I've changed my opinion on Man of Steel...now I don't like it so much...

[PNGwynne]

^Yes, it's rather crazy, but you know, '70s Superman would've done that in the comics, too. What about the weird telekinetic rays the Kryptonians used in Superman II?

[Hector]

The plane rescue scene made me gasp and smile; I can still recall the warm, fuzzy feeling sitting in the theatre from it. One of the best "comics" scenes on film IMO.

Yeah, that scene is just awesome...shows what Superman is all about...not snapping fellow Kryptonians' necks.

[emeraldknight47]

The biggest point I have to agree with you on in MOS is Jonathan Kent's decision to choose "suicide by tornado" instead of letting Clark, who could've moved fast enough to not even be noticed in all the chaos of the storm, save his sorry arse. Perhaps he was going through a personal guilt trip for scolding young Clark when he saved a school bus full of kids instead of letting them drown. Worst possible portrayal of JK ever...

[TrekStar]

I liked and enjoyed the movie and just watched it for what it was worth, I did though think that they might have
found a better and more convincing Jonathan Kent, Costner just didn't cut it for me personally.

[madmarva]

I had a lot of issues with Superman Returns, but the biggest was that Singer had a story he wanted to tell about how a biological father isn't always the best father for a child, and instead of telling that story in and of itself in a drama, he straps that on to the Superman characters. All that did was make the story he wanted to tell more difficult to pull off.

Next was the needless callbacks to Superman: The Movie. While there are difference to the story, in a lot of aspects it's as much remake as sequel. It really took me out of the film because I was constantly comparing the two while watching it instead of just being drawn into the movie.

The ham-fisted Christ references were also distracting to me. Superman: The Movie handled it much more deftly and subtly.

Lex Luthor was still a buffoon. Spacey could have been a great Luthor, if the character had of been handled better.

Routh did a fine job in playing Christopher Reeve's Superman/Clark. But I really would have liked to have seen how Routh would have played Superman/Clark if the assignment hadn't called for him to play Reeve playing Superman/clark.

And then, of course, the lack of action, other than a Kryptonite-weakened Superman getting punked by Luthor.

While Man of Steel is basically a remake of Superman II, scriptwriter Goyer said he and Snyder opted to zag where a more traditional telling of the story would have zigged.

The action overload, which I believe hurt the prospect of repeat viewings at the theater, was a direct overkill response to the lack-of-action complaints over Superman Returns.

The fearful depiction of Jonathan Kent was a zag when the script should have zigged.

I believe the fact that Superman is a novice "super hero" as well as how quickly the battles come down and how intense they are is more than enough to explain why Superman didn't take the fight to a less populated battleground as in Superman II when the action swings from Metropolis to the Fortress of Solitude. I think this will be addressed in BvS.

The weird gravity with Lois falling while everything else was being sucked into the Phantom Zone was just a mistake.

I really liked the Kryptonian opening to Man of Steel and the performances, even Costner's despite the fact the character was so off model.

[Mikey]

I was never a huge fan of Superman Returns but it did have more HEART in it's little pinkie than Man of Steel has in it's whole body.

[kept back]

I agree with most points except anything that might be construed as negative about Amy Adams. This here's an Adams praise only zone

Gotta admit she's not who I would have picked as Lois Lane, though.

[MIB41]

Hector I'm thrilled to read what you had to say about this film. I don't think I have to tell you, that sums up allot of what I thought was wrong with this movie. I liked what Snyder did with Watchmen and I think there was a time when I thought he might have been an ideal choice to direct the more traditional characters in this genre. But after watching MOS, I realized he was taking so many liberties on the foundation of the character, it ceased to feel anything like the hero I knew, even from a very fundamental level.

Now, I would be the first to say I realize I'm no longer a part of that generation these films get marketed to (sadly). I understand I have a more traditional, even old fashion definition, that may run contrary to mainstream audiences. But then again Superman as a character is far older than me, so I tend to believe there should always be a base line approach to this character that never gets altered over time regardless of trends, fads, or whatever the cultural tendencies are for the day. Having him tweaked for a new generation makes plenty of sense. But he should never feel completely foreign to anyone who loves the character. And in MOS, I never felt like I was looking at or hearing from Superman.

I think all the primary points have been covered, so there's no reason in retreading that material. But I will say it felt like Snyder was actually trying NOT to make the Superman I knew. So when that movie ended, I really had no emotional connection to the character on any kind of level. So you can understand why any interest I have in BVS is pretty tempered from the lessons I took from this movie. My early impression is it's Batman Arkham Asylum meets Snyder's MOS. It looks like a video game with allot of jaded heroes playing tent pole for the greater purpose of allowing Snyder to lay the foundation for the Justice League. Very commercial but kind of lifeless.