Man of Steel, Savior of the World?

mos1

 

I’m kind of a Superman girl, so naturally I had to run out and see this opening day. I took my dad along, which as it turns out was nice, since the theme of this film seems to be “fatherhood.” I had a lot of conflicting thoughts about it, though, so… read on.

The Plot:

Planet Krypton is due for implosion. Jor-El defies the authorities and General Zod to send his son, Kal-El, to earth, where he will be seen as a “symbol of hope and a god.” Thirty-three years later, Clark Kent discovers his origins and starts on his path to becoming Superman… when Zod turns up to take him captive and remake Earth into Krypton II.

mos3

Spiritual Symbolism:

Superman movies are ripe with symbolism. Smallville did it. Superman Returns did it. And Man of Steel does it.

The opening sequence shows a struggle between a father, Jor-El (God), and a loyal commander of Krypton who turns rogue and becomes its destroyer, Zod (Lucifer). The hopes of all Krypton rest in the infant Jor-El (Jesus), who is sent to live among human strangers and be raised by surrogate parents. Clark manifests his powers early but isn’t encouraged to begin his “mission” until his 30’s (sound familiar). He even loses his father because it isn’t yet “time” to reveal himself (as Jesus lost Joseph at some point along the way, and because it wasn’t “time” to start his mission, had to let him die).

Zod’s threat to all humanity forces Clark to surrender (sacrifice himself for human-kind), leads to an epic showdown between good and evil, and eventually causes the imprisonment of Zod’s armies in the Phantom Zone (demons cast into hell) and Zod’s death (Christ defeating Satan).

Even Lois has a bit of symbolism attatched to her – she’s visited by an echo / memory of Jor-El to guide her to the answers and solution to the problems Zod presents, just as Mary was visited by an angel.

Am I stretching here? Uh… do you think so?

Trivia:

There’s a LOT of references to Superman canon (check out the oil tanker chucked at Clark with the LexCorp logo on it), the DC universe in general (Zod and Clark take out a Wane Enterprises Satellite – Bruce won’t be pleased), and Smallville in particular (not only does it share cast members, it also shares names and references).

mos2

Closing Thoughts:

Symbolism aside and apart from the expanded father roles of Jor-El and Jonathan Kent, I really didn’t like this movie much. There are some great things about it. The intro on Krypton and our chance to get to know Jor-El, Lara, and something about their society was terrific (even if it did include a subtle greenie message – gee, we’ve overused our resources and the planet is going to implode). The flashback scenes are really well done and establish Martha and Jonathan as significant, wonderful people in Clark’s young life. And for once, the villain isn’t Lex Luthor (even if I did “miss” him).

But… the critics were right on this one: it’s lacking a soul. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I like reboots to at least give us some familiar territory to hold on to. I missed the dorky reporter shoving up his classes, crashing into desks, spilling coffee, and tearing off his suit to reveal a Superman costume. I missed the witty banter with Lois, her looking on him as a fool, and him playing the doe-eyed reporter. I missed Perry White actually having some personality and impact.

Here, Lois is a plot point – she is wherever she is not because she’s an important character but the plot needs her to be there. (Zod needed her… why?) Moreover, other than her first five minutes on screen, she’s forgettable, bland, and for the most part unimportant. When exactly did attraction start between her and Clark? I never saw it, so the kiss at the end was a bit of a “huh?” moment. The actress tries to work with it, but there’s not much to go on. The same can be said of Clark – good actor, looks the part, but he has about twelve lines of dialogue so… the only characters really fleshed out are Jor-El and Jonathan Kent. It’s somewhat eerie this film comes out so close to Father’s Day, since if nothing else, Man of Steel is about fathers training up their son in the way he should go.

My main problem with the movie is… I got bored thirty minutes in and it never recovered. The flashbacks are strangely placed and the script hops around a lot. I wasn’t impressed with all the “artsy” shots of clippers in cans and raindrops (nor am I a fan of extreme close-ups or shaky cams… if you’re filming a 250 million dollar movie, having it not be blurry would be nice). And the ending action scenes are not only soulless and present some real moral issues, they’re also too long.

