I left Man of steel thinking this was finally the Superman movie everyone's been waiting for since Superman II..I thought wrong.And I still dont really know why..And man, did I LOVE the new Superman theme song!
I am sitting literally for hours already on your channel and I am amazed how good your videos are. When it comes to movie discussion and analysis you are one of the best! Awesome work!
Honestly, you are welcome - credit is due where credit is deserved! The only negative point I got, but not its not your fault is that couple of your videos are locked here in Germany. For example your DoA or Street Fighter Video are blocked in Germany because of the distributers here. Huge bummer... :(
GoodBadFlicks Do you get more money if we watch your videos on RUclips, or on your site? I'm unfamiliar with your monetization systems, but I know most people do better on their own site. I just ask because I've watched just about all your stuff at least once, and I'll go through it a few more times - it's going to be my new background noise while I work on my own projects. Figure might as well make you as much money as I can by doing so to keep you producing such excellent content. Also, you should do a video on The Burbs (since you mention it so much, and we all know how awesome it is).
Superman knew that destroying the Cyborg Superman would not kill Henshaw as his consciousness exists as pure energy like Brainiac in Superman: TAS. He's already dead in the traditional sense having been killed in Adventures of Superman #466 when his body was subjected to cosmic rays that slowly deteriorated his physical form. Being living energy, every machine he touches he imprints his own consciousness so he can reconstitute himself. Henshaw even tells him in Superman 82 that he'll be back shortly before Kal disintegrates the Cyborg's body. In Smallville, Brainiac is a machine therefore Clark didn't kill him in the traditional sense a human would. Clark just destroyed a computer. The Mxyzptlyk that Superman kills in Action 583 was part of an imaginary tale it's not canon, though we do see him kill, the outcome of that story was his retirement. After taking that life, he knew he could never be Superman a hero that inspires others and is that symbol of peace and hope after that and hung up the cape, so he did learn a moral lesson you can't be Superman if you stoop to that level. Nuclear Man was not a person but a clone of Superman made up of pure nuclear energy, he hardly counts. I get that Superman has killed before but those examples either prove that Superman cannot exist after taking a life, or they were machines that could not be killed only destroyed or temporarily stopped. You simply took those events and reworked them to fit your defense when clearly you missed the intent or certain pieces of dialog that clearly gives Superman an out. I have no problem with Superman killing if there is reason for him doing so, I felt the examples you gave aside from the golden age Doc Savage Superman and Superman 22 from 1988, were bad examples to defend your argument.
Cecil I love everything you are saying but at 11:00 i think you missed the part where Clark DOES throw Zod in to space and Zod comes back. So tp everyone who asks why Clark didn't take the fight else where, well.... he did.
+Zach Couch That's just it though. He threw him into space and then immediately came back to make out with Lois. Zod's powers are even newer to him than Supes' were, so I feel like his argument of Clark being too "green" is invalid. If it had been a battle of Supes' superior strength vs Zod's superior tactics, that'd have been interesting. But instead we got nothing but smashy, smashy.
I don't understand why people complain about this film; I feel like I saw a different film than them. This film is great. Your review is spot on. I have spent the last week or so listening to dozens of your reviews while I work now. I love your channel. Thank you.
I think it is mostly due to Marvel's success and how this molds public perception of what a 'comic book movie' should be like. I'm not trying to start a debate or be that guy that goes 'Marvel movies suck' (I love a lot of their movies - but Age of Ultron, which is one I truly love isn't appreciated by general audiences as well) I'm just pointing out the general public perception. This is more comic book fan oriented, and it requires some pondering and consideration to trully absorb what they were trying to do (which is very similar to Christopher Nolan's Batman) using the character and its surrondings as a way for bigger and more complex analysis... Instead of, you know, just making a no-brainer (or 'turn-you-brain-out') blockbuster, which happens to most comic book movies. There's no subtext to The Avengers, it's mostly spectacle (big fights, giant monsters and huge special effects - with a huge secret organization that can order to nuke any city in the world in a blink of an eye like it's no big deal) while Age of Ultron had a huge ethics question at hand (should we do this - create Ultron - just because we can? And of course, the consequences, surely diminished since it is Disney after all, but still, it is the first Marvel movie to show a hero die).
My dislike for the movie has nothing to do with fanboy nitpicking (I'm not really a comic book guy let alone a diehard Superman fan) but rather with it's quality as a film. It's principle sin is it almost complete lack of characters. You can see fragments of emotions and ideas poking through occasionally, but it seems like most of the "characters" are rather bland representations of themes or serve no purpose beyond dumping exposition or providing some sort of plot convenience. I could kind of see what they were trying to do with Pa Kent but his ambivalence really did seem to lean more heavily toward the "don't be a superhero" side of things. That being said, I thing the film did handle most everything about Krypton and Jor-El exceptionally well, with Russell Crowe easily giving the best performance, though Michael Shannon deserves credit for having some fun with good, old fashioned scenery chewing. Also, the score is absolutely fantastic. Ultimately, the decision to examine Superman as an all powerful alien in a more realistic, fearful world remains intriguing and I'm still legitimately excited for Batman vs. Superman, even if the more recent trailer have me a little nervous that they might be committing the cardinal sin of comic book movies and stuffing too much crap in. And even if that doesn't work, it could still prove worthwhile if it results in a Ben Affleck directed Batman movie.
+andyhoov you know i find it funny because thats exactly how i found the dark knight movies in terms of characters. opinions awaaay~ but yeah i disagree though i respect yours =)
+EclipseHedgehog Actually, I think that it's a pretty fair criticism of most Christopher Nolan movies; as a storyteller he is much more interested in ideas than he is characters. That being said, I usually find his characters to be better woven into those ideas and themes than what Snyder did with most of the characters in Man of Steel. And is that an Epyon thumbnail? Because if so, then that's awesome!
andyhoov yeah, movies like inception or interstellar are a good example, i just got this feeling like some of his characters are more lecturers talking down to you, i found most of the characters in man of steel not that bad. i liked most of them. i liked parry white, i liked lois, jor-el, ma kent, the colonel was a badass, Hamilton even though he didn't do much, guess i liked the actor. i also liked henry's kal. the way they made superman in this is just a regular guy who happens to have super powers who's trying to find out who he is and where he belongs in this world., Even zod i thought was pretty dimensional. we know who he is, his goals, why he's doing what he's doing, the fact he'll do anything to achieve it, and when he breaks down in front of kal i couldn't help but just feel for the guy. and thanks ^^ glad we could be civil =)
+Garet Jax I forgot to mention it, but you are quite right about the camera work. I can appreciate their desire to go with a "boots on the ground" (or maybe in a helicopter for some scenes) but I don't think that style works when you are trying to capture what is, in essence, a battle between gods. Also, the constant wide shot to close up zooms were really weird and out of place for this type of movie.
where i stand for the cam work i THINK it was to try and hide the cginess of the character models, look at the star wars prequels for example, when they use cgi and you see them getting thrown back like rag dolls you can tell they aren't real.
It is the over all tone not all the little he did this in that episode, movie, cartoon, or comic book. Superman is about a moral standard of CHARACTER. Not so much of WHAT he does but HOW he does it. People do make opposition about other versions of Superman. But Man Of Steel, like JJ Star Trek, is TOO MUCH. And just can't be ignored.
EXACTLY!! I love the realistic take on this Superman because he's JUST A MAN. Raised in Kansas who has these amazing gifts and is still learning to use them when these other Kryptonians show up. An he had learned to fly only a couple days before hand. He's not a good goody guy, and the true fans will know this..not the ones that base on JUST the Chris Reeve films. I love those films, but this film AND Batman v Superman showed me how Superman would fit in the real world. One that's so easy to manipulate to hate Superman through media.
Considering some of Snyder's interviews and his views on sex in general, I believe your analysis of Sucker Punch is wrong. He clearly made a movie where he wanted to see hot girls in hot outfits.
He also wanted to wag his finger at us. He mentioned that in an interview. It was the old "classic" move of making a movie to make money while shaming people for paying to watch the movie.
The destruction in Man of Steel is not the same as Pacific Rim. Guillermo del Toro specifically filmed every destruction scene in Pacific Rim without any people so the audience wouldn't worry about collateral damage and just have fun. Man of Steel was portrayed with people's suffering intact to show the level of mayhem and destruction Clark and the other Kryptonians were causing. Zack Snyder was literally trying to make a disaster movie of legendary proportions. He said so himself.
This. Plus PR actually put in scenes showing them trying to NOT cause as much damage as possible. Like when Danger steps over a elevated road instead of just saying "Fuck it, I'm not changing my gate. I'm too busy". Also "the sword!" that people like to point at ... was a last resort because big sword + Big Monster = tons of monster blood and guts. They preferred to use impact damage and blast to lessen the spread of this biohazard. Also, that wasn't a "busy street". They had safe house bunkers for people to stay during an attack. They have been living in a world of Giant monster fights for sometime by then, everyone knew the drill. And for the Avengers ... they made it a point to SHOW that some of the non-heavy hitter Avengers were saving people and organizing an evacuation of the city with the cops. MoS? Once Zon goes to Clark's middle of no where farm and threatens his mother he bull tackles the dude INTO a populated town. >_>
Also, better action films deal with appropriate pacing. In Pacific Rim and the Avengers, the action kept on building. Man of Steel, on the other hand, was just a constant barrage of destruction, lacking any change in tempo.
People say Superman killing Zod came out of nowhere. Zod: "I'm going to make them suffer Cal, these humans you've adopted, I will take them all from you one by one". Does it still come out of nowhere.
Great review. Someone who actually understood the movie. Not that it was that difficult. I don't think the movie was perfect, but I enjoyed it when I saw it.
You know something funny about the scene where Superman kills Zod? He twists his head towards those people. The film makers made a mistake when shooting the film because if you look at the scene carefully, you'd see that the family should be dead.
I got the feeling that Zod wasn't really interested in killing those people. After all, his original motivation was to make a new Krypton on the bones of Earth, but that motivation was gone. It seemed to me at that point he wanted to die and everything he said and did from the beginning of the fight was him trying to goad Kalel into ending his life.
I have the opinion that Man of Steel is the "we are getting there" type of film toward the epitomizing Superman film. It's just a shame that B vs S will be a vehicle to build toward Justice League movie much the same way Iron Man 2 was Avengers. I wanted to see Man of Steel improved upon.
