AdSense to Search

Custom Search

Saturday, September 6, 2014

Man of Steel review (2013, Action/Thriller/Fantasy, Zack Snyder)

 

A long-needed, by some measures, reboot on a hero that has outlasted time itself. The seminal, archetypal comic-book superhero has been graced, and disgraced, by film many times before this outing. Superman has seen his ups & downs on film, with the 1970's original holding up all these years while the disastrous third & fourth entries, not to mention the criminally boring "Returns" take in '06, have held him back for the crowds. 

We've got Clark Kent/Superman meeting up with Lois Lane, presumably before he's even landed a job at her newspaper, to deal with an incoming party of fellow Kryptonians. They're suggestively hostile from the get-go and Superman is forced to put himself front & center, as he usually is, to try and keep humanity safe. However, General Zod & friends mean to restore their homeworld (also Clark's) by any means necessary, even if it means that billions die. Clark, like the Transformers of Michael Bay's on-screen creation, chooses humanity over his own and battles them to save the world. The implications really do seem high on paper, but they aren't when you are made to watch over two hours of film. 

So, storyline aside, how does this film hold up?

Well, it's not the best, nor the worst, screen adaptation of the world's most famous superhero. It's really quite a mediocre film, in spite of the good intentions that were obviously put into its conception. Production values are the highest the franchise has ever seen, and the action sequences raise the bar for comic book films quite frankly. But, and this is a weakness I've always felt plagued the man in blue in all mediums, the story is lacking. The characters, the plot, and the narrative don't hold up to the technical aspects, as well as when the film is having so much fun. 

Since we're talking about a character of enormous, pretty much godlike abilities, his roster often sees him pitted against often similar foes. Thus, it must follow that the action should mesmerize viewers. What few action sequences there actually are in this overlong, two and a half hour jumble of lens flares and conspicuous high-definition trickery, are quite impressive to behold. With entire buildings being smashed like sandcastles, automobiles and even locomotives being flung like playthings, gravel and dirt being pulverized by the sheer brute force of the Kryptonians; it's hard not to have a "gay" old time when these sequences bless the screen.

Everything else, though, holds it back.

Just about anybody who is anybody knows about Superman, and really all that matters about him. He's THE superhero, he swears not to kill his foes (especially humankind), he manages to fool everybody with the most obvious disguise ever conceived, he's practically a god with his exaggerated strength & durability and all that, he bears a weakness to a rock, and Christopher Reeve is practically synonymous with the character. So growing him in this film not only ends up falling flat, but is kind of unnecessary given its approach. It's also kind of odd that at the get-go, he reveals his abilities to many people (albeit ones in grave danger) and seemingly no one recognizes him. But I digress, because no other character even warranted the same amount of depth, or attempt at such anyway.

Another problem I have with the film are the flashback sequences. They are the sole reason the film is overlong, and gets quite tedious. Each one fails to add substance to the plot, or add character to Superman and others whom we were theoretically supposed to care about. They really could have been omitted entirely, and nothing of value would have been lost. Who were they trying to kid with these? Like I mentioned in the previous paragraph, pretty much everybody knows about Superman, so why fixate so much on his past and the growth in his mastery over his natural Kryptonian abilities?  After all, the mixed bag that was Smallville provided all that these flashbacks portray just fine. Anyway, if you watch the film, you can safely skip them and you won't be confused by the milquetoast plot.

Like the plot, the soundtrack, which in a great film would elevate the experience, accomplishes nothing out of the ordinary. It's your typical series of forced "Boom, BOOM, BOOOOOM!!!" notes to suggest, almost beg, you to feel something according to the wishes of the designers. It didn't work with me. How the hell a nearly forty year-old film accomplishes a more memorable soundtrack, whereas this film, in spite of its sheer production value ended up with a run-of-the-mill Hans Zimmer-esque one, is beyond me.

The acting doesn't quite bode well, either. Henry Cavill is the lead, and as a result of his performance here with very few high notes (his emotional reaction after a pivotal death scene in the film is one of them), he is expendable. Amy Adams is Lois Lane, and in spite of her cheery screen presence, the romance plot between the two doesn't build logically. Kevin Costner played Superman's adoptive father a bit too stoically for my tastes, but Diane Lane does fine as a hard-as-nails & protective adoptive mother. The folks who play the Kryptonians are alright, but only two of them really have an actual identity of sorts, and then there's Chris Meloni who was a surprisingly decent Colonel Hardy who even stood up to direct confrontation with one of them -- twice!

One last thing to point out is the excess of run-time. The film lasts, before the credits roll, for roughly two hours and ten minutes, and it is overlong. This feeling sets in fairly quickly, truth be told, considering that most of the "plot" consists of flashbacks and another re-tread of Superman's origins. It's rather jarring when the film seemingly shifts gears to introduce an actual crisis about halfway through its duration, because it's almost as if this was an admission from the filmmakers that this film would set audiences asleep with all of its filler had they not bothered with the Kryptonians at all. So at least it's definitely not a Superman Returns.

It's still a film mostly filled with fluff, with very few (but effective) thrills. There's way too many unnecessary elements at play to recommend it, as I would personally urge viewers to skip to the halfway point of the film. You, as a viewer, lose nothing in doing so because the writing is so poor that you miss nothing important. We all know about what happened to Krypton; we all know that Clark ended up with a farming family who helped mentor & shelter him from the world; we all know that he falls in love with Lois Lane; and most of all, we know that he's fucking Superman! You don't have to waste roughly half of the film explaining all of this, especially when it amounts to nothing but rehashing. I guess that's how it boils down. Next up: Batman v Superman, maintaining the rather uncharismatic Cavill and introducing the tonedeaf acting hijinks of Ben Affleck as the caped crusader.

C-

The Good:
+ High production value ensures some pretty sights
+ Nerdgasm inducing fight sequences

The Bad:
- Henry Cavill is boring in the role of Superman
- Way too long, and wastes too much time on unnecessary origin stories
- The flashbacks. God damn it.
- Superman kills somebody, when he had so many other options to consider instead. He's supposed to be highly-intelligent as well, Zack Snyder!
- The fight sequences end, and are succeeded each time with the boring plot.
- Borderline non-existent plot, as indicated above. 
- Nothing memorable about the soundtrack.