Since when is Clark unconcerned with pedestrians? He often flies into the bad guys, propelling them backward… not into open fields where the worst damage will be ruined corn stalks, but into buildings, trains, and I-Hops. Instead of luring the villains away from Smallville, they fight in the street! He rushes off to stop a monstrous alien ship on the other side of the planet, while Metropolis is crashing to the ground all around them. Sure, he stops Zod from frying a family alive, but what about all those office buildings they crashed through? That’s a lot of collateral damage, Clark.

Many people are going to LOVE THIS MOVIE. That’s how the wind shifts. I didn’t, but no one cares, so go see it and make up your own mind.  It’s 6am on a Saturday morning… I’m going back to bed.

Other Superman symbolism posts: here.

61 Replies to “Man of Steel, Savior of the World?”

  1. My Mom loved Superman as a little girl, so I thought about going to see this with her–but your review makes me think it wouldn’t be quite her style. (She gets VERY irritated with ‘clunky’ films as you describe them) We might watch it eventually on DVD though.

    I forget if I told you, but I actually saw the first 5 seasons of Smallville a few months back! They were enjoyable, but I started to get a bit annoyed for the reasons you mentioned above. The characterizations and whatnot began to feel inconsistent. Too much rebounding, break ups and make ups etc; I guess it’s inevitable whenever you have a long running show, and many different writers–but–in some cases you wonder if the script writers have ever seen the previous seasons! This is also what bugged me with Supernatural, long before we even got to the offensive religious elements 😛

    I still think Smallville’s a good show and want to see more, but it’s a bit sad seeing certain characters change for the worse. And I don’t just mean Lex.

    Lex is an interesting character though, because while in the early seasons, he’s not a “bad” person, you often see places where he misses the opportunity to be a better person. Do agree with others who say that Jonathan Kent could have given him more of a break, but I’m not sure it would’ve made a difference.

    We still see enough hints here and there, that show that even if more people had reached out to Lex, (Lana, Chloe, and other friends of Clark were usually pretty nice to him), it’s probable he would still have chosen the same path. The way he refused to stop investigating the car accident. The way he lied to his supposed friends etc; And then there was his growing ambition, and dislike of letting anything stand in his way.

    PS
    Finally replied to your email 😀 Any incoherences therein shall be ascribed to cat-induced insomnia 😛 !!!

    PSPS
    I started reading a Christian fiction novel yesterday for the first time in years– Beyond the Sacred Page by Jack Cavanaugh. It’s not too bad so far–though I am a little skeptical about the portrayal of Anne Boleyn!

    1. It’s worth a $3 rental… maybe not a $7 ticket, but I’m biased.

      No, you didn’t tell me until now! Overall, I like the series for its fun factor and certain of its characters but it had some of the most inconsistent writing I’ve ever encountered (then again, that’s a staple for the CW… The Vampire Diaries this season had me screaming, “WHAT THE HELL??”). The never-ending Lana/Clark (dubbed “Clana” by the shippers) made me want to vomit. I dug it for three seasons and then was so over it. Chloe turning on Lex after he saved her life was weird, too. Plus, the writers said they weren’t going to “flip a switch on Lex, and make him all the sudden evil” … and then did just that. Dude, REALLY?

      Oh, Lex was always evil. Others being a good influence on him might have held him back a bit, but he never once tried all that hard to be a better man. He dipped his toes in now and again but ultimately became exactly what his father wanted him to be. And frankly, I’m not surprised because… well, if I didn’t have God in MY life, curbing my natural INTJ instincts, I wouldn’t be nice either.

      Good grief, woman! Respond, you did! 😉

      So how is this Anne Boleyn? If she’s either a strumpet or a sweetheart, it’s wrong!

