I saw Man of Steel twice over the weekend. Obviously I
really like it.
Before I get into my actual review I just want to say this:
I think this is the single most inconsistently received film that I have ever
read a review for. The first reviews I read seemed to just be somewhat
critical, but then I noticed that they weren’t citing the same flaws. What one
reviewer considered the most abominable of problems was the same thing that
another found to be the film’s only saving grace. I’ll include links to several
of these, as well as a brief summary, just to illustrate my point: (as a
warning, some of the reviews might contain spoilers, but most of the ones that
do provide a formal declaration of it.) (It’s also worth noting that some of
these people might not have actually watched the move—at least two of the
reviews claim that the word “Superman” is not spoken in the film, and I can
definitively say that it is said at least twice, albeit in a brief exchange
between peripheral characters.)
This review is largely positive, and seems to have come from
someone who actually likes movies, and superhero movies in particular.
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/10/i-saw-man-of-steel-tonight-and-want-to-tell-you-all-about-it/
This one comes out somewhere between positive and neutral.
Mostly, not making complaints and not claiming anything was amazing.
This basically collects some reviews and mentions the
differences between them.
This is probably the most negative review I read. They
specifically gave the film 3/10, which is, in my mind, absurdly low. Claimed
Russell Crowe as best performance. Identified Kevin Costner as very bad. Says
Cavill and Adams had no chemistry.
Basically positive. Says Costner is the best Pa Kent ever.
Universally panned the film.
Considers the film a failure. Says the romance is weak. Says
him learning to fly is a great sequence.
Says it’s a crowd-pleaser, but not because its necessarily
any good. Visuals are a high point. Amy Adams did a good job as Lois. Zod and
Jor-El, both done very well. All acting good.
Calls the film a huge disappointment. Didn’t like Cavill’s
performance. Also thought the action was awful.
Middle ground rating. Too much destruction. Says Cavill is
great, also liked the other actors, except Zod.
This article is just about Lois, and claims that Amy Adams
is possibly the only redeeming quality in the film.
Very positive. Really like the Krypton stuff. Good
cinematography. Acting good, but thinks there was too much Lois. Hated the
flashbacks.
So, now that that is over with, I can do my bit.
I loved it. I don’t think I could point to a single
significant part of the film that I didn’t like. I think everything worked
together very well. Admittedly, I suspend my disbelief from the kinds of cables
used to build suspension bridges, so it is very easy for me to love movies, and
I usually am not looking for things to complain about. This movie contained
basically everything that I think is needed in the Superman franchise. There
was an emotional depth that felt right, the power of Superman was evident (even
frightening on some level (I think they nailed the visual for heat vision)),
Super-speed never looked so great, Superman definitely wants to do the right
thing, and sometimes it isn’t easy. I really don’t think I could say enough
positive things about the movie. Was it perfect, probably not, but who’s to
judge that. Did it do it’s job, absolutely.
Also, here’s some interesting info about the level of
destruction (which I thought made sense, as it showed just how high the stakes
are if two superbeings are this powerful, and can set up the fact that in the
future, since Superman is unlikely to face people this powerful again, he can
work on keeping the situation under better control to decrease the collateral
damage. That might prove enough of a challenge to him that fights against
weaker opponents will still be engaging.) http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/LEVITIKUZsLOUNGE/news/?a=81769
