THOUGHTS ON
With the Man of Steel being released on DVD/Bluray this week over here in the UK, it is time for me to look back over the film and reassess my thoughts on the same.
WARNING: SPOILERS!
It is not a superhero movie
Man of Steel is a science fiction movie, specifically a first contact movie, just with a superhero -- the superhero -- in it.
The Snyder question mark
Zack Snyder has his detractors. I am not, nor have never been, one of them. Sure he has made some bad films (300, Sucker Punch I am looking at you) but they have never been bad to look at. He is a visually assured director and has, narratively, been let down by some poor scripts. This is easily his best movie to date and, despite all the special effects and CGI, it feels his most real.
The script
Whilst it is a decent script, and the best Snyder has had to work with, it feels like it could have had one more pass, particularly in terms of the some of the dialogue and the placement of the flashback sequences in the narrative structure. More importantly, however, it could have done with a little injection of humour.
Superman is not a dirty word
It is at 1:45 that the moniker "Superman" is mentioned and I don't believe it is mentioned again. Why? 75 years and counting, Superman is an icon the world over. It is no more a silly name than Spider-Man or Batman. Folks do not care one bit.
The El's
In the modern era of cinema there is no-one quite as iconic as Marlon Brando to serve as the father of Superman. Daniel Day Lewis would come close, but I doubt he would ever do a film in the superhero genre. That said, Russell Crowe is some good casting. In the Superman mythos it always seems that Jor El is the catalyst for Kal El being sent to Earth with Lara being a bit of a cipher character that goes along with (though we have to assume she agrees). But what Man of Steel does is, whilst Jor El is dealing with Zod, puts the Kal El's fate with Lara. This is a welcome subversion of the general origin story of the Last Son of Krypton.
The Kents
Kevin Costner, genius casting. Beyond that, this is a different Pa Kent than the fans are used to. We get he loves Clark, even having one of the films more emotional moment, but his character is now seems less concerned with helping his son trust humanity than distrust it. His death becomes less about teaching Clark that he has limits than it does about making sure he hides the truth about himself. It is a little jarring for fans of the character, but works slightly in the context of the story. That said, there are times when the more recognisable Pa Kent shines through. Ma Kent is, kinda, just there beyond a touching flashback scene.
The cameo
I saw it when I was watching the film in IMAX the first time, but I assumed it was subconscious playing tricks on me. Even the second time it seemed like a subconscious trick of the mind. Then my brother mentioned it. I've now watched it three times since purchasing the bluray. It comes 1:54:17 to 1:54:21 in the movie, Henry Cavills face morphs into Christopher Reeves face. Not taking anything away from Mr Cavill, for me this is the part when Superman seems the most heroic and that every is going to be saved.
Henry Cavill
I liked Brandon Routh, he did a great job with what he was given to do. That said, Henry Cavill is the Superman for the early 21st Century and seems like the Dan Jurgens version of the character has jumped off the page. It must have seemed like a long time coming for Mr Cavill, but it was worth the wait no doubt. I look forward to seeing what he does with Daily Planet Clark (which he doesn't really get a chance to play with here) in the sequel.
Michael Shannon
This dude is intense. I genuinely believe he would commit genocide.
Lois Lane
Given the nature of this movie, compared with the predecessor Superman movie, it would have been easy to have left Lois out of the movie and replace her with Lana Lang. Luckily, the filmmakers don't and we have a nice new take on the Lois which places her on equal footing with Clark by (again subverting the known mythos) showing her as a reporter of some repute who tracks down Clark and ties him to Superman.
The Planet Crew
I love that Steve Lombard is in the film and I love that Jimmy Olsen isn't. Man, I have never got/liked Jimmy. As for Perry, once again they cast well with Laurence Fishburne and I look forward to seeing more of him in the sequel as the scenes he appears give us a credible Perry White.
Krypton
I like this mecha-medieval version of Krypton, a planet that seems to be in decay regardless of whether it is dying or not. I like how the filmmakers set up the eventual nature of the threat will take and it's resolution whilst at the same time addressing how it is there are not a fleet of spaceships leaving the planet as it destroys itself.
The score
Hans Zimmer had one tough job. John Williams theme is itself as iconic as the character. Zimmer, however, delivers what I believe to be his best score since Gladiator and is award worthy. It blends science fiction, action and intimacy seamlessly.
