This user has not updated recently.

7222 150 671 270
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

5 Reasons Why Man of Steel Sucks and 5 Reasons Why It Doesn't

Overall, I have to say Man of Steel is a bad movie. However, it is not without it's strengths. And the following list will explain some of those...Along with it's weaknesses. And no, it's not kryptonite.

Overall, I give the movie a C-. Bad, but not horrible, and there would be hope for the sequel if the casting agent wasn't going full retard. And you know what they say about going full retard.

List items

  • BEST: I have to admit, I really had my doubts about Henry going into this movie. I hated the character of Superman to begin with, and Henry's acting in the trailers seemed really awful and bland. However, surprisingly enough, he didn't suck. In fact, he rocked. I was never a Superman fan, EVER, but if anybody has made me sympathize with the Man of Steel, it's Henry. I really do think his performance as Supes was probably the best performance of the character ever, and Henry did a great job portraying all of Superman's angst, guilt, humanity and inner torment. Keep surprising me Henry!

  • BEST: Kevin Cosnter is making a SERIOUS comeback. His role as Jonathan Kent was outstanding, I have to say he just stole the show. Out of all the characters, he was one of the most sympathetic. I knew what was going to happen to him, but surprisingly enough, I cared this time. Kevin portrays a humble man filled with fear and insecurity, but not because of himself; it is fear manifested from sheer love for his son. In the end, that fear can blind him, but it makes for an EXTREMELY likable and deep character.

  • BEST: If Costner stole the show, Crowe gave him a run for his money. His role in the movie is limited, but he is AMAZING. He pulls of a fantastic performance, as a guiding, wise mentor whose entire faith has been poured into his only son. I would have loved to see more of him, he really looked like he put a lot of love and care into this role.

  • BEST: This simultaneously infuriates me and fills me with joy. The flashback scenes are done extremely well, making me sympathize for a character that I, like I said earlier, would normally never sympathize for. I felt the flashbacks worked in Batman Begins, but for some reason; maybe because the supporting cast is so likable, it works even better here. The cinematography, the dialogue, the acting. Everything seems to be done better in these flashbacks.

  • BEST: Krypton looks friggin AWESOME! Seriously, this look was refreshing and just great to look at. The mix of medieval and sci-fi fuses really well, and the wildlife also had a unique look to it as well. Not to mention it flows perfectly with the cinematography.

  • WORST: I always hated Zod and thought his motivations made no sense, but this movie just pushes me to far. Michael Shannon's performance as Zod is at best a joke and at worst Razzie worthy. His emotions and facial expressions are some of the most cartoony things I have ever seen, only made more hilarious by his slobbering and slurping voice. And his motivations still make no sense. If you're home planet was destroyed, and your sheer purpose was to protect it and you couldn't, you would become insane and suicidal, not genocidal.

  • WORST: I HATED this love story! With all the passion put into Clark's backstory, couldn't they put a LITTLE effort into the romance? Cavill and Adams have little chemistry, and the entire love story seems forced and just thrown in to appeal to the majority teenage audience. It brings down the emotion of the rest of the movie by reminding you that it is, in general, a cash grab (This is my opinion of course, if you didn't think it was a cash grab, that's fine)

  • WORST: No...I didn't like the fight scenes. They were shot so quickly and used so much shaky cam I felt like I was watching Cloverfield vs The Super Saiyans. Nothing is less entertaining than watching a superhero I don't like fighting a villain I don't like when you can't even see what's going on. The shameful product placement did not help.

  • WORST: As much as Cavill tries to make Superman interesting, it ends up, in the end, failing. Why? He doesn't develop...At all. In the end, he has to make the terrible sacrifice of taking away a life in order to save innocents, and admittedly I liked this scene. However, when it ends, it feels like nothing really changed. Nobody was changed by Clark having to kill somebody, Lois didn't develop much at all either, I didn't see any change in her character by the end. Am I missing something?

  • WORST: (Get it? Middle Ages? Middle? Yeaaaaah, that was pretty lame)

    As great as the beginning is, that is how unengaging and uninteresting the middle and end are. I feel like the film just slows down during these parts, getting tired of really creating an interesting character with a deep personality and interesting motivations, and just goes the route of a generic, soulless blockbuster. It's like they just got tired and lost the energy to pour in the effort that they put in the beginning in the middle and end.