      1. Hmm, maybe I should hold out till my library gets it 😉 ?

        I agree about it being fun, and the characters often likable. Not sure about inconsistent writing/characterization being a CW staple though as I’ve seen bad examples in other shows, even BBC or ITV stuff. Obviously given the massive cast/crew you have on these series, everyone’s interpretation will vary, so some degree of change is inevitable. The problem comes when people don’t seem to know the difference between character development and derailment…

        Well this Anne Boleyn has just appeared once so far, but she seems more…crabby than anything really. Oh, and rather ugly, which seems odd, because while I’ve long read that Hollywood accounts of her beauty are greatly exaggerated, and contemporary artists strove to flatter. I can’t picture Henry VIII attempting to move heaven and earth for a downright ugly woman either 😛

        1. That works too. There’s no rush, after all!

          That may be true — I don’t watch all that much television any more (getting rid of cable and having no way to get signals out in the country pretty much put most of my viewing on hold — thankfully, a few stations actually post their stuff online the next day, so I can keep up with some stuff) so I don’t know how much quality or lack thereof goes on. In the case of TVD, they just stick their writers in a room, toss around ideas, and run with it — if it messes with previous seasons and changes characters’ personalities around, so be it. (Case in point — Elijah is all about family, to the extent of nearly killing his brother when he thinks Klaus murdered his siblings one by one. This season, he was entirely nonplussed about the fact that Elena offed his baby brother Kol for selfish reasons. Um, no! Where’s the Original who calmly dispatches hell whenever he’s annoyed? Where’s his family loyalty? WHERE’S THE RAGE, DANGIT?!)

          … sorry, hot spot.

          From what I know of Anne Boleyn, she wasn’t gorgeous but she wasn’t bad looking, and she was outgoing, flirtatious, and fun to be around so… yeah, crabby doesn’t work for me. (Neither does scheming, or slutty, both of which are the more popular presentations.) Henry liked beautiful women, enticing women — Thomas More said that Katharine of Aragorn when she first arrived in England was one of the most beautiful women he’d ever seen. Replace her with an ugly nobody? I think not.

  2. I thought this movie was a huge missed opportunity. For a character with such a rich history and so much potential, I thought it was really kinda sad…

  3. I just saw the movie today with my siblings, and actually I liked it more than I thought I would (probably because of Superman Returns, lol). I didn’t actually get bored during the flick (and that can happens to me a lot – I am the queen of fast-forwarding, haha) but I have to say some of the stuff you said bothered me too.
    Why can’t Superman/Clark Kent be allowed more lines? I mean seriously! The same exact thing happened in Superman Returns – he barely ever said a word.
    I was kinda glad we didn’t see the dorky Clark persona though. I always felt it was kinda dumb.
    Oh, and Superman destroying buildings right along with the villains?!!!
    It would be nice, also, if at the ending of a movie – the city that was just TOTALED wasn’t suddenly transformed back to its original state. I mean there is no way they rebuilt that city that fast!
    At any rate, I thought the movie looked gorgeous, music was beautiful, I loved Russell Crowe and felt that Henry Cavill was a thousand times better than the Superman Returns actor. I also loved the scenes with Krypton. I liked how they threw away the ridiculous idea that Lois doesn’t know that Clark is Superman aside. (not sure if I’ve just offended die-hard Super-fans or not, lol)
    On a funny (and rather cute) note, when the movie ended – my youngest brother was literally raving about how the movie was “the best superhero movie” ever with the most “awesome action scenes”. So you see – Man of Steel does have fans; those who appreciate the complete and utter destruction that comes in the form of a superhero battle. 😉

    1. Well, I’m glad you enjoyed it!

      Poor Superman never gets very many lines, which makes me think he’s meant to be eye candy and not much more. But if it gets a sequel, maybe he’ll have a bigger part.

      The weird ending makes me think that either Superman helped build Metropolis… or he joins the Daily Planet like five years after the devastation.

      Krypton was awesome — as was Jor-El but given that Russell is probably my favorite acting, I’m biased. 😉

      Your brother isn’t alone — a lot of people loved it, big battle scenes and all.

  4. Enjoyed this post, Charity. Sorry most everyone here was only “meh” about it. (Asked two people on Twitter; one girl didn’t love it, another raved about it, so… there it is – all those differing opinions ;D) Planning to see it this week – either tomorrow or Thursday so – yay! Excited. See I didn’t “love” ‘Superman Returns’ (like the story) in the same way as some of its counterparts (other superhero movies) so if this is equal with that (in my opinion), I won’t feel cheated or any worse off. And since I LOVE the cast, I expect to like it better just for that reason. 😉

    Glad you didn’t regret going – and besides, you saw it with your dad! That’s always fun.