Guy More I think its going to set things up more and while it will lead into the Justice League movie, I think it is going to explain more into Superman's story. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
I think having Batman as a moral compass and someone who represents the people of Earth will help develop Superman's character better. It will also help address the collateral damage done on MoS by establishing the characters existing in the same universe and their reactions on an event that big, as well as how Superman will respond to them.
I'm thinking that JL will be the bigger sell in this case. They are going to want JL to do Avengers box office numbers. So expect everything DC to be about the JL movie over the next few years. Including this movie.
I'll be honest, I was a little underwhelmed on first viewing of Man of Steel. There were elements and scenes I really enjoyed, but I wasn't totally convinced the film makers had 'got it'. Not sure they fully understood the character. I too was one of those a little perturbed at the destruction of Metropolis. Still am to an extent. I think he would/should have flown them both away from the city to continue the fight. But it is, as you say, nitpicking. The death of Zod I can totally handle. Only way to go. What I really liked on the second time I saw the film, what really made me accept the film and cherish it in the way I do The Dark Knight, are the scenes where Clark/Superman is discussing his acceptance of Pa Kent's lessons, his developing and acceptance of his powers, his understanding of his responsibilities. I really like the scene where he surrenders himself to the military. And the scene in the church. And when he goes to destroy the atmosphere generator, knowing he may not survive. It demonstrates his unquestioning belief that Earth is his home, so much that he's prepared to sacrifice himself. Taken as films in their own right, if these were brand new characters we had been introduced to, the Batman and Superman films made under Nolan's watch would be considered amazing. But whilst MOS and TDK may not appeal to all comic book fans, as they do play loose with a bit of the history as we've come to know it (the Batman franchise especially), the one thing I think they deserve credit for, is they do stay true to the ethos of the characters. They represent the soul of the characters, even if they aren't as true to their wider stories. The only thing that edges The Dark Knight over the Man Of Steel for me, is that whilst MOS took several scenes to convince me they understood Superman, TDK needed just the interrogation scene to do the same job about Batman.
I never got why he would go to a priest for divine intervention, when concerning what he should do regarding Zod instead of Lois or maybe someone who knows exactly who Zod is, Jor-El? I thought a potential scene with Lois would have been more meaningful and strengthened the bond between the two characters. Not only would their romance at the end of the film actually work, but it would have justified her involvement with the final act. There's really no reason why Lois should have been at the army base. Had Lois been there to be a listening ear and his liaison for humanity as a whole, he could have decided that he would only surrender to the authorities if Lois would come with him because she is the only person he trusts (aside from his mother of course.)
Thanks for mentioning Superman 3, and Brainiac's scene where he transforms the woman in to a cyborg. That scene absolutely destroyed my 6 year old mind. I was so terrified for so long that I spent countless nights crawling in to my parents' bed in the dark of night. My dreams were populated by that woman chasing me through corridors, and of Brainiac trying to transform me in to one of them. TL;DR Superman 3 messed me up bad.
I agree, this was an all around solid film. The only thing that I wish they had done differently was leave Pa Kent alive. I have always wanted to see the "Superman Dies", "Back from the Dead?", "Reign of the Superman" storyline on the big screen, and it's obvious now they won't be going that direction any time soon, if ever. Don't get me wrong, I think Pa Kent's death in Man of Steel was emotionally gripping and essential to Clark's character arc, so I am not really disappointed; they did what they had to do, and they did it well.
erentheca I do agree there. I don't have a problem with the way they did his death scene in this film (actually it kinda made me tear up a little), but I would have much rather have them keep him alive - at least for a few more films.
In Superman 2, Supes didn't actually kill Zod and the others tossing them in the pit. The deleted scenes on the dvd show Superman handing them over to Artic police after the fight. That scene might have also been in a TV cut.
+mike s There was a deleted scene at the end of the Shining where Jack was still alive. In the original ending of True Romance, Clarence dies. The original ending of Fatal Attraction had Glenn Close committing suicide and Michael Douglas gets framed for murder. The original ending of Little Shop of Horrors (1986) was Audrey II killing and eating everyone. In Clerks, Dante is shot and killed at the end. What does all this mean? They were deleted scenes and not in the completed film that was released. Therefore, they are not cannon. Same with the deleted scene in Superman 2.
They lived in the ABC TV edit with 17 extra minutes. I'd consider that canon. Probably was included in a novelization of the book too. Just a tidbit to point out. That all it means.
+ilyriandevil What are you talking about? When did this video say that Wonder Woman beating up Superman was OK? A male feminist is just someone thinks women and men should be treated equally. No stupidity required. Just logic. Maybe whatever insecurities you have about women should be worked through with a therapist and not hoisted onto a movie critique video in a street corner soap box rant.
+GoodBadFlicks once again goodbadflicks has to set everyone straight. deleted scenes were deleted for a reason. they don't spend all this money and time filming scenes to intentionally delete them. they do it cause it messes with the overall flow of the movie
I'm so happy to see that one of my favorite youtubers actually enjoyed this movie. It had its flaws but overall I really liked this film. It's a solid 8.5 out of 10 for me. I think the haters need to give this film a second chance. It's not like this is a Superman that we haven't seen in the comics before.
Thank God, someone who understands. I love this movie, I put it at number 1 of my top 10 movies of 2013, this movie is almost everything I wanted out of a superhero movie: dark, modern and realistic setting mixed with pure grand scale epicness with heavy emotional themes. It's relieving to see someone who understands what the movie is going for and says it a good movie, thank you.
Fantastic video, its great to hear from somebody that actually A) watched the movie and B) actually got/understood it. When I hear most people complain about it I usually get the feeling they watched a completely different movie or didn't watch it at all and are just complaining because Zach Snyder directed it, which is weird since he's put out two great comic book movies.
The problem I have, and my counter to these criticisms is that the only things you can site are moments, like Pa Kent dying in the tornado and not being saved. That would have made a good scene but it was not done as a scene. It was a moment, and then we did not follow up that moment. When I watch a movie, I like to see a story, I don't watch it to string together a series of moments like, I think it would be important to see how Clark mourns after the death, immediately after, how it is processed. I could not get into his character, because I don't know how he goes through things because this film shoots many moments of cinematic glory, but very few scenes. Nothing is "off the action" where we can see Clark just, reacting. We only see Clark being absorbed in the action. We don't see Clark trying to understand the implications of killing Zod, we see him cut to a comedy scene and the moment of "Clark at the Daily Planet"
man such a great review!! This is exactly how I saw this movie and not with pure hatred eyes! He's not Superman yet but developing into Superman! I love how he has changed for this world and time. I guess some people just don't want to see that.
Am im the only one who really likes the direction the dc movies are heading to? The darker more real take, i get that its comic book movies but if we only get marvel like movies i feal like it will blend together to much and be just more of the same. Having a distinct look from the other movies (marvel, fox, sony) will work in their favor. And the only real argument towards MoS is that it isent "thier" superman but what they fail to understand that its a origin story and superman is only starting his carrier, there by making mistakes and need guidense. But his carachters will grow in to the superman role and he will get there.
Based on what you said here I thought I'd give Man of Steel the benefit of the doubt and discount all the negative reviews. I'm happy to say I'm very glad I did so! So thanks man!
Thank you for this video. The movie ended up expecting too much from its audience who just wanted jokes and camp. MOS is a masterpiece if you actually pay attention, I remember the complaints about it when it was released and I was baffled, people just jumped on the bandwagon of hating it.
I'll be honest, I was someone who was overly critical (as well as hypocritical) in my opinion of this movie. I hope to watch it again with a clearer, more open mind. Thanks for the review.
I thought Man of Steel was pretty good, not the best comic book movie, but still enjoyed it. I don't think Zack Synder's a bad director, far from it (I loved the remake of "Dawn of the Dead"), but he did drop the ball with "Sucker Punch", i got the film... And still thought it sucked (Sans the awesome effects and Scott Glenn), but hey, if you liked it, you liked it, can't strike you there.
I have been defending Sucker Punch for three years now and catching hell from my aging hipster friends, from now on I will recite your brilliant take on it! Thanks a million-Man of Steel is great as well, keep these videos coming.
you cant compare superman and pacific rim on destruction levels. superman is an icon like you said at the beginning, this is the same reason people have a problem with the edgyness of the character and the zach snyder grim dark setting. Superman is known as the boy scout all american who will stop at nothing to do what is right, Pacific Rim on the other hand is a little bit of plot sprinkled onto amazingly bad ass fight scenes because Del Toro wanted to make a kaiju movie. This is the problem with movies built around adaptations of novels and pre-existing media. When you create something called Superman (even if you use the name 'Man of Steel') you're still bringing in all of those feelings and pre-determined characteristics. If you wanted to make this movie and rename all the characters it'd be a bit better, but you put the name of superman in it. Btw those first killings you mentioned where still around the time where superman could level galaxies by getting a cold and sneezing. totally different character from what has evolved through it's like 70 years of story telling. and killing the joker is from Injustice, a universe set on the day superman says fuck it and starts killing and becomes evil alien dictator, kinda killing your point ironically...
this is a great review and you defended this movie exactly the way I do. the scene where Clark kills zod is actually one of my favorites because of how he reacts. not gonna lie I teared up a bit. they even carry this over to the next film. in SvB when Luthor pulls his trump card (ugh that phrase is never gonna be usable again is it?) superman is literally floored by it. after seeing all those people die in the court house and then this he was pushed to the edge and made the hard choice. when he tells lois that no one stays good forever the look of pure brokenness was gut wrenching. and when batman gets the better of him he spends what might be his last seconds of life trying to convince his murderer to save his mothers life. this version of superman is by far the most realistic and the best for the modern audience. Christopher Reeves was a great superman for his time but the modern audience just doesn't really want the campiness in superheroes anymore. o7
This is such a great video. I always use those arguments about the final fight scene and. Neck snapping whenever someone bad mouths this movie. I saw it at the cinemas when it came out, and I loved it. It wasn't as good as the 1978 one, but it was pretty damn good. Also, we can't just have the same type of Superman over and over again, so a dark and realistic movie is a change that everyone needed. I hope the Batman V Superman movie is good, but there is a high chance it will get mixed reviews. I'm not too fond of them over stuffing it with unnecessary characters (Aquaman, Cyborg, etc...) Zack Snyder is good with these type of movies, and he definitly wasn't trying to compete with the old movies, otherwise Man of Steel would've sucked.
