I only saw MoS once, and thought it was bad because of the destruction of metropolis and such. But I heard something interesting from another person that in MoS superman himself actually doesn't do that much damage. He crashed a couple windows and beams, but that was superficial damage at best. Zod was the one who threw Superman through buildings and actually caused structural damage and whatnot. I don't own MoS, so can anyone confirm this?

no.i like it and a bought it when it came out on dvd/blu- ray.

Superman in MOS is solely guilty of destruction exactly once: In the Smallville fight, he drags Zod through a cornfield, silo, and 7/2/11. That was on him. He was furious, so I was personally ok with it for "Clark Kent using his powers for the first time man". Id be mad if an experienced Superman allowed his emotions to get the better of him in that matter. You ultimately get to decide as the viewer.

But almost everything else was him getting thrown around by Zod. Superman was a like a drowning child, kicking, clawing, and fighting to breakthrough the surface. He did a poor job wrangling Zod, and I am glad, because if he accomplished it easily, then Zod would have just been a paper tiger.

Nope. A lot of biased opinions went into the critic and user reviews. It wasn't perfect but it was no close to being as bad as people make it out to be.

He was good, could have been a little more conservative with the destruction.

It seems like a lot of the issues people have with MOS will be addressed in Batman v Superman aka the destruction of metropolis.

MMM, don't ask. At this point, everyone is set in their opinions on the movie. It is certainly the most polarizing superhero movie ever made. People either love it or hate it, doesn't seem to be much in the middle.

I love it, but I think that it has flaws 7/10.

No. It wasn't very good in my opinion, but it was better than most CBMs.

nah its just cool to hate okay movies. it was cool and im not much of a superman film, my problem was russell crowe . he is to me what nicolas cage is to the internet

9/10

If you think MOS is bad cause of the destruction, you're not a good critic, just a angry fanboy.

You can say you didn't like the pacing, or acting, or tone, but not "Superman wouldn't destroy buildings!!" Cause this isn't comic Superman, it's an adaptation.

It was great. I had no problem with the killing of Zod

Only dumb part was Pa Kent choosing to die.

Still 100x better than Superman Returns

@jayc1324: Eh, I feel it actually made perfect sense. If my son was super powered I would worry for his safety and protect him from being found out. I would sacrifice myself just as Johnathan did on that alone. Even then Clark wasn't fast enough to do it without people seeing, and I doubt they knew if he could survive a tornado like that either.

Russell Crowe didnt beat everyone up, so yes it was bad

Not necessarily.

This should answer your question. This youtube channel answers all of the 'alleged' problems with Man of Steel.

@korbenheagerty: I want add another video by the same YouTube channel addressing the destruction of Metropolis, since this is related to your question. I highly recommend checking out his other videos.

@Saint_Wildcard:

8.5/10

IMO Amy Adams as Lois Lane was a horrific miscast, and less cinematic and traditional camera techniques were annoying, but overall it was pretty good. About 7.6/10. A lot of action, a fair amount of backstory and good fight scenes.

Superman can only be said to be indirectly (or partially) responsible for the havoc in Metropolis.

First things first; much of central Metropolis took a massive pounding from the World Engine, leading to most of the buildings even nearby to be mostly evacuated by the time Superman finally got there.

The the fight with Zod begins. You have to remember that Zod had just lost everything he believed in and fought for, he was a man with nothing left to loose, so he couldn't care less about structural damage. And then he even topped it all off by threatening to kill every single human on the planet. Superman could have done more to limit the damage while Zod couldn't fly, but once he mastered that, there was really no stopping Zod from fighting inside a kindergarden if he wished. And as he mentioned, Zod himself is a veteran soldier of Krypton, born and bred to lead and fight, Superman grew up on a farm and told to hold back.

So in short, Superman did the best he could with what he had in terms of powers and experience in the face of an opponent that was rapidly approaching his own levels of power and was far better trained.

Also, I think that last scene with Zod will be touched on in BvS, with Superman doing more to get civilians out of the way.

@mercinwithamouth: I wouldn't sorry about Superman's safety. Who's going to harm him? And who's going to believe what the people their said they saw? People found out about him anyway later on. The guy was lifting buses as a kid, I doubt it would have killed him.

@korbenheagerty: Well let's see,

• He didn't save his dad knowing he could.
• His dad didn't show him anything about being good yet for some reason he still is.
• His space dad want him to inspire hope, he destroys the city and people still love him, (probably bc he save them)
• He show his power, inspire hope and still let people die.
• Don't have convintion.
• I like the movie but common, he knew Zod by aproximately 45 min in screen, is not like "you want to destroy my adopted family and destroy innocent life, i will do anything to stop you" that was good until there. but after he kill him "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" that make it more awful than ever.