    1. I just think it’s a clunky film… a bit too dry in places, too action-packed in others, without much character development. It assumes everyone knows all the characters do it doesn’t bother to really introduce them to the audience.

      Since we have the opposite taste on a lot of movies, you’ll probably enjoy it.

      1. There is an “art” to introducing characters. When it’s a sequel, self-explanatory introductions should be seamless because I believe some “responsibly” (loosely speaking since we are just talking about movies for goodness sake!) should lie on the part of the viewer. Too much “history” and re-capping of past events and it becomes annoying (I’ve read books that are basically just a re-telling of the first because of how much they “remind” the reader of who is who and what happened); too little and you aren’t being a good story-teller. In this case, it may feel a bit “repetitive” since Superman is an iconic figure already (hence, I may feel as if writer’s can get away with the lack of introduction) and this is just another in a long line of film adaptations.

        Call me silly or naïve but guess I am just easy to please; don’t have to be “challenged” because I’m ready to chill out for two hours when I watch something – especially a silly super hero flick. 😉

        1. When you’re basically re-inventing Superman canon, you kind of need to introduce the characters and give them some personality to work with — otherwise, people are left wondering why established characters they’re familiar with are acting so out of character. I have nothing against this “reboot” in a story sense, I just don’t think it was that well executed — as an origins story or as a reboot.

          For me, it depends… if I’m asking for entertainment, I demand to be entertained. If something professes to be deep and profound, I want it to be deep and profound. The more a movie sets itself up to be “epic,” the more epic I expect from it. The best movies are honest about what they are and not too ambitious; that way they can do just fine on a mediocre plot, and I won’t expect greatness from them.

          1. What is ‘Man of Steel’ claiming to be? A re-boot? That’s my impression/guess I suppose – either way, I’m cool with it.

            I suppose I don’t find many movies “epic” in the best sense. I mean, sure I say ‘The Avengers’ had its epic moments (or those scenes that put goose bumps on your arms) but overall, I didn’t think it was epic in the true way that ‘Amazing Grace’ was (i.e. the spiritualism) nor did it rise to the greatness of ‘Narnia.’ When I think of super hero movies (or specifically Superman), I think “entertainment.” Nothing more. If it offers more or I glean more from it? That’s also awesome. 🙂

          2. It’s a re-boot and a re-imagining in which the entire Superman universe is altered (how certain characters died, who knows about his identity, and so forth).

            True, epic movies are few and far between — except for Narnia, The Lord of the Rings, and The Hobbit. 🙂

            Like I said, you’ll probably like it. I didn’t mind watching it once, but I’ll never watch it again.

          3. Great to know! Thanks. 🙂

            Since I don’t even know all the backstory or “ins and outs” of the history, I hope it won’t hurt the experience. That being said, I think I’ll enjoy.

            Oh, hey, what’d you think of it in comparison to ‘Returns’? I’d guess you preferred it better?

            You are right; true “epic” movies are rare. When we find them, they are that much more “precious.” 🙂

          4. MYYY PRECIOUS… oops, sorry, slipped into LotR mode. 😉

            I don’t know if it’ll hurt the end result or not. I guess I’ll have to read your review to find out! I liked Returns better — just because it was lighter, funnier, and jumped around less. A LOT of Superman fans hate that movie, but I never had any complaints with it.

  5. Just got back from seeing it with my dad. Now, I did enjoy it (and I’ll just admit it: Henry Cavill I have loved since you turned me on to “The Tudors” so that definitely has something to do with it–and I enjoy Amy Adams)…but I didn’t get much of an opportunity to feel. I appreciated them going back and forth between the Krypton story and the present story (because I was clueless), yet other times, I definitely feel it held back.

    I don’t know what to say about this: I felt more dismayed at all of the buildings that got demolished (seriously, I had 9/11 flashbacks WAY too many times) than at some other points of the story….that being said, I was bummed that “Detective Stabler” died. That bugged me.

