SIX YEARS AGO, HENRY CAVILL STEPPED IN SUPERMAN’S BOOTS AND HIT THE BIG SCREEN. THE ANTICIPATION AND EXPECTATIONS OF FANS WERE HIGH. DC COMICS WOULD EITHER MAKE OR BREAK IT WITH THEIR REINCARNATION OF ONE TIMELESS AND MOST BELOVED SUPERHERO OF ALL TIME.
SIX YEARS AGO
A little more than two months ago, I wrote an entire article about Krypton and the impression we got of it from Man of Steel. The Kryptonian planet lacked a few pertinent details and overall evacuation planning. Looking back on the article, Man of Steel, are we missing something?
If we compare this 2013 movie, to all the others made previous to it, it is an improvement. Despite Christopher Reeve being the only Superman to me, Henry Cavill in appearance hit the mark of Superman’s looks.
The British actor took the role seriously and worked to fit the mantle. However, his acting limited the depth a good actor could bring to the character.
Moreover, Superman being a quite superficial superhero, for the most part, missed the mark on digging beneath the surface because Henry Cavill is not much of an actor.
WHAT WE ARE MISSING
Surrounded by elite actors such as Kevin Costner, Amy Adams, and Diane Lane to make the British actor appear talented, worked for the most part. As a result, the writers cut from Cavill’s lines in the script, which ended being the right decision in my opinion.
The decision to add to Superman’s alter ego, Clark Kent, was a touching moment where I recalled tearing up. We rarely see, in-depth, Clark’s past other than the frequent finding of Kal-El as a baby and little bits and pieces.
However, in Man of Steel, we witness Clark going through hard times when his Kryptonian abilities surface one by one.
ARE WE MISSING A CHILDHOOD?
Diane Lane was the perfect choice to play Clark’s mother. Her natural compassionate look in her eyes when reminding Clark to focus on her voice to shut the world down was breathtaking. Holding him, letting him know that everything would be okay, was a treat.
Kevin Costner’s role was, of course, perfect and heartbreaking. Playing the role of Clark’s father, he showed a lot of patience, kindness, and bravery.
He witnessed Clark as a victim to bullies from taller and “stronger” boys. He reminded Clark that despite having the abilities to dismember his bullies, would not make it right.
In conclusion, Clark’s Earth parents’ role helped raise him as a kind-hearted Kryptonian. However, the saddest part was when his father sacrificed himself to save their dog. Yes, many said Clark was the obvious choice, but it was his father who ordered him to stay away to protect him.
MAN OF STEEL BULLIED
One of the best parts of the movie other than his childhood is the way he concealed his abilities by traveling. I can’t lie, I wanted them to change Clark’s life from a journalist to someone roaming around.
It makes more sense for someone with his abilities, taught to hide them, to not stay long enough in one region to be recognized.
What we realize while watching the movie, is a part of Clark’s life that isn’t as depicted in the comic books. We see him growing up in Smallville, going to university in journalism and then move to Metropolis where he works for the Daily Planet.
Instead, in Man of Steel, we see Clark moving around and bullied when he’s a boss boy at a restaurant in Alaska. Many times he is the victim, take a few breaths, and take the curses and whatnot.
Do we think that making fun of a six feet tall guy with the body of a WWE wrestler a good idea? No, but again, those Alaskan men had one too many beers.
Clark used his abilities a few times to save people but didn’t stay long enough in one place to attract eyes. Yet. So, the Man of Steel are we missing something?
NEW MAN OF STEEL NEW LOIS LANE
What one can appreciate from the movie is how quickly Lois Lane finds Superman’s true identity. That was one of the dumbest ideas in a comic book to have your “best journalist” fooled by a pair of glasses.
Yes, in The New 52, DC Comics’ writers tried to explain the situation by making the glasses Kryptonian, therefore, changing certain features of Clark Kent so people wouldn’t make the association. Still, not the brightest idea. Man of Steel fixed that.
When accepting who he is and returning home, Clark takes on the mantle of Superman. The “S” means “Hope” I classified it as cheesy. It’s the symbol of the house of El, period.
Lois plays a more significant part in the movie, and I was quite happy to see Amy Adams bringing a new persona to this b*tch that Lois Lane is. I never liked the character. I always said she was a superficial overrated bipolar—smart at times, dumb as a rock in others, b*tch ever to be in comic books.
Instead, in Man of Steel, we see Lois as a smart and compassionate person. She wants to protect Clark but also wants to protect Superman from the government.
Ms. Lane agrees to surrender herself to Zod and his goons in a heartbeat. Lois makes smart decisions and ends up saving herself and give Superman a chance to win the battle.
So, Man of Steel are we missing something?
SIX YEARS LATER IT STILL DOESN’T ADD UP
It took years for Superman to master and control his abilities not to have those overwhelm him. He grew up developing larger than life senses and strength, multiple visions, and flight.
He had a little over thirty years to master those Kryptonian skills. Yet, when Zod’s helmet breaks, despite the overwhelming senses and disorientation he suffers, his adaptation is quite sudden a little too quick if you ask me. Man of Steel, are we missing something?
The smart move was to bring Superman inside the ship regulated to Kryptonian atmosphere and livable condition.
However, on the other hand, despite the helmet, Lois wears when Superman falls to the ground under Kryptonian gravity, her bones crushing under pressure. If Superman is face to the ground, imagine a human being?
THE KILLING IN MAN OF STEEL
The one scene that everybody refused to accept is The killing of General Zod. First, everybody must calm out. General Zod explained that every Kryptonian had a purpose.
They genetically engineered their progenies so that their planet would always have the right amount of people in each field. General Zod’s goal was to protect Kryptonians at all costs.
The purpose of Kal-El was to become a bridge between the genetically engineered Kryptonian and organically born ones. Now, Earth. Of course, again, plot holes since there is no way Jor-El or Lara knew Earth would accept their son, despite carrying the entire genetic codes of his people in his bloodstream.
Following that thought, Zod swears that he would collect the genetic code from Kal-El and rebuild Krypton to his ideal. Superman had two choices, letting Zod win as he would not surrender or kill him and end the madness.
This moment was to prove that most of the time, you cannot have it both ways. Madness at Zod’s level is not something curable by Earth’s means. Superman stopped him the only way he could to save his adopted world.
THE ENDING IS STILL BAD
What did I love about the ending? Knowing that Lois was about a decade older than Superman, You go, girl! Clark working at the Daily Planet? I know, most fans loved it, I didn’t.
What, he suddenly has the requirements necessary to be a journalist? Is this the perfect place to know what’s going on in the world? No, that’s called the CIA or secret service like the IMF, oops, wrong franchise!
Either way, I do not think the ending was one worthy of the beginning. He doesn’t want to answer to the government, okay. DC Comics wanted people to know they wouldn’t go the “Boyscout” route with him but failed. The end to me was Superman kneeling before Lois after killing Zod.
In conclusion, Man of Steel had many good ideas and moments; what it lacked was the precision. Too many plot holes in the science department and changing route with Superman.
Own it! You want to change the character and make him more relatable? Do it but own it and go a hundred percent with it. In the end, Man of Steel, are we missing something?
That’s my opinion, what is yours?