It was a good movie. But as a Superman movie? Failed hard. This short film managed to capture Superman perfectly unlike the so called big budget Superman movie aka Man of Steel.

Close, but this is my new username (plan on changing it again in the future), that dude stole my name so I can't use the underscore. That aside, I will give my input later.

Well good thing it wasn't a Superman movie. It was Clark's journey to become Superman. I'll go more into detail on my post later on in the week, but that video while cute is too short and misses too many steps to be considered anything else but a cute little project.

@saintwildcard: Who is that dude ?

Congratulations MOS

@saintwildcard: this guy gets it

Pretty sure it's one of my a--hole friends. They took my name when I had it changed to something else.

@redwingx: Wait a minute, aren't you that massive troll on the batman forums, you're the guy who tried to say that batman was useless but everyone else blocked you, you have quite a reputation there man

1. Did we really know he could? Clark may have survived many things, but we don't know for sure he could survive a tornado. How would you test that to be sure? There are multiple reasons Johnathan told him not to save him. Clark's safety could be one of them. You're using your own pre-biases to assume he would and could survive.

2. We didn't see Clark's whole life played out on screen. We don't know that he didn't, plus I would say the scene with the bully pushing him down shows that Johnathan has taught Clark a lot.

3. He was trying his best to stop Zod, and even though there's a lot of destruction, he did save the whole planet.

4. It's a realistic take. It would be impossible for him to save everyone.

5. ? Conviction? He's still learning his way. Not all answers can have a black and white answer.

6. He was painted into a corner. This will set the stage for Superman to have a no kill policy. There's a great youtube video that shows this end scene with the birth scene at the beginning and how they line up shot for shot. This is the birth of Superman, this is why it's called Man of Steel.

Not really Jonathan just didn't wanted him to use his power, hell even to save his friends in the bus he told him that he should have let them die. WTF

We didn't see much of him but we did saw the most important.

Yeah, he did save the whole planet and i say it in my comment but that doesn't change that he didn't had to scream at the end of his fight with Zod.

IDK that but he wasn't even trying to save anyone besides the family in the station, he was trying to stop Zod.

Sorry but DC is Black and White, Lex Luthor have stated it in most occasions, also you are either good guys, bad guys or do your best to be better.

It's not stating nothing since he didn't show any conviction, the movie shows a lot of things irrelevant for the plot for some reason. Besides this new Superman is a little more darker one, or at least isn't trying to hide it.

@korbenheagerty:

The destruction was actually quite dialed down a bit. Or at least powerwise, Metropolis shouldn't even be left standing.

So don't waste your time thinking about the destruction. There were much better questions left open in the movie.

1) After reading the prequel comic of the movie, it was shown thousands of ships left Krypton thousands of years before its destruction. How can they expect us to believe that during Zod exploration of the colonies, they didn't found at least one that had survived?

2) The atmosphere change and the powers go down thing is poorly explained at best. They could at have said that Krypton's atmosphere had unique elements to it, that were deadly to humans. Then we could guess that one of those unique elements was kryptonite in gas form. It would then tell us two things. One, that kryptonite doesn't have the same deadly effects on kryptonians (but it was deadly to humans), but instead it weakens or totally disables a kryptonian powers. Two, why the kryptonians wearing the breathers only had a fraction of Superman powers.

3) Who was the kryptonian that survived the crash of ship on Earth? Most likely it was Kara, which in the MoS timeline would no longer be Kal cousin but actually his ancestor. And if she's still alive, why didn't she intervene? Even if it was only in a scene in the post-credits.

4) Given that has was stated by Jor-El, kryptonians had only one space exploration age, and none of the colonies survived (which given their tech is highly unlikely to believe) how was it that Jor-El knew that sending his son to a solar system with a younger sun would give him powers?

5) The Codex thing was also weird has hell. The kryptonian race suffered no genetic sterility problem. So why the need for an artificial breeding system? When the same results could be achieved by post gene therapy/manipulation.

5) Why was Lara suffering so much during child birth? A civilization thousands of years ahead of ours should at least be able to suppress pain.

Has you see. There isn't a lack of questions.

And ultimately answering the question this post asks. No. The movie wasn't bad. It was actually pretty good. Just lacked a few changes to make it great.

i don't get it. why are people whining about the destruction in MOS, but the avengers get a pass? the avengers destroyed multiple cities. it's a movie. what was superman supposed to do? he could have let zod kill the family. the kryptonians were terra forming the planet. if he hadn't fought them, the whole world would have been destroyed. the guy saved the whole world, and people are whining about a few buildings in metropolis. superman couldn't take the fight to a less populated place, because zod wouldn't let him. zod could care less about humans. why would he follow clark to somewhere less populated? zod's equipment was in metropolis. as soon as clark flew away, zod would have continued terra forming earth uninterrupted. the avengers killed villains left and right, but the MOS catches flack because clark had to kill zod to save a family. i don't understand it. the only think i thought was dumb was when clark let his father die. that could have been handled better. that was no different than death scenes in other super hero movies. i think the mos was the best superman movie that i have ever seen. it modernized superman one and two. i don't get all the crying

Who does even care at this point! Seriously, there are a plethora of threads for this matter already.