    Of the two blockbusters I have seen lately, I think I prefer Into Darkness…..their villain definitely has the edge 😉

    1. See? That was my problem — I felt nothing watching it other than shock at the action porn of the second half. I didn’t have any 9/11 flashbacks but a lot of people did, so I totally understand their reasons why.

      Poor Stabler!

      Into Darkness was a great film — my favorite this year.

  6. This movie does absolutely nothing to excite me, or compel me to want to spend $7 on a ticket. I like Superman sometimes, depending on my mood, but this one is just another in a franchise that has never really been as good as it pretends to be. At least Smallville was relatively cute!

    Caitlin and I might end up going, but I’m really not anticipating any WOW moments.

    1. Unfortunately for me — the trailers represent this movie pretty well: dull. The trailers didn’t peak my interest and neither did the film itself. I’m not sorry I saw it, since I like watching Superman movies and having something to talk about with people — but I’ll probably never watch it again.

      The same can’t be said for Superman Returns (I re-watched that a couple of days ago and remembered all the reasons I love it) and… Smallville. I just started my re-watch. I forgot how much I love it.

  7. So I went & saw it yesterday and . . . Really liked it. I have to admit my personal knowledge of the “Superman” has only recently been acquired through “Smallville” and is still quite spotty. I’ve never seen the Christopher Reeves versions, & I’m only in season 3 of “Smallville”.

    SPOILER: I just started to piece together that Lex Luthor’s character will someday be the villain of the story. Yeah, I’m that behind. And it’s making me sad since thus far I really enjoy Lex’s character in the TV series :/

    Therefore, I’m sure I’m not the person to judge if this compliments the legend. Or, maybe it means its an opportunity for a new set of eyes to evaluate & fall in love with it 😉

    The dislikes: much as I love long movies, the last fight scene was a tad stretched. And not seeing Lex (pouty face). Sometimes the flashbacks felt a bit ill-placed (the first few we’re okay, but after 3 flashbacks I think it’s overused). That’s what I can think of now, maybe with time I’ll think differently.

    I liked Henry as Clark, but I think that’s my female sensibilities speaking ;). (It was nice to see the Count of Monte Cristo’s son grown up). I needed the Krypton backstory because of my ignorance. And I liked having a clue who Pete Roos and Lana were due to my recent “Smallville” introduction.

    I must say you are observant, I missed the Luthor reference on the truck (but my brother caught it). I’ll have to ask him if he noticed the Wayne reference.

    Nice to hear your thoughts!

    1. I started watching Smallville three seasons in and saw the final seven seasons live! (You’re lucky, you’ll only have to take a break from watching it if you want to! I had to wait summers between season finales!) I’m actually re-watching them all now, since this movie sparked my interest in it — it’s still my all-time favorite television show! Re-watching season one, I’m reminded of how awesome Chloe is.

      Hang in there — season four got pretty smutty at points (I think they were trying to be “edgy”) but it calms down later in the season and gets fun.

      Lex was my favorite character from start to finish, even after he went bad. I knew he’d go bad so I made up my mind to enjoy it and root for him anyway — so I did. The only thing that really ticked me off I blame on the writers in season… five? Maybe six! I won’t spoil you — you’ll probably figure it out when you get there. 😛

      Overall, I think Man of Steel should have gone in sequence rather than in flashbacks — let us get to know the Kents and then mourn the loss of his dad. Henry did a nice job with what little he had to work with — I doubted him at first but he really looks the part.

      Here’s a few references even I missed: http://www.kryptonsite.com/news/smallville-connections-in-man-of-steel-spoilers/

      1. I can’t believe I’ve followed you for forever and never jumped on the “Smallville” bandwagon before. I just love it. I don’t think I could wait summers between season finales, I could barely wait to go to the library the next day for the next disc. A whole summer sounds very emotionally exhausting.

        Thanks for the heads up on Season 4. Season 3 is starting to tread some difficult waters, and I was starting to get worried that the darkness would only get worse and I’d have to quit. Sounds like it does temporarily. I’m just so frustrated right now with Lionel Luthor. He is so evil and manipulative, I REALLY feel sympathetic for Lex. And if Jonathan Kent would just lighten up around Lex – give me a break already! (I’m really holding back not going back and reading all your previous Smallville reviews and INTJ assessments of Lex). I’m not a root for the bad guy girl usually, but I’m almost finding myself saying my most despised words, “He’s just misunderstood.”

