Eight years ago, Christopher
Nolan reinvented a seemingly dead superhero franchise with his Dark Knight trilogy. Here he’s acting as
a producer to attempt the same with another DC comic book hero and perhaps the
most famous of all, Superman. There have been Superman films in the past of
course and it’s only seven years since the forgettable Superman Returns hit screens to a decent critical and lukewarm box
office reception. Taking control of Man
of Steel is director Zack Snyder, a man a distinct style and experience of
large, special effects movies. I’ve never had much affinity for the Superman character although I enjoyed
the 90s TV series. The character, coupled with a director whose films I rarely
enjoy lead me to having low expectations for the latest in a long line of
superhero based blockbusters. Unfortunately even my low expectations failed to
be met with Man of Steel, a dull
movie which lasts for an age and goes nowhere.
The film does what all superhero
re-boots are doing this century and gives us the origin story. The problem with
Superman’s origin story is that it’s long and complex, or at least it is in
this film. Spider-Man gets bitten by a spider, develops heightened senses and
web stuff then goes with it. Batman invents stuff and goes from man to
superhero. Superman though has a story which involves the end of a world, a
race’s battle for survival, civil war, unusual childhood development and
alienation before self discovery. That’s a lot to put in one movie and of
course the movie doesn’t want to just give us the origin, it wants to entertain
us with a villain and large scale battle. This results in a two and a half hour
film which is full of long, unnecessary exposition and long winded flash backs.
I expect most people will be aware
of the Superman origins story so why this movie feels the need to go into it in
such depth is beyond me. The early scenes on Krypton bored me rotten but at
least the world is well designed. It was an interesting development to see
Clark Kent
struggle to come to terms with who he is, drifting from town to town, never
fitting in. This is slightly more realistic than Smallville to Metropolis to
journalist. While not disastrous, these early scenes failed to have me enthralled
and I felt a little like the fidgety young child sat next to me. The film
attempts to cram in a lot of Christian symbolism and views the Superman
character as a Christ like figure. This is fair enough as after all he’s a
being come down from the skies who is capable of magical things. And he’s made
up. The problem is though that the film isn’t at all subtle with this idea.
There might as well be a claxon sounding each time the character appears Christ
like. In one scene, Kent
is discussing sacrificing himself for the good of humanity whilst he’s sat in
front of a giant stained glass portrait of Jesus. In another scene he actually
falls from a space ship in the crucifixion pose and late on there is an image
where he is seemingly ascending to heaven. It’s all so in your face.
The final forty or fifty minutes
contain several large scale, CGI heavy battles. I felt the same about these as
I did in Iron Man 3. It’s just not
exciting anymore. It’s all been done before and there was little originality in
it. First Smallville is half destroyed and then the fight turns to Metropolis
where the action improves slightly before becoming another full scale, city
destroying battle. The Avengers did
this last year to good effect but now it seems as though every blockbuster
movie feels the need to end with a prolonged section in which half a city is
destroyed. It’s so overdone that it loses its excitement and the entire genre
is ending up looking the same. Speaking of looks, Man of Steel is a very good looking film. Zack Snyder has a unique
style which is instantly recognisable and while I personally don’t love it, it
does look good. The CGI is mostly excellent which considering how much there
is, is something of a success. There was a scene of a large building collapsing
which looked superb and some of the stuff in the air looks great too. A problem
I had with the look of the film is Snyder’s overuse of a particular type of
shot. It’s a shot which is very ‘now’ and features in a lot of big movies at
the moment but Snyder seems to put it in almost every scene. The shot is always
a wide angle CGI shot which has a little bit of shake or movement in it. The
camera then zooms very quickly and deeply onto the focal point and again does a
slight shake. It’s an attractive looking shot but it’s over done here. I saw
the film in 3D and I’m happy to report that I completely forgot I was watching
it in 3D. On the plus side this means that it didn’t distract me but I didn’t
actually notice anything being in 3D either.
The score is efficient for its
purpose and was instantly recognisable as being composed by Hans Zimmer. Like
the director, he has a unique style which I spotted despite not knowing that he’d
worked on the movie. There are problems in the acting department though.