Malachy Lewis Thanks! With BvS, they are just introducing the characters, they aren't going to have major roles. Think like with the X-men movies where they would introduce characters and then give them larger parts in the later movies.
The reason why the disaster porn is okay in Pacific Rim and not in Man of Steel is the tone: while Pacific Rim is the movie equivalent of kids playing with toys, Man of Steel tries to be realistic, so you can't ignore that there are people dying everywhere (and you see it too). Consequently, when the journalists are in danger, you don't care because ALMOST EVERYONE IS DEAD. Similarly, when Clark kisses Lois, who gives a fuck: everyone is dying and I should care because Clark "got the girl?".
100% Agree with everything you said in this video, including the Sucker Punch stuff. But yes, humans can be imperfect but Superman isn't human so he should be better, duh! Disregard the fact that he is raised as one! You literally made every argument I did, and people still hate for no reason.
A review should never nitpick one by one all the criticisms a movie has, and argue why they are wrong while adding no reasons why the film overall is good. That's advertising
Obo Agboghidi You're imposing your own definition of a what review is as the actual definition. Your standards arent viewed the same by everyone. Whether you personally liked the movie or consider this video a review is irrelevant
I've been saying this exact same thing since 2013. People are just nitpicking at this film for no apparent reason. They are so narrow minded that they fail to see the broader perspective, and you have to feed spoon them.
The bigger picture being that man of steel is now the haphazardly integrated debut of the dc cinematic universe. My opinions about Man Of Steel aside, they rushed the set-up for the universe and now they're stuck with a tonally inconsistent cast of characters, and it feels like every movie they release they try to do damage control because of people not liking or not empathizing with the protagonists of the DCEU. It's not that Man Of Steel is a bad superman movie or even a bad movie, it's that it's trying to tell a story about a morally conflicted and brooding man who learns to accept the responsibility of being human, while at the same time being in the same universe as Jared Leto's completely over the top gangster goth Joker.
This guy truly understands why I love this film to pieces, I love that Zack took elements from the comics and made them a lot more fleshed out in a realistic type of way. And I love that Supes is a three dimensional character with layers, this film made me pick up a graphic novel and I've been a fan of his stories ever since. I grew up with the animated series and this film kinda is like that show but on a much more mature level, even though the show was already mature as is. Your retrospective on Man of Steel was awesome Cecil.
eyeofodin01 Thanks for the sub! It wasn't an article, it was just a segment I asked her to write for this video. If I do end up doing an exploring video for Sucker Punch, I'll have her back.
Though it's not a bad film, and definitly better then Superman Returns, I didn't like it and it didn't really make me hopeful for the DCCU as a whole (I'm still iffy about it since, though the trailer for Batman V. Superman looks good, nothing from Suicide Squad is giving me any hope for that movie). My two biggest gripes with the movie is Zod's actions and Jonathan's death. For Zod, having him be the villain who wants to destroy Earth works, but his motivation makes no sense and his actions are counter-productive to his goal. Say what you will about Earth being unable to defend itself, the terraformation proses would have worked just as well on Mars or Venus but without the pesky problem of resistance, and would also mean an already habitable planet would exist right next door for conquest and settlement down the line. On top of that, he tries to get Clark, the only person on Earth capable of stopping him, to join him by stating he will destroy the only world he has ever known. Now say what you will about him being a madman, no one that crazy could manage to get where he was in the first place without things falling appart. For all he knows Clark doesn't even know he isn't human, with his parents raising him to believe he was a human born with the powers he had, and that the data on the ship that brought him to Earth may have been programmed to reinforce that idea. I can believe a man can lead a group with the efficiency Zod did and still be a little mad, but stupid on top of that not so much. For Jonathan's death, this is personal preference but I really think they should have gone the route where his death was through a means that Clark could not prevent, as a means of showing that even despite being the strongest person in the world he could not do everything.
I don't really get this whole "why not just terraform Mars" -thing. Why would he? He's already on Earth abd he has 0 compassion for humans. "You don't move out of your home if you find a beehive in it. You destroy the beehive" As with Pa Kent's death I'm on the fence. I feel this death fits really well with the movie, but I do like the orginal as well.
Timppa 3 Well like I said, he could only terraform one planet with the resources he had, so terraforming Mars would mean his people would have two habitable planets in the same system in the long run to work with, while terraforming Earth would mean only having one habitable planet to work with until they could either find another.
Timppa 3 That doesn't really answer why Mars isn't a viable option, especially since Earth in its natural state can allow him to create super soldiers out of his people.
dave19941000 They mention in the film that Earth is suitable for terraformation. So maybe no other planet close by was? I mean do you want your movies to hand feed you everything? They directly address this in the film. Jor-El: Our people can co-exist. General Zod: So we can suffer through years of pain, trying to adapt like your son has? Jor-El: You're talking about genocide. General Zod: Yes! And I'm arguing its merits with a ghost. I feel like some people need this movie to be perfect in order to think it's good. Which I don't understand. I honestly don't see MoS having that much more problems that The Dark Knight or The Avenger has, but people overlook the problems in those movies. It feels like people are trying to nitpick this movie. Which is something I don't understand why anybody would want to do that.
Batman's first appearance he knocks some mobster into acid (no not the joker). He actually killed someone and said it was a fitting end. Characters in comics evolve and many audience members don't realize it or want to accept it. And how the fuck was superman supposed to stop zod without killing him? Ask him not to?
The Coffee Nut I've still had people argue this point. There was nothing on earth that was going to stop Zod and yet people were still like "Superman would have found another way". Good grief, its like they can't accept any flaws in the character. He did what he thought was right at the time to save the earth.
I Always Think of how many are killed in the fight in the city. Instead of superman killing Zod on the spot he is indirectly killing thousands by throwing each other into Buildings for 20 minutes. Its just stupid.
Exactly, it's ridiculous how overtly violent the movie is. Marvel films have violence, but they don't make it so graphic. It's the gratuitous nature of the death that's the problem. Iron man and Captain America and Wolverine have killed in their movies as well, but it isn't done in such a tasteless fashion. It's subtle so you see the action, and if you think about it you see that the guy probably got killed, but it isn't in your face. And for the record, Superman could have defeated Zod the way he does in the comics, by sending him to the Phantom Zone.
K L First: Marvel movies are made from audiences ranging from children to adults, the overall feel of the movie is much lighter, you can't have buildings being demolished and people being killed everywhere in those types of movies. Second: Superman and Zod are much more powerful than what the Avengers in the movieverse have fought so far. They're both titans, and when you pit two titans in the middle of a city, there's bound to be casualties. Third: There was no way Superman could've put Zod in the Phantom Zone, there was no opening on earth, and even if there was I'd doubt Superman would know how to use it.
I don't like MoS personally, but I do think the flashbacks are fantastic. I could watch a whole movie of just his upbringing. It's the present day material that's a mess for me. Though, him killing Zod is necessary. I thought it was a really good ultimatum for him. A great moment.
I Loved the Avengers and I Loved Man of Steel, but every time I re watch The Avengers it gets worse and worse. but, every time I re watch Man of Steel, it gets better and better.
I forgot Goyer wrote BB and TDK. Wow, so many says he's a crappy writer because of how much they hate MoS yet they still hold TDK dear to their hearts.
+Studio2770 dark knights plot is silly and bloated. But you don't notice because Nolan is a goddamn wizard. I do find it interesting that a movie treated as gritty and realistic breaks down so easily under very little scrutiny. ANd I find it even more amazing that the breakdown doesn't affect my enjoyment of the film one bit while im watching it. Its DAMN compulsive.
+Plutoburns THANK YOU! the dark knights plot is just as you said. it felt like it was totally in jokers favor having him being 2 steps ahead of everyones game yet trying to be cute by saying he just "does things". you can't have it both ways! either he's a genius planner or a psycho and goyer/nolan/ledger seemed to have wanted both making him a villain sue. meanwhile batman is a complete moron who fails completely, not to mention KILLS harvey dent, and yet not a single soul complained about it! can you believe it? the superhero they praise for not killing, KILLS in their so called "favorite movie/super hero movie ever", how ironic.
I'm glad I've subbed to you today. I now have a new reason to look at this movie again. I've seen it twice, both with mixed feelings. The latter being the viewing that said "ok. its not great, but its ok." I watched batman v superman and gained an even better perspective of MoS. And watching this clarified a LOT. So I think I may give it another go, and I may actually like the movie. I guess I din't really try to see anything good about it. But after BvS and now, this, yeah. I think I may come back with a new feeling about the movie. Thanks!
GoodBadFlicks It is by far one of the most underrated movies of all time. And I want to say, I just found out about you yesterday (the WTF PG-13 video). And been kinda binge watching your videos. You make a lot of good points. Keep it up, you've got a new fan.
I got mixed feelings about the movie. I wish Kal El smiled more, more optimistic and hopefu saving people until he met Zod, turning him from Golden Age to 52 Superman.
1st video: Exploring DareDevil Thoughts- I like this guy, he brings up good points 2nd video: What happened to PG-13 Thoughts- Even more good points, and something that needs fixing 3rd video: Exploring Man of Steel Thoughts- Said it better than I could have ever done I.E 3 random great videos is not a coincidence, keep being awesome
I couldn't take Erod seriously in that review after he literally started crying over how the children, oh god the children, now have to live in a world where Superman kills. STFU.
Hey I got another video for you. Its called man of steel the verdict. Its an even longer review thats 50min that address what good bad reviews did and more. Its my favorite cause he breaks it down as: Lack of insight; Legit; and personal taste.
MrHootiedean I like what insight this video had to say, but Erod's review was the perfect analysis for me. It summed up 100% everything I felt after watching the movie.
GameStation3 That was clear to me. But what bothered me was how much less concerned Superman was for saving peoples lives than he was for fighting Zod and the other Kryptonians and not taking into consideration how many innocent bystanders in the way could get killed while crashing through dozens of walls and buildings. Even in at a younger age, Superman's priority should be saving and protecting the people first and fighting the enemy second. It's the same way how whenever Goku in Dragon Ball Z has to fight an enemy, he always requests to the opponent that he fights away from people. Superman man's thought process isn't any different.