        Thanks for the links, that was fun! And as for your season 5/6 spoiler, I was telling a friend’s Mom about the show and she said, “oh, I stopped watching that when …” “Aaahhhhhh, nanannanana (ears plugged), don’t tell me any more!” So I’m nervous I can conclude what you are referring to. Let’s just say I don’t talk to this lady any more about films I haven’t seen. 😉

        My brother (who just got back from college) is catching up on the previous seasons and his guy analysis of Chloe vs Lana has been refreshing. He’s like, “Chloe has a personality and spunk, Lana has crisis after crisis of life struggles that [his words] only define her.” I hadn’t thought of it that way the first time through, so it’s interesting to get his perspective.

        ‘Smallville’ seasons were on sale this week at Walmart due to the “Man of Steel” release. I uncharacteristically went and spontaneously bought the first two seasons. Heh heh heh, I’m soooo happy!

        1. I’m so glad you like it! The series has its flaws — sometimes the writing is off, and they veer the characters into insane directions — but overall it’s very memorable, has some great moments (particularly with the Kents) and is just… well, fun. Season three is probably the darkest, what with the Lex mind-wiping devises… season four is lighter and more fun but drags out the smut more often in the first six episodes. (It figures, just when I’d convince my parents to watch it, that would happen!)

          Lionel gets no sympathy from me. He’s a monster. They try and make him empathetic later but… I never forget. And yes, Jonathan Kent’s anti-Lex status frustrates me. I can see his point on one hand (trying to protect his family and being dubious of the Luthors) but on the other, if Lex had a father figure worth anything, he might not turn out the way he does!

          My lips are sealed as to what plot point angered me the most. Even though it’s really hard to keep them shut. Heh.

          To be honest, I “like” Lana overall (at least until… never mind) but her never-ending angst and continual demands for honesty from Clark annoy me. I actually said that out loud last night and then added, “But I know you can’t help it, since you’re an S-personality type instead of an N!” They value honesty. If people lie to them, it’s hard for them to forgive. Overall, Chloe is my favorite female… or was until Lois Lane entered the picture. Gosh, I love their version of Lois. Happily, she arrives in season four — so despite the problematic content, at least she’s around to brighten the experience!

          Yay for deals on television shows! I’m on disk 2 of season 2 at the moment. I forgot how hilarious “Heat” was.

          1. My Mom and I watched up to the middle of season 3 before my brother got home, so re-watching it with him we are about in the same place as you.

            I didn’t dislike Lana the first time through, most of the time I was rooting for her. At times I found Chloe’s “investigating” of her friends extremely irritating. Now, watching it through with my brother, it’s just nice to get a different perspective. It’s like we both know Lana and Chloe’s flaws, but he decides to get more irritated with Lana, and I choose to get irritated with Chloe.

            Maybe looking at it through the personality type scope would help me 🙂 (What personality type the characters are, and what type my brother and I are and value). I liked your analysis of Lana that way.

            Can’t wait for Lois! I’m slowing starting to realize that Clark/Lana is not a feasible long-term relationship (partially because of the show, partially because I know someday he ends up with Lois).

          2. I liked Lana in the first several seasons but later she started getting on my nerves. She’s the queen of rebounds and it annoyed me (being a personality myself that simply walks away from relationships and never looks back) that she was hung up on Clark for… what, 7 seasons? Even when she was with other people, it always came back to Clark.

            Here’s my guesses for some of the characters:
            Clark – ISFJ (P?)
            Lois – ESTJ
            Lana – ISFP
            Chole – ENFJ
            Lex – INTJ
            Lionel – INTJ

            Lana is hung up on truth and honesty (yet isn’t above lying to and in some cases, manipulating and stealing from other people, which is hypocritical on her part, and one reason I hate what the writers did with her in later seasons) and … Clark can’t be honest with her, so… yeah, that relationship is doomed to fail.