Don't you people get bored to debate the same issue again and again. Let it die.

Man of Steel will not go gentle into the night, it will live on while all other movie come and go. It will stand the test of time

The moment BvS comes out,every MoS thread will be exchanged for a BvS one:

"Was BvS really that bad?"

"The real problem with BvS"

"BvS was too bleak"

"How BvS should have ended" (we will get the same HISHE video in 100 gazillion threads)

Depends on the quality. It won't if it's not as polarizing, which I don't think it will be.

Considering the main players and how they are handled, the polarizing cast, the divided lines of MoS sympathizers and haters, the outcome of the awaited battle, I think it will be worse.

The quality I believe will be about the same.

... that sounds exiting

The quality I believe will be about the same.

100% disagree. I'm very sure it will be better and that it will live up to all my expectations and be my new favorite Superhero movie.

Wasn't bad just wasn't all that good. Well that's my opinion anyways, there are many people who quite like the movie.

I Loved it till the final act. The destruction of the city was way to much and the killing was unecessary and poorly executed. Still I liked it more than alot of other CBM like Dark Knight Rises, Green Lantern, Iron Man 2 and 3, Thor: The Dark World to name a few. 8.5/10

@squalleon:

"""The moment BvS comes out,every MoS thread will be exchanged for a BvS one:

"Was BvS really that bad?"

"The real problem with BvS"

"BvS was too bleak"

"How BvS should have ended" (we will get the same HISHE video in 100 gazillion threads)"""

That's for sure. It doesn't matter if the movie rates awesome on the reviews. People will still b*tch about something.

It is an inevitable war. Even more because it's Superman vs Batman, at least for some part of the movie. And that alone will create an avalanche of discussions, bickering, or simple hate talk.

But I don't really care. If the movie exceeds my expectations, I'll probably not even say anything about it, just so I won't have to deal with those just looking for a verbal fight.

If the movie sucks... Well. Then things will be different. If I see a clear manipulation of events, in which one character is clearly given superiority over the other just because, then I'll give more than just a piece of my mind about it. I have enough it already in the comics, don't need a rigged movie too.

@theincrediblesuperhulk8642:

""I Loved it till the final act. The destruction of the city was way to much and the killing was unecessary and poorly executed.""

Funny how almost no one worries about the unnecessary destruction in both Avengers movie, specially Age Of Ultron. And there we didn't had one hero fighting alone against equally dangerous foes. We had an entire team of heroes and still, they almost didn't make it.

In MoS Superman, wasn't even Superman. Not yet. He was still figuring things out. He had just learned how to fly. He had no combat/military training. And still he was able to hold his own.

Sure, there was destruction. A lot of it. But knowing if all the kryptonians on the ship had left the ship and removed their breather masks from the start. There wouldn't be anything left standing at the end. And I'm not just refering to Metropolis. The entire world would be a bloody field.

So has destruction goes, MoS was still very low, in comparison with what could've been. If there hadn't been clear plot manipulation.

Still a good movie. I wouldn't give it an 8.5, more like a 6.5.

Please watch the videos regarding the destruction I posted earlier in here and you will see that it is not as bad as you think it is.

@heavenlydarkdragon: I think from the looks of it, it will be controversial like MoS.

And considering the main players and how they are handled, the polarizing cast, the divided lines of MoS sympathizers and haters, the outcome of the awaited battle, I think it will be worse in terms of b!tch!ng from all sides.

Because there wasn't as much mindless destruction buildings weren't tumbling down and civilians were relatively unharmed. I just felt the destruction was over the top not who or why it happened.

Again I never said Superman was the reason behind the destruction I just felt that the destruction was over the top for my taste.

MoS is no better or no worse than Thor:TDW

@theincrediblesuperhulk8642: I think the destruction was for a reason. Unlike in Transformers, this wasn't destruction for the sake of looking cool. Snyder really knows and cares about Superman so he's going to use it for plot points in the BvS (as we saw in the trailer). I for one am exited to see what journey Zack has for Superman, and I believe that his growth from Farmboy to Founding member of the JL and symbol of hope will play out from MoS to BvS to JL.

PS- Please don't take this as an other slam on your opinion. You seem to already have had that twice, I'm simply just pointing out my view on the matter.