My problem with Pa Kent's death is that Clark chose to let him die. In the 1970s film, Pa Kent died of a heart attack and there was nothing Clark could do to save him. It's a difference between choosing who lives and dies and learning you can't save everyone. It was a small thing that I hated that reflected itself through the whole movie as a base for Clark's character.
I really loved Man of Steel *shrug*. It was pretty good apotheosis story and I didn't think any character motivations were out of place. Given that he was put between a rock and a hard place, Superman did the best he could.
What you say in the video is not the real problems in this movie. These are what people (who are stupid) said about it. There are many more problems with the movie. I didn't hate it but i lost my interest in it while watching. There are good segments but ultimately I think it was boring.
I dont know about the part where you called people stupid, but I agree that this movie was boring. It was nowhere near good enough to be as long as it was. After the fight in Smallville, I just stopped caring because I thought it should have ended. When he broke Zod's neck, I was happy because that meant the movie would be over soon.
Platypus of Death I was a bit harsh. People like to be clever and they say things the don't understand or they don't have the knowledge to understand. Like people hate man of steel but they love transformers and adam sandler movies. They are just avg consumers who like sitting in front of movies without care and deeper thinking.
Rekettyelovag Fair enough. I don't really watch movies to have "deep thoughts" or anything like that, I'm a big fan of popcorn movies. That being said, Transformers was mediocre at best, and Sandler hasn't made a good movie since the Waterboy. There are a few movies he was in that were good, but they were good in spite of him.
I love this episode! Love the sucker punch rant! I look forward new episodes. i am glad I stumbled upon your channel. I get so sick of negative reviews. Now that I have lost all my college database.
Couldn't agree more! Fantastic film, best soundtrack ever, Snyder fucking ROCKS. His love of the genre is in every frame! Cannot WAIT to see what he does with the sequel!
I'm glad you pointed out these things, i have singing the praises of this movie since everyone in the world seemed to hate on this movie. The movie was a MASTERPIECE of a reboot damn it!
While I agree with most of your responses to the typical MoS criticisms, the one about Pa Kent dying might be a bit off. For me, the intention there wasn't the problem, it was how the scene was shot. It made it very hard to tell how far away from each other they were, and with the very close zoom on both of them, and the establishing shots before it, it just felt like a very small area. I get what it was going for, but the framing sabotages it completely. Also, the comparison with the Avengers doesn't really work, as that was about containing a threat and limiting the damage to a certain area. There was an obvious effort on screen to prevent escalation, with an actual goal in mind to cease the conflict. The finale in Man of Steel is just unfiltered, undirected chaos. I'm not saying it's a bad finale, or that it should be like Avengers, I just don't think they're remotely similar finales and don't compare well here.
People in the comment section angry because someone is finally telling the truth about what this movie is.Man of Steel is a great movie & it gets better the more you watch it.This movie alone has more soul than some other Superheros have in their entire trilogy.I will defend this movie no matter what.It gave me a character I can relate to.A character I can care for.These days it seems like everyone just hates on something just to seem cool.Great job & great video.
Thank you so much. I really appreciated this video and what it had to say. I loved the film and I really feel that Man Of Steel was very misunderstood/underrated. You mentioned much of what I would say in defense of this film and I am so glad you put it out there. Thanks again!
I would have been okay with Sucker Punch if not for the "second layer" which was totally unnecessary IMO. They could have had their action fantasy happen from the first asylum layer, which was plenty awful- the stuff about the whorehouse didn't add any richness to the story and only confused what was happening. Or it could have eliminated the asylum all together and just started with the whorehouse. Also gotta disagree that it was empowering. I'm a girl, and my opinions are not everyone's, but personally I don't get why anyone would try to escape a horrible reality by creating a just-as-horrible fantasy, and from there leap into an action fantasy. It came off as a teen boy's attempt to write empowered female characters. I guess I appreciate the attempt, but it didn't work at all for me. Plus there was a lot of bad music. Man Of Steel was okay though.
Actually, Sucker Punch takes notes from identity psychology. The first layer is the objective reality, the second layer is the perceived reality by others, the third layer is the perceived reality by the individual. Together they form the experienced reality. So if you took out the second layer, the whole movie wouldn't make sense anymore. Don't feel bad if you missed this obvious parallel. It's kind of sad that most of the critique this movie gets just proves how uneducated people really are. Also, you were never ment to like the second layer because it showed the way men look at women in the most masochistic way. The third layer was there to counter that.
Although I agree with most of the points you brought up here, there are some that, imo, Snyder missed the mark on. I wasn't a fan of the heavily copied Avatar and Matrix imagery on Krypton. I didn't like that Jonathon couldn't give Clark some type of foundation. The entire reason Clark is such a boy scout is because he was brought up by God fearing good people. Jonathon Kent should not have died by a preventable method. The most impacting scene in both the comics and the original film was the fact that Pa Kent died in a way that taught Clark a valuable lesson: he can't do everything or save everyone. It was a powerful moment that helped shape his character. Finally Snyder's over saturated dark tone does not fit Superman as a character. Someone color corrected this movie and made it look a billion times better. Once in the entire film we see him smile. I love that we watched him grow in this movie. I loved the action (except for the fight with the tentacles on the world changer which interrupted the flow imo). I didn't even mind that he killed Zod because I felt that would be what would help shape him later (although if I was Snyder I would have shown a scene where he at least tried to get Zod away from the city). Sadly it shaped him in the opposite direction as you can see from Batman v Superman. While Man of Steel was a good movie, BvS was a depressing, convoluted mess that I needed to take a prozac to get through (that's just a joke lol). I really wish Snyder would have went in another direction with these characters and stop trying to make everyone Batman. One more thing, the difference between gratuitous scenes and awesome scenes are context. Pacific Rim is a giant robot vs monster movie. No one expects anything BUT destruction. Superman is different. People know what he stands for. People are aware of his "rules". By not even showing him try to help people or steer Zod away, the audience perceives him as not caring which is how it came across. Even showing a little concern would have changed this scene and the audiences feeling on it entirely.
Man of steel is one of those rare movies i like more and more with each viewing. The only real complaint i have is that it's to dark and grey. Ad by that i mean the color of the movie. But that looks like it will be fixed in Batman v Superman.
love this I'm a huge superman fan and tried to explain most of these points to people but you do it better and you pointed out things I did not even think about
Good points made but I still can't say I like this movie. The fact that there are no witnesses to his truck vandalism was my first warning sign, as the truck is sitting in the car park in plain view of the diner, yes he is faster than a speeding bullet etc, but I would imagine that impaling a big rig on the logs it was carrying would be quite a noisy spectacle., The final straw was Lois finding the ship after supposedly spotting Clark in a photo she takes( as well as the forced love story between her and Clark). I must point out that I think that the Smallville battle and the initial flight scene are great, but the Metropolis scene was too OTT for me, and the main Daily Planet characters are always in the 'right' place for dramatic purposes(Lois seems to have some kind of plot driven teleportation device). That being said being said, I love your videos, Only discovered them this weekend and I've been binging on them since.
i think man of steel is a smart, meaningful, and GOOD movie. it has its moments and is my favorite movie of 2013. its one of those movies you have to see multiple times to get it. Believe me when i say i had some of the same complaints on the first 2 viewings. but on my 3rd and 4th viewing, everything made sense. the kryptonians aren't perfect as they think they are, they're flawed. thats why they didn't do anything and why krpton was dying. Pa kent isn't perfect, he's flawed too. but thats alright, he's only human. they say superman is just a piece of wood, but i saw someone who's trying to fit in with society, someone who is happy with what he has, he's a symbol of hope where there is none. you can't have hope without despair which the latter is what zod brought. he's still obviously going through an arc like luke skywalker did in star wars. those of you who don't know what that is, its what we call character development. he starts off rash and still learning, by RotJ he's calm and focused. superman is now going to be tested in dawn of justice, the people now know of his existance and will now either accept him or shun him. sounds like an interesting conflict, a mirror to the community in frank millers the dark knight returns.
Half those examples are out of continuity, two of them are robots, Doomsday was an animal a mindless creature, and the rest is bad writing. Ok I get your point but you either ignore problems or hand wave them. I like your reviews (not sure it counts) but this so far is the only one I dislike so far. Superman has said time and time again he won't kill.
Love this analytical video, dude. I don't agree with everything, but will openly admit how I had ALL of those complaints you examined when I saw the film on release. Since then, I have come around to agree with your more logical thinking about these complaints. I could go on, but I just want to make one NEW complaint. You asked (paraphrasing): What does it say about humans if we are allowed to kill and Superman isn't? I think this is exactly the question I was considering in first complaining about Kal killing. The film uses a line from Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman comic book. “You have given them an ideal to aspire to, embodied their highest aspirations. They will race, and stumble, and fall and crawl....and curse....and finally....They will join you in the sun, Kal-El. They will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun. In time you will help them accomplish wonders.” I feel like based on your take, accepting your thinking, Snyder and Goyer should have not included this quote. It was misleading thematically. I can imagine the argument for keeping it in: Superman is a man who must accept he will make mistakes and model to humans how to handle that (?). I guess. I don't know. What do you think?
The problem with the carnage in the climax wasn't the carnage itself, it's that it wasn't building to anything. There was no end in sight because the two just kept punching each other to no visible effect. Neither one took any wounds, nor did either one look fatigued when the big neck-break scene happened. The murder scene has the opposite problem: there's no build-up TO it. Zod focuses primarily on fighting Superman throughout the fight and makes little effort to go after humans, something that Terence Zod exploited in Superman II for a tactical edge. Zod said, "I'm going to make them suffer, Kal" doesn't have a lot of action backing it after the fact. And that line of, "This only ends two ways: either you die, or I do?" should've been followed by Zod turning around, dashing off and slapping some poor civilian into a building, killing them, or at least making the effort before Bob stops him. If they'd had Zod go after civilians, that could've been the build-up the death scene needed as Zod comes closer and closer to crushing someone, with Bob just barely able to keep up with him because, like you said, Zod is a tactically-minded military guy. Then, when Zod has someone in a headlock about to pop their head like a balloon, _that_ is when Bob breaks Zod's neck. There's a clear and present danger to a civilian, there's no other feasible way out of the situation, there's build-up to the moment, and there's pay-off for the big fight scene. But instead we get a long scene of violent nothing before a character moment that was never earned jumps in out of nowhere. And, just to add insult to injury, the next scene completely forgets about it. We don't even get a shot of Clark overhearing a conversation about how Bob killed Zod followed by a look of shame and regret on his face, that would've been enough. Just SOMETHING to show that yes, this affected him. This changed his demeanour in some way. This developed what little character he had.