            Personally, I always liked her better with Lex as a friend/potential romantic partner, because he improved her, and emboldened her rather than simply “saved” her all the time. He refused to let her emotionally manipulate him into preserving the Talon — he forced her to use her brain and come up with a workable business arrangement to profit them both. When she got attacked by someone and Clark couldn’t save her, Lex taught her how to defend herself. In every way, they complimented one another rather than thriving on the co-dependent, puppy infatuation she has with Clark.

            I will say no more. I hope I haven’t said too much already — I don’t want to spoil it for you!

          3. Going to have to look up all these personality types and relate them!

            Hearing the spoiler as mentioned beforehand (which we both keep alluding to but still remain ambiguous so that I might be wrong 😉 ) I am starting to see all the Lex/Lana compatibilities. Them starting the Talon together surprised me but it seems to work. Rewatching it I can see that Lex has an attraction for Lana that he doesn’t act on (thus far), but he’s always pushing Clark to act as he would personally. He doesn’t understand why Clark is taking so long because he would have done things differently long before. Just waiting to see how it all develops.

          4. I think Lex was always attracted to Lana — but as long as he and Clark are friends, he doesn’t do anything about it. Still, as he says in one fairly early episode, in Clark’s shoes — he would have gone for it! 😀

      1. You’ll have to tell me what you think Rissi. I really liked it. Like really liked it 😉

        But different strokes for different folks. I didn’t think “The Hobbit” was much more than a fun afternoon date with my Mom. (Did I just say that? On Charity’s blog? Perhaps I should hide 😉 ). But I did get chills from Thorin/Richard’s “the pines are rolling.” That was cool. . .

        . . . Back to “Man of Steel”. I enjoyed the parallels of baby Moses in the basket to Clark being sent in a space shuttle to an unknown world for protection. I liked the jab at artificial reproduction and genetically manipulated cultures/populations. I missed the Joseph/Jonathan Kent correlation that Charity pointed out, but was touched to think of it that way.

        Then, there were just things that were fun. Superman in handcuffs? Really?

        The things Charity points out are it’s weaknesses. There are to many crashing buildings, and the action scenes are extended.

        But I guess it’s like a child that I have chosen to adopt and love despite it’s imperfections (even blatant). We all have those films. Charity has “Titanic,” I have BBC “Robin Hood.”

        Hope you enjoy it!

        1. Tolkien adaptations are special to me, because The Lord of the Rings was my first real foray into fantasy, it taught me to search for religious symbolism in movies, and it gave me my best friend. We met online co-moderating a Christian LotR website and have been BFFs ever since… so The Hobbit is kind of like reliving that magical experience all over again. 🙂

          We all have our weaknesses when it comes to entertainment — I still watch Downton Abbey in spite of it being the worst drivel to come out of ITV in decades!

          1. Still haven’t seen Downton Abbey . . and there is so much on Pinterest by the time I see it I’ll probably know what’s coming.

            I know how sentiment can play a part in your film/book choices. I’ve never seen Lord of the Rings because I had no interest, but when they advertised the Hobbit I was actually a smidge interested because it was one of the books my Dad read to me in elementary school. It was something I didn’t enjoy at the beginning when he was reading to me (all these weird characters and names and circumstances), but by the time they slayed the dragon I was excited. I don’t think I would have seen the Hobbit if he hadn’t read it to me.

            Woot woot for online friends made through mutual interest. I love your analysis of movies, which is why I always come back!

          2. Don’t watch Downton Abbey unless you’re prepared to deal with a great first season full of exciting twists and surprises, followed by several seasons of predictable plot twists, inconsistent character development, and senseless write-outs of the actors in crappy ways. Me? Bitter? Absolutely.

            Sentiment does influence people. Pop in a Narnia movie, and I cry. Why? Because CS Lewis was instrumental in my dad finding salvation, so it has a special place in my heart. Can’t make it through a single Narnia movie without tearing up. (Much to my own annoyance.)

            You should try The Lord of the Rings films someday — they’re really quite remarkable. 🙂

          3. Yes, bitter with the BBC, I know those emotions. DA is in my Netflix queue, I just keep pushing it towards the bottom. I must be declining and emotional rollercoaster at the moment.

            That is so special about CS Lewis and how he affected your dad. I’m sure that’s an amazing story, and so sweet.