This looks like a job for... Basil!
There are two (possibly three) points in this film with major exposition and this info is dumped by two characters in particular:-
Zod: This was very much necessary as the film centered around Clarks journey so that we needed to know what got Zod et al to this point and what their main motivations were. It is the nature of the exposition that bothers me but the way in which the info-dump takes place. Visually the "dream sequence" offers a lot but the mechanics of how Zod is accomplishing this interaction (beyond a random throwaway Lois line about it happening to her too and even then) is not fully explained to the audience. Is this another Superman 2 where Kryptonians are given a new power (telepathy) to further the plot? Or is there some kind of Kryptonian machine that allows e-telepathy?
Avatar Jor El: A compu-Jor El has long been part of the Superman mythos to explain Krypton to Kal El. This one seems more sentient than the others, almost like a ghost than an avatar. It does raise some question: When, if he is Jor El's consciousness, did Jor El have time to do that? Does it actually make it a ghost of his father trapped in a machine? If it is his consciousness, does that mean Jor El was never really killed on Krypton? Is there a Lara app for future sequels? If not, isn't it a bit of dickish move on the part of Jor El to download his consciousness and not Laras?
This looks like a job for... Basil!
There are two (possibly three) points in this film with major exposition and this info is dumped by two characters in particular:-
Zod: This was very much necessary as the film centered around Clarks journey so that we needed to know what got Zod et al to this point and what their main motivations were. It is the nature of the exposition that bothers me but the way in which the info-dump takes place. Visually the "dream sequence" offers a lot but the mechanics of how Zod is accomplishing this interaction (beyond a random throwaway Lois line about it happening to her too and even then) is not fully explained to the audience. Is this another Superman 2 where Kryptonians are given a new power (telepathy) to further the plot? Or is there some kind of Kryptonian machine that allows e-telepathy?
Avatar Jor El: A compu-Jor El has long been part of the Superman mythos to explain Krypton to Kal El. This one seems more sentient than the others, almost like a ghost than an avatar. It does raise some question: When, if he is Jor El's consciousness, did Jor El have time to do that? Does it actually make it a ghost of his father trapped in a machine? If it is his consciousness, does that mean Jor El was never really killed on Krypton? Is there a Lara app for future sequels? If not, isn't it a bit of dickish move on the part of Jor El to download his consciousness and not Laras?
All that destruction
Special effects have now got to the point where we can see a fight between Kryptonians fully realised on film. However the it goes onto for about twenty minutes too long and veers off into destruction porn.
This joke
That death
Do I like that it happened? Heck, no. But I can reconcile myself with it. It is not like we haven't seen Superman kill before (Zod, Doomsday) only it is never for frivolous reasons but for the greater good. It makes sense that, growing up on a farm, he would be taught that sometimes you have to take a life if it threatens the well being of the herd. The problem with the death of Zod is with the execution rather than the death. The script, whilst signposting it as the outcome of this conflict does not quite set it up satisfactorily enough for it to not be jarring.
The ending
As much as I enjoyed the film, it was the last minute or so of Clark showing up for his new job in the Daily Planet that brought a smile to my face. I, partially, wish they had made that movie but I get that they needed to make this movie to reintroduce the character.
The future of the Man of Tomorrow
I am as excited as anyone that Batman and, no matter her screen time, Wonder Woman are showing up in a film with the Man of Steel. But at this point is this a sequel or a sidequel? I, personally, would have liked a straight forward sequel maybe with a cameo by the Bat or Amazon to set up a team up movie. It doesn't seem like that is going to happen, at least with the involvement of the Dark Knight. That is a shame really, though we don't know the extent of Batman and Wonder Woman's involvement (unless some of the titles being bandied about are reliable) and maybe they will not be more than overglorified set up cameo's. All in all, though, I am dang excited for the production revelations, trailers and the final movie.
Verdict
Man of Steel was never going to replace the love I have for Superman: The Movie (I feel for that film what people feel for Star Wars). That said, Man of Steel is an epic science fiction spectacular that, even though it is flawed, brimming with humanity. A welcome new vision of Superman for a new generation.
No comments:
Post a Comment