+Ikrani I think you missed the ENTIRE point of the movie. Did you even watch it? Or just read about it on Wikipedia and formulate your "opinion" based solely on that? I am beginning to suspect the latter the more I read your post. Let's break this down. Cecil did a nice job in the video, but since you can't seem to wrap your head around his version, here's mine.Clark spent his whole life among humans. He KNEW he had super strength. He didn't know much else about how far those powers went or what else he could do, besides the heat vision (used in the school when he was angry). When Jonathan Kent decided Clark shouldn't rescue him, it sent Clark on a journey of self-discovery. From this, we were able to ascertain Clark's character. We know he put that guy's truck on the pole, but only because he couldn't hit the guy through the wall, which he clearly wanted to do in that scene in the diner. We also know from Lois' tracking of him, that he was a generally nice person overall. When he shows himself to the military, he knows he could break out at any time; but, if he wanted the humans to trust him, why would he do that? It would just create mistrust and they would be even MORE afraid of him. During the final battles, in both Smallville and Metropolis, Superman did EVERYTHING he could to save people. Zod's people were creating havoc and destruction ALL OVER, but we (as the audience) don't get to see the collateral damage. We the those aftereffects in the preview of Batman V Superman, but I would guess that since Zod was trying to punch Superman through EVERY building in Metropolis, I think it is safe to say that it WAS building up to that. Plus, I think you forgot about Brainiac (aka The World Engine), and what that did to Metropolis. Zod told Superman what his plan was after they captured him. Once he was on the ship, Zod told him that they were going to terraform Earth into another Krypton and rebuild the civilization. Towards the end, when Zod tells Superman that he has nothing to fight for because all of his "people" are now gone, he is a man with NOTHING TO LOSE. That makes him unpredictable and DANGEROUS, like a cornered animal. Superman needed to keep Zod focused on him, so he wouldn't go off and kill people. That is actually just common sense for anyone with half a brain and know anything about military strategy. I mean, why do you think Britain kept up the resistance versus the Nazis in WWII? Because eventually they wore down the Nazi resolve enough for them to try something else. Like attacking Russia. Zod would never have stopped. If Superman had stopped fighting him, Zod would have become a power-mad dictator and ruled Earth with an iron fist. Instead, Superman fought him to a STALEMATE. Zod knew in that moment it was either him or Superman. So, he forced that decision ON Superman. Superman doesn't kill indiscriminately, but he does when the need suits him. Like in the case where Superman fought Doomsday to death. Literally. That is what happened here. He needed to make a choice, and that choice will carry a scar throughout the movies. We might not see that scar manifest itself, but I think that you can see what will be happening in Batman v Superman. Just when they thought Zod was gone for good, along comes a "doomsday" look-a-like with strange powers that are eerily similar to Zod's. If you watch the end of the film, I think that you will see that Clark/Superman is clearly carrying the burden on his shoulders, but trying to mask it because he DOESN'T WANT THE HUMANS TO KNOW HIS REAL IDENTITY. Would you want people to know that you were a Superhero? I wouldn't think so, because then people would be calling you every 15 seconds because they stubbed their toe. So, he carries those burdens inside. Much like Bruce Wayne does as Batman. Peter Parker does when not swinging around as Spider-Man. All true heroes carry that burden, because they can't tell another living soul. It is PART of who they are. Hell, even anti-heroes like The Punisher (my all-time fav) carry those burdens within them. There are always those you can't save, and those difficult decisions. Do you think that Peter Parker (in the original run of Amazing Spider-Man) carried the guilt around because of Gwen Stacy's death? HELL YES HE DID!! For YEARS in the comics he brooded about her death, until a red-haired girl walked into his life named Mary Jane Watson. So yeah. Your "argument," such as it is, doesn't carry much weight when you actually analyze the movie properly. Because it doesn't look at the movie so much as it just looks at the surface. You really haven't seen it properly, because the movie is quite layered. In fact, I have watched it 3 times personally (and plan to watch it another time here soon before Batman v Superman comes out) and I have seen new things I missed in other viewings. Go and actually watch the film. Really sit down and watch it. It will do you good. Because if you aren't feeling the tension in the final scene with Superman and Zod, then you have missed the whole of Superman's backstory.
Why didn't he just kiss Zod to erase his memory? He could have made him an ally. NO STARS!
+osriccauldwyn Well like Cecil pointed out. This is Clark Kent. Not SuperMan. He doesn't know or realize about these powers that he has.
+osriccauldwyn Cuz that wud b g@y.
ChildrenOfRadiation I don't follow. Is that bad?
+ChildrenOfRadiation you should see jackdfilms' batman v superman trailer
+Daily Dose of Sass *jacksfilms
I left Man of steel thinking this was finally the Superman movie everyone's been waiting for since Superman II..I thought wrong.And I still dont really know why..And man, did I LOVE the new Superman theme song!
Hard to buy into a world where a human sacrifices themselves for a dog
This movie is too mopey. Stop moping, clark kent.. You can fly, learn to be happy.
Don;t forget that in the comics, Superman EXECUTES Zod, not in the heat of the moment, but in cold blood... (Superman #22, 1988)
Never forget
Well said. This still one of the best interpretations of not just a comic book movie but as an alien encounter movie
Found the RLM fan lol
Please please please *please* do an Exploring video for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)!
Cecil did a brief review of Batman V Superman in an interview on my radio show. It's on my channel.
I'm sure he did, and I'll check that out, but something as divisive as BvS warrants a full video essay.
YES! +1 to this petition!
I'm told the DVD fixes a lot of the problems with the theatrical release.
Todd Bollinger agree
You sir, deserve more subscribers and viewers.
Abdallah Ahmed Thank you!
Damn straight, he does. I have been on a GBF binge recently. Not one bad video.
I am sitting literally for hours already on your channel and I am amazed how good your videos are. When it comes to movie discussion and analysis you are one of the best! Awesome work!
Anophathalm Thanks so much!
Honestly, you are welcome - credit is due where credit is deserved!
The only negative point I got, but not its not your fault is that couple of your videos are locked here in Germany. For example your DoA or Street Fighter Video are blocked in Germany because of the distributers here. Huge bummer... :(
Anophathalm for the blocked ones, you should be able to view them on my site www.goodbadflicks.com
HA! Awesome, thank you very much for the heads up! :D
GoodBadFlicks Do you get more money if we watch your videos on RUclips, or on your site? I'm unfamiliar with your monetization systems, but I know most people do better on their own site. I just ask because I've watched just about all your stuff at least once, and I'll go through it a few more times - it's going to be my new background noise while I work on my own projects. Figure might as well make you as much money as I can by doing so to keep you producing such excellent content. Also, you should do a video on The Burbs (since you mention it so much, and we all know how awesome it is).
As always, Cecil nails it. Man of Steel is my favorite Superman film. It's updated without being relentlessly dark 100% of the time.
Damn, you really did change my mind about this, I was someone that thought all those things. I didn't see it like the way you told me. Great video.
Nice to hear someone speak SENSE about Man Of Steel. This movie is a masterpiece.
Amazing review buddy
Thanks :)
Superman knew that destroying the Cyborg Superman would not kill Henshaw as his consciousness exists as pure energy like Brainiac in Superman: TAS. He's already dead in the traditional sense having been killed in Adventures of Superman #466 when his body was subjected to cosmic rays that slowly deteriorated his physical form. Being living energy, every machine he touches he imprints his own consciousness so he can reconstitute himself. Henshaw even tells him in Superman 82 that he'll be back shortly before Kal disintegrates the Cyborg's body. In Smallville, Brainiac is a machine therefore Clark didn't kill him in the traditional sense a human would. Clark just destroyed a computer. The Mxyzptlyk that Superman kills in Action 583 was part of an imaginary tale it's not canon, though we do see him kill, the outcome of that story was his retirement. After taking that life, he knew he could never be Superman a hero that inspires others and is that symbol of peace and hope after that and hung up the cape, so he did learn a moral lesson you can't be Superman if you stoop to that level. Nuclear Man was not a person but a clone of Superman made up of pure nuclear energy, he hardly counts. I get that Superman has killed before but those examples either prove that Superman cannot exist after taking a life, or they were machines that could not be killed only destroyed or temporarily stopped. You simply took those events and reworked them to fit your defense when clearly you missed the intent or certain pieces of dialog that clearly gives Superman an out. I have no problem with Superman killing if there is reason for him doing so, I felt the examples you gave aside from the golden age Doc Savage Superman and Superman 22 from 1988, were bad examples to defend your argument.
Cecil I love everything you are saying but at 11:00 i think you missed the part where Clark DOES throw Zod in to space and Zod comes back. So tp everyone who asks why Clark didn't take the fight else where, well.... he did.
Well Zod is still in earth in Batman V Superman who is now dead after Man of Steel
Right, I agree. I was just saying he did everything he could to stop Zod.
I know
Cool
+Zach Couch That's just it though. He threw him into space and then immediately came back to make out with Lois. Zod's powers are even newer to him than Supes' were, so I feel like his argument of Clark being too "green" is invalid. If it had been a battle of Supes' superior strength vs Zod's superior tactics, that'd have been interesting. But instead we got nothing but smashy, smashy.
Brilliant analysis. You've articulated perfectly everything I liked about this film and couldn't put my finger on. Thank you.
I don't understand why people complain about this film; I feel like I saw a different film than them. This film is great. Your review is spot on. I have spent the last week or so listening to dozens of your reviews while I work now. I love your channel. Thank you.
Excellent! Thanks for watching! Maybe one day people will come around on this. I'm still baffled as to how much unwarranted hate it gets.
I think it is mostly due to Marvel's success and how this molds public perception of what a 'comic book movie' should be like.
I'm not trying to start a debate or be that guy that goes 'Marvel movies suck' (I love a lot of their movies - but Age of Ultron, which is one I truly love isn't appreciated by general audiences as well) I'm just pointing out the general public perception.