            My brother’s into the LOTR stuff. He just recently finished a biography of Tolkien. I’m sure his constant gushing means eventually I will be introduced. I’ll let you know when I am.

        2. Thanks, Camille. Saw it. Am reviewing it. 🙂

          Agree with you; we all do have our likes and weaknesses. ‘Robin Hood’ was fun despite it’s sometimes silliness – it actually got better in the end (more serious).

          Ha! Your comment about ‘The Hobbit’? Made me smile – you may want you to hide! 😉

          1. The fact Charity runs her webzine proves she willing to let us gush with admiration for films she personally finds . . blah. My last article of BBC Robin Hood for example 😉

          2. Even if I don’t like/love something, I always find it interesting to read other people’s thoughts — and sometimes they can make me see a movie/tv show in a way I hadn’t thought of before, which is always much appreciated. 🙂

          3. Oooh, can’t wait to read it!!

            I know, I like the serious tone of Robin Hood, and think it would have been much more powerful if they had actually had maintained story writers throughout the series (Robin and Guy knew each other as children? . . . really?!)

            But I know I should stop referencing RH in these posts, the point of this article really was “Man of Steel”.

          4. Yay! Do stop by anytime, Camille. 🙂 Should be up in the next day or two.

            Hey, you can mention ‘Robin Hood’ anytime – it’s always a fun topic. 🙂 Still looking for *my* favorite version. *sigh* Someday they’ll make it.

          5. Mine’s Russell Crowe’s version for… well, Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett reasons. Heh. 😉

            So, which side of the fence are you on — Man of Steel was epic or didn’t quite work?

          6. No! I’d never have imagined you choosing the Russell Crowe/Cate Blanchett version! 😉

            Probably leaning more towards the “defending Superman” side of the fence – the conservatism is always a BIG pro. Was it epic? Sadly, no. Did I “enjoy” it? Yes. Was the “bigness” too much? Absolutely! I think the franchise needs to ditch this director and go from there.

      1. One of these days I’ll give it a try. I had no desire to watch it when I was younger simply because my step-brother liked it and sometimes if he liked something, I wanted nothing to do with it. Yes, that was just me being contrary. :Þ

        1. I’m contrary too… but Smallville was my intro into being a sci-fi girl, so it has a special place in my heart and a drop-dead gorgeous INTJ Lex Luthor.

  8. I’m a Superman fanatic, so I really want to see this…not sure how I’ll end up liking it. Christopher Reeve was always Superman to me, but there does seem to be benefits in this movie…like that Margot Kidder is not Lois Lane and they’ve scrapped the red undies. Anyway, not going to lie, mainly seeing this because Hrnry Cavill looks great, but not expecting it to usurp the first Superman in my affections. 🙂

    1. Agree with you, Alexandra! There could be LOTS of good in this; dying to see Henry in the role and I adore Amy Adams. Plus the red undies? There is no loss. 😉

      1. So, I saw it…and I really liked it. 😛

        I do see, understand, and partly agree with you about the “flaws”, but I liked the realism, as much as I loved the campiness of the 70’s Superman. And Henry Cavill was *so* much completely delicious eye candy in this film. 😉 Anyway, really enjoyed it..and I might have fangirl-squealed in the theater when he shows up at the end with Clark glasses. Thank goodness it was almost empty. 😀 This Christopher Reeve fangirl was shocked to find a Superman I liked as much. 🙂

        1. I’d say I’m so happy you had an awesome time watching it, but that would be a bald-faced lie, since it annoys me whenever anyone else doesn’t share my opinion. 😉

          That being said, it’s cool that you found another Superman you could like as much as the original. I’m not sure who my favorite Superman is… I have a soft spot for Smallville’s Clark Kent, but sometimes he drives me insane. I like Christopher Reeves okay but haven’t watched those in a long time. I enjoy Brandon Routh quite a bit. And then there’s the old TV show Lois & Clark… which frankly, I don’t remember at all.

          They say the mind’s the first thing to go — or is it the body?

          1. I have too say; I also get annoyed to with opposite opinion. Helps me out that I am not the only one…

Share Your Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s