses wonder and enthusiasm while masking all of its flaws. It is a poetic and epic, sometimes intensely sensitive, sometimes fetishistically destructive colossus that undermines itself when it kills the fragile realistic feeling of a fatal clash of the two worlds it has managed to build up so far with an over-digitized skyscraper climax. But how can you not like a movie in which the father of the main character is Russell Crowe and his stepfather is Kevin Costner? Add in the likable Henry Cavill and powerful villains headed by Michael Shannon who feel strongly superior towards the human race, their perfect costumes, H.R. Giger’s vagina-like spaceship interiors, and the explosive music by Hans Zimmer, after which you will feel like you’ve drunk five cans of Red Bull in quick succession. Personally, I was also delighted with the elaborate Krypton mythology, and the disappointment over the improperly cast Lois Lane (Amy Adams) was mitigated by newcomer Antje Traue in a sexy helmet. (20/06/2013)

Is it a man? Is it a plane? It’s... Big, it’s big, it’ big. It’s hopeless, it’s hopeless, it’s hopeless. Massively effective, but at other times unfortunately just effective. Self-centered, pretentious pathos, interspersed with incredibly opulent action following the maxim “any one second of action when a skyscraper doesn’t collapse or nobody throws a locomotive at anybody else and where there aren’t at least seven cuts and fifteen reflections is a god-forsaken, wasted second of action". Tons of pathos, but no levity or tongue-in-cheek. Just the falling skyscrapers, deathly serious faces, falling skyscrapers, character “psychology" reduced to moralizing two-word sentences, only sounding right from the mouth of charisma-oozing Crowe, falling skyscrapers, falling fighter planes, falling people, flying extraterrestrials and a couple of falling skyscrapers for good measure. If, same as the skyscrapers, you can’t take all of this (and that could easily be the case), this turns into a good movie to laugh at in ridicule, more than anything else. I could take it, but for me to like it, the ratio of the almost non existent down-to-earth storyline to the cold, action (and, purely subjectively, endless and therefore numbing) part would have to be more than 1:5(00); and it really wouldn’t hurt if the creators could lighten up a little. (18/06/2013)

Donner’s original Superman was open to New Testament interpretations, so it is not surprising that Snyder didn’t hesitate to use the budget for Man of Steel to make a modern Biblical epic. The apocalyptic climax, which evokes the feeling that two ideologies have clashed and the whole world is facing destruction, is merely the inevitable spectacular culmination of an epic story that follows the successive inceptions of Kal-El, Clark Kent and Superman. The other two narrative units are deliberately “broken up” by numerous flashbacks (like the whole Watchmen film), which hold our attention by clarifying new facts and aiding character development (at least for our basic orientation in space and time, we have to keep in mind from where we have jumped back to the past). In addition to rhythmising the narrative, the flashbacks also help to exploit the storytelling potential of the supporting characters, who are not entirely overshadowed by the main protagonist thanks to comprehensible parallels (Lois cannot write the truth about Superman; Superman cannot boast about his abilities). Lois Lane, who represents an unusually strong female protagonist (not only in the comic-book adaptations), undergoes the most significant change. Though she does let herself be led by a man (or the voice of God?) in the film’s least spectacular (and, in my opinion, best) action scene, she otherwise definitely does not just dully wait around to see what will happen to her and who will rescue her, and thanks to what she knows, here presence is even a necessary condition for good to triumph over evil. Man of Steel doesn’t say much that’s new (only the concept of Krypton – which incidentally resembles the art of H.R. Giger – as an “ideal” Platonic society, which Superman, as an “American hero”, ultimately rejects in favour of American democracy, is elaborated upon to some extent), but at least it gathers together and distributes old information in an original way. Like Batman Begins and Skyfall, Man of Steel goes back the roots of a heroic myth, while at the same time attempting to confront it with reality, of course within the realm of possibility that the genre offers. Besides the pseudo-realistic indie style of the directing, this is apparent particularly in the loss of the previous films’ sense of levity. Of course, Superman is still a guy who can fly and lift a school bus, but now he has to flex all of his muscles, grit his teeth and work up a proper sweat. Thanks to the fact that the film’s air of ancient tragedy is actually believable, Cavill’s strained expression during the difficult physical performances is not unintentionally funny. Thanks to its actors, the emotions that it evokes and especially the pathos of which it is not ashamed, Man of Steel is, in my opinion, the blockbuster highlight of the year so far, as it superbly finds a balance between the silliness of Iron Man and the nerds of Star Trek with its heartfelt earnestness. 85% (24/06/2013)