This is more comic book fan oriented, and it requires some pondering and consideration to trully absorb what they were trying to do (which is very similar to Christopher Nolan's Batman) using the character and its surrondings as a way for bigger and more complex analysis... Instead of, you know, just making a no-brainer (or 'turn-you-brain-out') blockbuster, which happens to most comic book movies.
There's no subtext to The Avengers, it's mostly spectacle (big fights, giant monsters and huge special effects - with a huge secret organization that can order to nuke any city in the world in a blink of an eye like it's no big deal) while Age of Ultron had a huge ethics question at hand (should we do this - create Ultron - just because we can? And of course, the consequences, surely diminished since it is Disney after all, but still, it is the first Marvel movie to show a hero die).
My dislike for the movie has nothing to do with fanboy nitpicking (I'm not really a comic book guy let alone a diehard Superman fan) but rather with it's quality as a film. It's principle sin is it almost complete lack of characters. You can see fragments of emotions and ideas poking through occasionally, but it seems like most of the "characters" are rather bland representations of themes or serve no purpose beyond dumping exposition or providing some sort of plot convenience. I could kind of see what they were trying to do with Pa Kent but his ambivalence really did seem to lean more heavily toward the "don't be a superhero" side of things.
That being said, I thing the film did handle most everything about Krypton and Jor-El exceptionally well, with Russell Crowe easily giving the best performance, though Michael Shannon deserves credit for having some fun with good, old fashioned scenery chewing. Also, the score is absolutely fantastic.
Ultimately, the decision to examine Superman as an all powerful alien in a more realistic, fearful world remains intriguing and I'm still legitimately excited for Batman vs. Superman, even if the more recent trailer have me a little nervous that they might be committing the cardinal sin of comic book movies and stuffing too much crap in. And even if that doesn't work, it could still prove worthwhile if it results in a Ben Affleck directed Batman movie.
+andyhoov you know i find it funny because thats exactly how i found the dark knight movies in terms of characters. opinions awaaay~
but yeah i disagree though i respect yours =)
+EclipseHedgehog Actually, I think that it's a pretty fair criticism of most Christopher Nolan movies; as a storyteller he is much more interested in ideas than he is characters. That being said, I usually find his characters to be better woven into those ideas and themes than what Snyder did with most of the characters in Man of Steel.
And is that an Epyon thumbnail? Because if so, then that's awesome!
andyhoov
yeah, movies like inception or interstellar are a good example, i just got this feeling like some of his characters are more lecturers talking down to you,
i found most of the characters in man of steel not that bad.
i liked most of them. i liked parry white, i liked lois, jor-el, ma kent, the colonel was a badass, Hamilton even though he didn't do much, guess i liked the actor. i also liked henry's kal. the way they made superman in this is just a regular guy who happens to have super powers who's trying to find out who he is and where he belongs in this world., Even zod i thought was pretty dimensional. we know who he is, his goals, why he's doing what he's doing, the fact he'll do anything to achieve it, and when he breaks down in front of kal i couldn't help but just feel for the guy.
and thanks ^^ glad we could be civil =)
+Garet Jax I forgot to mention it, but you are quite right about the camera work. I can appreciate their desire to go with a "boots on the ground" (or maybe in a helicopter for some scenes) but I don't think that style works when you are trying to capture what is, in essence, a battle between gods. Also, the constant wide shot to close up zooms were really weird and out of place for this type of movie.
where i stand for the cam work i THINK it was to try and hide the cginess of the character models, look at the star wars prequels for example, when they use cgi and you see them getting thrown back like rag dolls you can tell they aren't real.
Seriously, everyone who thought Man of Steel was a bad movie needs to watch this video. This is great. 10/10
I watched the video and my personal opinion has not changed one bit.
Renegade Cut's video however is spot on.
I couldn't be bothered to watch it. Superman is a boring character at the BEST of times.
Nope, it's still a shite film. Still, he does try.
Good movie people bitched cause it was too dark probably bitched about Superman Returns also
Amen!
Thank you for explaining Superman has killed before. It was great just to hear someone else say it besides me.
I am 65 and watched all Superman tv and movies.I liked this Superman the best.This and Smallville.
It is the over all tone not all the little he did this in that episode, movie, cartoon, or comic book. Superman is about a moral standard of CHARACTER. Not so much of WHAT he does but HOW he does it. People do make opposition about other versions of Superman. But Man Of Steel, like JJ Star Trek, is TOO MUCH. And just can't be ignored.
MY NEW FAVORITE VIDEO!!! YES!! FINALLY someone that understands!
+SuperBen97 awesome thanks!
EXACTLY!! I love the realistic take on this Superman because he's JUST A MAN. Raised in Kansas who has these amazing gifts and is still learning to use them when these other Kryptonians show up. An he had learned to fly only a couple days before hand. He's not a good goody guy, and the true fans will know this..not the ones that base on JUST the Chris Reeve films. I love those films, but this film AND Batman v Superman showed me how Superman would fit in the real world. One that's so easy to manipulate to hate Superman through media.
Kinda like whats happening in real life in a way. With Superman I mean.
+GoodBadFlicks Pacific Rim was bad and 300 was overrated!
300 like all other Frank Miller adaptations are garbage.
Considering some of Snyder's interviews and his views on sex in general, I believe your analysis of Sucker Punch is wrong. He clearly made a movie where he wanted to see hot girls in hot outfits.
He also wanted to wag his finger at us. He mentioned that in an interview. It was the old "classic" move of making a movie to make money while shaming people for paying to watch the movie.
You should also acknowledge that he didn't write that segment.
You, sir, have the rare ability to make people like ANY movie. You made me like The Happening, for the record.
Thrano Awesome!
Thrano I wouldn't say I hate this movie, but the review definitely didn't make me like it.
16:28- The theatrical poster for Man of Steel 2.
Man Of Steel was great! The best Superman film since the 1978 version.
The destruction in Man of Steel is not the same as Pacific Rim. Guillermo del Toro specifically filmed every destruction scene in Pacific Rim without any people so the audience wouldn't worry about collateral damage and just have fun. Man of Steel was portrayed with people's suffering intact to show the level of mayhem and destruction Clark and the other Kryptonians were causing. Zack Snyder was literally trying to make a disaster movie of legendary proportions. He said so himself.
This. Plus PR actually put in scenes showing them trying to NOT cause as much damage as possible. Like when Danger steps over a elevated road instead of just saying "Fuck it, I'm not changing my gate. I'm too busy". Also "the sword!" that people like to point at ... was a last resort because big sword + Big Monster = tons of monster blood and guts. They preferred to use impact damage and blast to lessen the spread of this biohazard.
Also, that wasn't a "busy street". They had safe house bunkers for people to stay during an attack. They have been living in a world of Giant monster fights for sometime by then, everyone knew the drill.
And for the Avengers ... they made it a point to SHOW that some of the non-heavy hitter Avengers were saving people and organizing an evacuation of the city with the cops.
MoS? Once Zon goes to Clark's middle of no where farm and threatens his mother he bull tackles the dude INTO a populated town. >_>
Exactly what I was gonna type.
Also, better action films deal with appropriate pacing. In Pacific Rim and the Avengers, the action kept on building. Man of Steel, on the other hand, was just a constant barrage of destruction, lacking any change in tempo.
People say Superman killing Zod came out of nowhere.
Zod: "I'm going to make them suffer Cal, these humans you've adopted, I will take them all from you one by one". Does it still come out of nowhere.
Great review. Someone who actually understood the movie. Not that it was that difficult. I don't think the movie was perfect, but I enjoyed it when I saw it.
Bret .Maverick Thanks!
You know something funny about the scene where Superman kills Zod? He twists his head towards those people. The film makers made a mistake when shooting the film because if you look at the scene carefully, you'd see that the family should be dead.
Wrong
Philip Alvarez How?
I got the feeling that Zod wasn't really interested in killing those people. After all, his original motivation was to make a new Krypton on the bones of Earth, but that motivation was gone. It seemed to me at that point he wanted to die and everything he said and did from the beginning of the fight was him trying to goad Kalel into ending his life.
Akray Bothorda fuckn idiot fanboy
What a compelling argument.
That Suckerpunch speech is EXACTLY what I've been saying since it came out! THANK YOU!!!
I have the opinion that Man of Steel is the "we are getting there" type of film toward the epitomizing Superman film. It's just a shame that B vs S will be a vehicle to build toward Justice League movie much the same way Iron Man 2 was Avengers. I wanted to see Man of Steel improved upon.
Guy More I think its going to set things up more and while it will lead into the Justice League movie, I think it is going to explain more into Superman's story. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
I think having Batman as a moral compass and someone who represents the people of Earth will help develop Superman's character better. It will also help address the collateral damage done on MoS by establishing the characters existing in the same universe and their reactions on an event that big, as well as how Superman will respond to them.
Guy More Why can't Batman v Superman do both? Build upon Superman and set up for Justice League
I'm thinking that JL will be the bigger sell in this case. They are going to want JL to do Avengers box office numbers. So expect everything DC to be about the JL movie over the next few years. Including this movie.
I'll be honest, I was a little underwhelmed on first viewing of Man of Steel. There were elements and scenes I really enjoyed, but I wasn't totally convinced the film makers had 'got it'. Not sure they fully understood the character. I too was one of those a little perturbed at the destruction of Metropolis. Still am to an extent. I think he would/should have flown them both away from the city to continue the fight. But it is, as you say, nitpicking. The death of Zod I can totally handle. Only way to go.
What I really liked on the second time I saw the film, what really made me accept the film and cherish it in the way I do The Dark Knight, are the scenes where Clark/Superman is discussing his acceptance of Pa Kent's lessons, his developing and acceptance of his powers, his understanding of his responsibilities. I really like the scene where he surrenders himself to the military. And the scene in the church. And when he goes to destroy the atmosphere generator, knowing he may not survive. It demonstrates his unquestioning belief that Earth is his home, so much that he's prepared to sacrifice himself.
Taken as films in their own right, if these were brand new characters we had been introduced to, the Batman and Superman films made under Nolan's watch would be considered amazing. But whilst MOS and TDK may not appeal to all comic book fans, as they do play loose with a bit of the history as we've come to know it (the Batman franchise especially), the one thing I think they deserve credit for, is they do stay true to the ethos of the characters. They represent the soul of the characters, even if they aren't as true to their wider stories. The only thing that edges The Dark Knight over the Man Of Steel for me, is that whilst MOS took several scenes to convince me they understood Superman, TDK needed just the interrogation scene to do the same job about Batman.