Newcomer Henry Cavill plays the Last Son of Krypton and his performance is
uninspiring. Some of the problem might lie with the character but Cavill is
wooden, lacks passion or emotion and didn’t have the screen presence to carry
the character. He’s also ridiculously good looking which probably helps but
annoyed me! Amy Adams is usually a steady pair of hands and she’s fine but
unspectacular here. She’s always watchable but I’ve seen her do far better
work. The same can be said of Michael Shannon who plays villain Zod. Shannon is one of my favourite current actors and has a
natural malice and anger. For some reason he seems to lack some of that intense
anger here though and is much more restrained than usual, despite playing a
comic book villain. He feels flatter than he has been of late but comes alive a
little more late on.
Because I wasn’t enjoying the
movie, I picked up on things which I might have otherwise missed. A little
thing that bugged me was how Clark Kent managed to have a shave on a 20,000
year old space ship and I couldn’t help but wonder where he kept the codex in
his suit. Something which I couldn’t miss was the product placement. I haven’t
seen such a blatant product placement in a movie for a long time. There are cringe
worthy shots of cameras, phones and shops, all with their logos front and
centre. The movie made an incredible $160 million from product placement before
it even hit cinemas and I find this to be a huge insult to the audience. Not
only does it get in the way of enjoying the movie but it means that the
director is making it with the advertisers in mind, rather than the audience.
The massive cash injection from this advertising means that the film’s
production cost in real terms was just $65 million.
Man of Steel is a very long film and it feels longer due to having
several endings. On at least four occasions I thought that the film had ended
only to have another scene and then another. It’s almost like the film doesn’t
know how to end and wants to cover all the bases just in case, but it just ends
up feeling weak. The multiple endings come after half a city is destroyed, an
act that no one seems particularly bothered about. There’s a severe lack of empathy
in this film. Overall Man of Steel is
a movie which looks good but has an overly long, overly explained and overly
dull story which is averagely acted to a backdrop of seen-it-before explosions
and Nokia adverts.
5/10
GFR 4/10
Titbits
- Ben Affleck was considered to direct but turned the job down due to his lack of experience in the genre.
- Although Superman's arch nemesis isn't featured, he gets a blink and you'll miss it visual mention.
- Henry Cavill won the role ahead of the likes of Armie Hammer, Joe Manganiello, Zac Efron and Matt Bomer.
Huh. Damn. I was hoping more from it even if I didn't enjoy Batman too much.
ReplyDeleteI like your spottings a lot. Product placement makes me reconsider seeing this very, very seriously. I mean... why? Oh my god give me some Tarantino after this, please. Thanks for the warning though heheh.
Even if the film was great, the product placement would have annoyed me but when the film isn't good, it makes it even more noticeable.
DeleteI did notice the product placement, something I tend to notice more since following Today I Watched a Movie. Nikon and Sears (for some reason) especially, and I noticed the LexCorp logo a few times. I also never once looked for the clock during the entire movie. Also a quick note, the codex was actually encoded into his very cells, not that that helps the believability factor much.
ReplyDeleteYeah you're right about the codex. I meant that little key thing he had with him. I'll pop over and have a look at what you thought, this being your genre.
DeleteDamn, 5/10. I guess Superman is just tricky to get right. Still got to wait nearly two weeks til we get it here in Australia - probably won't be going on the opening night. More pumped for Monsters University, Catching Fire and The Hobbit to be honest!
ReplyDeleteI didn't like it but I've read more good things than bad elsewhere. I feel your pain about late release dates. I hate having to wait when the US has a film.
DeleteGood review. Being a superman fan, I hate Man of Steel. Instead of creating a solid movie, they seemed more focus on those dumb CGI fight scenes.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. Thanks!
DeleteI actually enjoyed the first half of the movie, it's when all the explosions and building destruction start that I got bored. I didn't notice all the Christian parallels, but now you mention it I'm not sure how I missed them. You mention Snyder's style, but I din't think Man of Steel had it; it looked nothing like 300, Watchmen or Sucker Punch.
ReplyDeleteI agree though, that it just wasn't interesting enough, and that figure about product place is appalling.
I've read a lot of reviews which missed or ignored the religious stuff. Maybe it's just my interest in (the destruction of) religion that drew my attention to it.
DeleteSeems like we had similar opinions with this one.