Friday, June 14, 2013

movie review: Man of Steel

So last night I went to the midnight premiere of Man of Steel. I've never been a huge fan of DC but having grown up watching all the old Superman movies, I was more than a little curious about this one. It started out like any other movie experience, and I certainly wasn't planning on writing any kind of analysis or review for it. But there were so many things in the movie that jumped out at me as being something I wanted -- no, needed -- to write about. So here we go!

Spoilers aplenty. Don't say I didn't tell you so.

I was actually pretty impressed with how the plot laid out. Starting with Kal as an adult helped cut to chase, as opposed to the the typical linear plotline which follows the hero from the very beginning. The flashbacks to Kal's youth, especially after key scenes with his mother or personal self-discoveries, were far more meaningful because we understood how those points in Kal's life were key in shaping him.

The worst part of the movie was the dialogue. At first, I thought it was the acting that was just so stilted and stiff. But I realized that it was all the dialogue, and I'm inclined to blame Snyder for that. It didn't fit with the overall themes of the movie, and some of the lines were so inappropriately timed that it ruined a lot of the emotion behind the moments. For instance, after Kal and Lois kiss, Lois says, "You know, they say it's all downhill after the first kiss," and Kal responds "I'm pretty sure that only applies to humans," and they share a small smile/chuckle.

What was that? Was it seriously an attempt at humor? Kal just committed genocide on his own race. Everyone is barely alive, and they're trying to be humorous? That was a disappointing scene for me. As an audience member, it was like I didn't have an opportunity to process Kal's emotions regarding the loss of his own race, or even the sheer amount of death and destruction around him.

Other than the dialogue, my biggest problem with this movie was Lois Lane. I'm kind of a feminist, in that I don't believe the sole purpose of a woman is to play the romantic interest. Martha Kent is a good example of a more realistic female character. She's not expecting to be saved but that doesn't stop her from standing her ground against beings infinitely more powerful than herself just to keep her son safe. Seeing that "momma tiger" instinct really made my heart happy. But Lois! She's supposed to be a sassy, not-taking-anyone's-crap kind of girl. Instead she's stalking a hot guy around the world (although, to her credit, he is really hot) and being Kal's damsel in complete distress (and most of the time, it's her own dang fault for being too nosy and involved with everything), and that got annoying really fast. In her first scene, she made a good entrance and stood her ground with Colonel Hardy and Professor Hamilton, but it was all downhill from there. It felt like they just took the prettiest actress they could find and told her to stand there and stare wistfully after Kal for the whole movie. As a character, she was so terribly flat that I wasn't even a fan of the kiss because it could have been any girl standing there. There was no strength behind her, no real personality. She didn't even say a whole lot. In other words, I had no reason to like her or feel connected to her. She definitely had a few good action scenes, but again, I think the whole point of her was to stand there and hug Kal or fall from things and need saving (and can we talk about the physics of being caught by Superman while falling from ridiculous heights? The whiplash, man).

(And can I just say, Henry Cavill with scruff! He's attractive without it too but hot dang. Was anyone else semi-disappointed when he came out of the genesis chamber clean-shaven?)

So here's a question. If Kal was so concerned about keeping humans safe, why was he fighting General Zod in the middle of a big city? Zod probably would have followed him anywhere and they could have spared a lot of the city just by doing their fight somewhere else. Oh, wait, destroying buildings looks really cool. Better keep it in Metropolis. That was cool-looking and all, but after a while it felt like they were just trying to one-up The Avengers as far as sheer property damage goes. And by way of comparison, New York was being invaded by an entire army of Chitauri warriors, and Metropolis was being attacked by a terraforming machine and a madman with no control of his strength. And yet Metropolis looked like it had been hit by a nuclear bomb. It looked like some kind of post-apocalyptic scene. Even though the terraforming probably makes that a more realistic picture, it still seemed like a bit too much.

There were a lot of really good themes in Man of Steel. The concept of not knowing how strong we are unless we keep testing our limits; the theme of religion and how we all wonder where we come from and what our purpose is here; the idea that the choices we make, even the little ones, determine who we become. I was thoroughly impressed by the depth of the themes and symbolism. For those like me with over-analytical minds, the movie was more than sheer entertainment.

So that's Man of Steel. I've got some issues with the movie, and it's still a DC comics movie (I'm a really hardcore Marvel kinda girl), but overall I really, really enjoyed it. It was mostly well-executed and the effects were brilliant. But what I liked most about the movie was the fact that I walked out of the theater feeling connected to Kal. I always liked Superman as a kid but I was never really able to feel a connection to him because he was so foreign. Seeing him grow and develop and struggle made him very human.