James Dennett Thank you for the well thought out response. Valid points. :)
I never got why he would go to a priest for divine intervention, when concerning what he should do regarding Zod instead of Lois or maybe someone who knows exactly who Zod is, Jor-El? I thought a potential scene with Lois would have been more meaningful and strengthened the bond between the two characters. Not only would their romance at the end of the film actually work, but it would have justified her involvement with the final act. There's really no reason why Lois should have been at the army base. Had Lois been there to be a listening ear and his liaison for humanity as a whole, he could have decided that he would only surrender to the authorities if Lois would come with him because she is the only person he trusts (aside from his mother of course.)
Thanks for mentioning Superman 3, and Brainiac's scene where he transforms the woman in to a cyborg. That scene absolutely destroyed my 6 year old mind. I was so terrified for so long that I spent countless nights crawling in to my parents' bed in the dark of night. My dreams were populated by that woman chasing me through corridors, and of Brainiac trying to transform me in to one of them.
TL;DR
Superman 3 messed me up bad.
matterofact I still remember how scared I was as a kid seeing that scene. When she opened her eye, oh man, I had nightmares for weeks.
This YT channel deserves twice the subs watch mojo has.....
Thank you! :)
I loved this film
so many images like when he flies for the first time made me scream in joy
Thanks! You helped change my opinion on "Man of Steel".
DarthDJJD awesome!
Sweet lord, I can't thank you enough. Every person I see who talks about this movie trashes it without mercy, I thought I was going crazy.
I agree, this was an all around solid film. The only thing that I wish they had done differently was leave Pa Kent alive. I have always wanted to see the "Superman Dies", "Back from the Dead?", "Reign of the Superman" storyline on the big screen, and it's obvious now they won't be going that direction any time soon, if ever. Don't get me wrong, I think Pa Kent's death in Man of Steel was emotionally gripping and essential to Clark's character arc, so I am not really disappointed; they did what they had to do, and they did it well.
erentheca I do agree there. I don't have a problem with the way they did his death scene in this film (actually it kinda made me tear up a little), but I would have much rather have them keep him alive - at least for a few more films.
In Superman 2, Supes didn't actually kill Zod and the others tossing them in the pit. The deleted scenes on the dvd show Superman handing them over to Artic police after the fight. That scene might have also been in a TV cut.
+mike s There was a deleted scene at the end of the Shining where Jack was still alive. In the original ending of True Romance, Clarence dies. The original ending of Fatal Attraction had Glenn Close committing suicide and Michael Douglas gets framed for murder. The original ending of Little Shop of Horrors (1986) was Audrey II killing and eating everyone. In Clerks, Dante is shot and killed at the end.
What does all this mean? They were deleted scenes and not in the completed film that was released. Therefore, they are not cannon. Same with the deleted scene in Superman 2.
They lived in the ABC TV edit with 17 extra minutes. I'd consider that canon. Probably was included in a novelization of the book too.
Just a tidbit to point out. That all it means.
+ilyriandevil What are you talking about? When did this video say that Wonder Woman beating up Superman was OK?
A male feminist is just someone thinks women and men should be treated equally. No stupidity required. Just logic.
Maybe whatever insecurities you have about women should be worked through with a therapist and not hoisted onto a movie critique video in a street corner soap box rant.
+GoodBadFlicks once again goodbadflicks has to set everyone straight. deleted scenes were deleted for a reason. they don't spend all this money and time filming scenes to intentionally delete them. they do it cause it messes with the overall flow of the movie
+GoodBadFlicks I know this comment is old now, but what are your thoughts on this with respect to Batman v Superman: Ultimate Edition?
I'm so happy to see that one of my favorite youtubers actually enjoyed this movie. It had its flaws but overall I really liked this film. It's a solid 8.5 out of 10 for me. I think the haters need to give this film a second chance. It's not like this is a Superman that we haven't seen in the comics before.
Thank God, someone who understands. I love this movie, I put it at number 1 of my top 10 movies of 2013, this movie is almost everything I wanted out of a superhero movie: dark, modern and realistic setting mixed with pure grand scale epicness with heavy emotional themes. It's relieving to see someone who understands what the movie is going for and says it a good movie, thank you.
Tristan Hartup thanks for watching! :)
Thank you for this. Comparing the Man of Steel Supes with Donner's is the equivalent of comparing Adam West's Batman and Christian Bale's.
biohazard951753 thanks!
Dammit man, i was about to sleep but now im on your marathon. Consider this a new subscriber
Bogri Namka haha, I always enjoy hearing that. Thanks for the sub :)
Fantastic video, its great to hear from somebody that actually A) watched the movie and B) actually got/understood it. When I hear most people complain about it I usually get the feeling they watched a completely different movie or didn't watch it at all and are just complaining because Zach Snyder directed it, which is weird since he's put out two great comic book movies.
+Jason Tomlinson Thanks!
The problem I have, and my counter to these criticisms is that the only things you can site are moments, like Pa Kent dying in the tornado and not being saved. That would have made a good scene but it was not done as a scene. It was a moment, and then we did not follow up that moment. When I watch a movie, I like to see a story, I don't watch it to string together a series of moments like, I think it would be important to see how Clark mourns after the death, immediately after, how it is processed.
I could not get into his character, because I don't know how he goes through things because this film shoots many moments of cinematic glory, but very few scenes. Nothing is "off the action" where we can see Clark just, reacting. We only see Clark being absorbed in the action. We don't see Clark trying to understand the implications of killing Zod, we see him cut to a comedy scene and the moment of "Clark at the Daily Planet"
man such a great review!! This is exactly how I saw this movie and not with pure hatred eyes! He's not Superman yet but developing into Superman! I love how he has changed for this world and time. I guess some people just don't want to see that.
Minetic Thank you!
Am im the only one who really likes the direction the dc movies are heading to? The darker more real take, i get that its comic book movies but if we only get marvel like movies i feal like it will blend together to much and be just more of the same. Having a distinct look from the other movies (marvel, fox, sony) will work in their favor.
And the only real argument towards MoS is that it isent "thier" superman but what they fail to understand that its a origin story and superman is only starting his carrier, there by making mistakes and need guidense. But his carachters will grow in to the superman role and he will get there.
Ah yes, suicide squad and justice league were fucking masterpieces.
Truly this "realistic" take is just doing fucking wonders!!
Based on what you said here I thought I'd give Man of Steel the benefit of the doubt and discount all the negative reviews. I'm happy to say I'm very glad I did so! So thanks man!
LeweRG Excellent! Glad you enjoyed it :)
Thank you for this video. The movie ended up expecting too much from its audience who just wanted jokes and camp. MOS is a masterpiece if you actually pay attention, I remember the complaints about it when it was released and I was baffled, people just jumped on the bandwagon of hating it.
Thanks for watching!
Man, i absolutely adore your work. Since 3 days strait i explore your explorations and "Man of steal" is definitely one of the best entries.
Thank you!
I'll be honest, I was someone who was overly critical (as well as hypocritical) in my opinion of this movie. I hope to watch it again with a clearer, more open mind. Thanks for the review.
Bloxgator Thanks for having an open mind, I hope you enjoy it more the second time :)
I thought Man of Steel was pretty good, not the best comic book movie, but still enjoyed it. I don't think Zack Synder's a bad director, far from it (I loved the remake of "Dawn of the Dead"), but he did drop the ball with "Sucker Punch", i got the film... And still thought it sucked (Sans the awesome effects and Scott Glenn), but hey, if you liked it, you liked it, can't strike you there.
James Carlson I don't expect everyone to agree on everything :)
GoodBadFlicks Course dude. But there's one thing we can agree on.... Judge Dredd and COTC2 ruled. XD
James Carlson
lol hell yes!
Hell yes indeed. Oh and what did you think of "You're Next" and "I Saw the Devil"?
I have been defending Sucker Punch for three years now and catching hell from my aging hipster friends, from now on I will recite your brilliant take on it! Thanks a million-Man of Steel is great as well, keep these videos coming.
Awesome! Thanks!
you cant compare superman and pacific rim on destruction levels. superman is an icon like you said at the beginning, this is the same reason people have a problem with the edgyness of the character and the zach snyder grim dark setting. Superman is known as the boy scout all american who will stop at nothing to do what is right, Pacific Rim on the other hand is a little bit of plot sprinkled onto amazingly bad ass fight scenes because Del Toro wanted to make a kaiju movie.
This is the problem with movies built around adaptations of novels and pre-existing media. When you create something called Superman (even if you use the name 'Man of Steel') you're still bringing in all of those feelings and pre-determined characteristics. If you wanted to make this movie and rename all the characters it'd be a bit better, but you put the name of superman in it.
Btw those first killings you mentioned where still around the time where superman could level galaxies by getting a cold and sneezing. totally different character from what has evolved through it's like 70 years of story telling. and killing the joker is from Injustice, a universe set on the day superman says fuck it and starts killing and becomes evil alien dictator, kinda killing your point ironically...
I love this movie XD
this is a great review and you defended this movie exactly the way I do. the scene where Clark kills zod is actually one of my favorites because of how he reacts. not gonna lie I teared up a bit. they even carry this over to the next film. in SvB when Luthor pulls his trump card (ugh that phrase is never gonna be usable again is it?) superman is literally floored by it. after seeing all those people die in the court house and then this he was pushed to the edge and made the hard choice. when he tells lois that no one stays good forever the look of pure brokenness was gut wrenching. and when batman gets the better of him he spends what might be his last seconds of life trying to convince his murderer to save his mothers life. this version of superman is by far the most realistic and the best for the modern audience. Christopher Reeves was a great superman for his time but the modern audience just doesn't really want the campiness in superheroes anymore. o7
This is such a great video. I always use those arguments about the final fight scene and. Neck snapping whenever someone bad mouths this movie. I saw it at the cinemas when it came out, and I loved it. It wasn't as good as the 1978 one, but it was pretty damn good. Also, we can't just have the same type of Superman over and over again, so a dark and realistic movie is a change that everyone needed.
I hope the Batman V Superman movie is good, but there is a high chance it will get mixed reviews. I'm not too fond of them over stuffing it with unnecessary characters (Aquaman, Cyborg, etc...) Zack Snyder is good with these type of movies, and he definitly wasn't trying to compete with the old movies, otherwise Man of Steel would've sucked.
Malachy Lewis Thanks! With BvS, they are just introducing the characters, they aren't going to have major roles. Think like with the X-men movies where they would introduce characters and then give them larger parts in the later movies.
One of the best reviews I've seen and sums up my thoughts
keep up the great work, very good watch
Reierdacool Thanks!
The reason why the disaster porn is okay in Pacific Rim and not in Man of Steel is the tone: while Pacific Rim is the movie equivalent of kids playing with toys, Man of Steel tries to be realistic, so you can't ignore that there are people dying everywhere (and you see it too). Consequently, when the journalists are in danger, you don't care because ALMOST EVERYONE IS DEAD. Similarly, when Clark kisses Lois, who gives a fuck: everyone is dying and I should care because Clark "got the girl?".
Igotkiwi They also showed us people going to a bunker. While here they show us that people are still on the street running for their lives.
100% Agree with everything you said in this video, including the Sucker Punch stuff. But yes, humans can be imperfect but Superman isn't human so he should be better, duh! Disregard the fact that he is raised as one! You literally made every argument I did, and people still hate for no reason.
Thing is, ppl forget that Clark took revenge on that bully who beat him up in Superman 2 when he was human.
FINALLY someone who shares my views on MoS.
OnlyRoke glad to know there are fans out there
You're not the only one. Man of Steel is the most underrated super hero movie i can think of.
GoodBadFlicks We'll always be here
Finally, a review of the film that isnt entirely based on spite
This wasn't a review. it was defending every dumb mistake this movie made.
Obo Agboghidi You have to review something to do that
A review should never nitpick one by one all the criticisms a movie has, and argue why they are wrong while adding no reasons why the film overall is good. That's advertising
Obo Agboghidi You're imposing your own definition of a what review is as the actual definition. Your standards arent viewed the same by everyone. Whether you personally liked the movie or consider this video a review is irrelevant
Fine, it'a review that sounds like advertising.
The Man of Steel was an amazing film, gave new life to Superman.
I've been saying this exact same thing since 2013. People are just nitpicking at this film for no apparent reason. They are so narrow minded that they fail to see the broader perspective, and you have to feed spoon them.
The bigger picture being that man of steel is now the haphazardly integrated debut of the dc cinematic universe. My opinions about Man Of Steel aside, they rushed the set-up for the universe and now they're stuck with a tonally inconsistent cast of characters, and it feels like every movie they release they try to do damage control because of people not liking or not empathizing with the protagonists of the DCEU. It's not that Man Of Steel is a bad superman movie or even a bad movie, it's that it's trying to tell a story about a morally conflicted and brooding man who learns to accept the responsibility of being human, while at the same time being in the same universe as Jared Leto's completely over the top gangster goth Joker.
This guy truly understands why I love this film to pieces, I love that Zack took elements from the comics and made them a lot more fleshed out in a realistic type of way. And I love that Supes is a three dimensional character with layers, this film made me pick up a graphic novel and I've been a fan of his stories ever since.
I grew up with the animated series and this film kinda is like that show but on a much more mature level, even though the show was already mature as is.
Your retrospective on Man of Steel was awesome Cecil.
Thank you!
@@GoodBadFlicks You’re welcome, keep up the good work. 😊👍🏼
wow, you are the only person who actually got sucker punch! Subscribed! BTW, where can I find that article you mentioned by your friend?
eyeofodin01 Thanks for the sub! It wasn't an article, it was just a segment I asked her to write for this video. If I do end up doing an exploring video for Sucker Punch, I'll have her back.
Though it's not a bad film, and definitly better then Superman Returns, I didn't like it and it didn't really make me hopeful for the DCCU as a whole (I'm still iffy about it since, though the trailer for Batman V. Superman looks good, nothing from Suicide Squad is giving me any hope for that movie).
My two biggest gripes with the movie is Zod's actions and Jonathan's death. For Zod, having him be the villain who wants to destroy Earth works, but his motivation makes no sense and his actions are counter-productive to his goal. Say what you will about Earth being unable to defend itself, the terraformation proses would have worked just as well on Mars or Venus but without the pesky problem of resistance, and would also mean an already habitable planet would exist right next door for conquest and settlement down the line. On top of that, he tries to get Clark, the only person on Earth capable of stopping him, to join him by stating he will destroy the only world he has ever known. Now say what you will about him being a madman, no one that crazy could manage to get where he was in the first place without things falling appart. For all he knows Clark doesn't even know he isn't human, with his parents raising him to believe he was a human born with the powers he had, and that the data on the ship that brought him to Earth may have been programmed to reinforce that idea. I can believe a man can lead a group with the efficiency Zod did and still be a little mad, but stupid on top of that not so much.
For Jonathan's death, this is personal preference but I really think they should have gone the route where his death was through a means that Clark could not prevent, as a means of showing that even despite being the strongest person in the world he could not do everything.
I don't really get this whole "why not just terraform Mars" -thing. Why would he? He's already on Earth abd he has 0 compassion for humans.
"You don't move out of your home if you find a beehive in it. You destroy the beehive"
As with Pa Kent's death I'm on the fence. I feel this death fits really well with the movie, but I do like the orginal as well.
Timppa 3 Well like I said, he could only terraform one planet with the resources he had, so terraforming Mars would mean his people would have two habitable planets in the same system in the long run to work with, while terraforming Earth would mean only having one habitable planet to work with until they could either find another.
dave19941000 I think this answer it quite well and I'd rather not copy paste or write it all.
www.manofsteelanswers.com/tag/repost/
Timppa 3 That doesn't really answer why Mars isn't a viable option, especially since Earth in its natural state can allow him to create super soldiers out of his people.
dave19941000 They mention in the film that Earth is suitable for terraformation. So maybe no other planet close by was? I mean do you want your movies to hand feed you everything?
They directly address this in the film.
Jor-El: Our people can co-exist.
General Zod: So we can suffer through years of pain, trying to adapt like your son has?
Jor-El: You're talking about genocide.
General Zod: Yes! And I'm arguing its merits with a ghost.
I feel like some people need this movie to be perfect in order to think it's good. Which I don't understand. I honestly don't see MoS having that much more problems that The Dark Knight or The Avenger has, but people overlook the problems in those movies. It feels like people are trying to nitpick this movie. Which is something I don't understand why anybody would want to do that.
Batman's first appearance he knocks some mobster into acid (no not the joker). He actually killed someone and said it was a fitting end. Characters in comics evolve and many audience members don't realize it or want to accept it. And how the fuck was superman supposed to stop zod without killing him? Ask him not to?
The Coffee Nut I've still had people argue this point. There was nothing on earth that was going to stop Zod and yet people were still like "Superman would have found another way". Good grief, its like they can't accept any flaws in the character. He did what he thought was right at the time to save the earth.
I Always Think of how many are killed in the fight in the city. Instead of superman killing Zod on the spot he is indirectly killing thousands by throwing each other into Buildings for 20 minutes. Its just stupid.
Exactly, it's ridiculous how overtly violent the movie is. Marvel films have violence, but they don't make it so graphic. It's the gratuitous nature of the death that's the problem. Iron man and Captain America and Wolverine have killed in their movies as well, but it isn't done in such a tasteless fashion. It's subtle so you see the action, and if you think about it you see that the guy probably got killed, but it isn't in your face.
And for the record, Superman could have defeated Zod the way he does in the comics, by sending him to the Phantom Zone.
K L First: Marvel movies are made from audiences ranging from children to adults, the overall feel of the movie is much lighter, you can't have buildings being demolished and people being killed everywhere in those types of movies.
Second: Superman and Zod are much more powerful than what the Avengers in the movieverse have fought so far. They're both titans, and when you pit two titans in the middle of a city, there's bound to be casualties.
Third: There was no way Superman could've put Zod in the Phantom Zone, there was no opening on earth, and even if there was I'd doubt Superman would know how to use it.
I don't like MoS personally, but I do think the flashbacks are fantastic. I could watch a whole movie of just his upbringing. It's the present day material that's a mess for me. Though, him killing Zod is necessary. I thought it was a really good ultimatum for him. A great moment.
How did Zod lost hand to hand battle with Sup, if he specificly states he was training the whole life while Sup was a farm boy?
Great points +GoodBadFlicks! The more I watch the Superman '78 and '80 flicks, the more I dislike them, they're just bad.
mario martinez thanks!
I Loved the Avengers and I Loved Man of Steel, but every time I re watch The Avengers it gets worse and worse. but, every time I re watch Man of Steel, it gets better and better.
I forgot Goyer wrote BB and TDK. Wow, so many says he's a crappy writer because of how much they hate MoS yet they still hold TDK dear to their hearts.
I think The Dark Knight was good
+Studio2770 dark knights plot is silly and bloated. But you don't notice because Nolan is a goddamn wizard.
I do find it interesting that a movie treated as gritty and realistic breaks down so easily under very little scrutiny. ANd I find it even more amazing that the breakdown doesn't affect my enjoyment of the film one bit while im watching it. Its DAMN compulsive.
Goyer is good with Nolan over his shoulder. He understands Batman and not much else.
+Plutoburns THANK YOU! the dark knights plot is just as you said. it felt like it was totally in jokers favor having him being 2 steps ahead of everyones game yet trying to be cute by saying he just "does things". you can't have it both ways! either he's a genius planner or a psycho and goyer/nolan/ledger seemed to have wanted both making him a villain sue. meanwhile batman is a complete moron who fails completely, not to mention KILLS harvey dent, and yet not a single soul complained about it! can you believe it? the superhero they praise for not killing, KILLS in their so called "favorite movie/super hero movie ever", how ironic.
+Cynthia Utz Said eveyone. jk I did like it too.
I'm glad I've subbed to you today. I now have a new reason to look at this movie again. I've seen it twice, both with mixed feelings. The latter being the viewing that said "ok. its not great, but its ok." I watched batman v superman and gained an even better perspective of MoS. And watching this clarified a LOT. So I think I may give it another go, and I may actually like the movie. I guess I din't really try to see anything good about it. But after BvS and now, this, yeah. I think I may come back with a new feeling about the movie. Thanks!
Thanks for watching and thanks for the sub!
GoodBadFlicks You're welcome!!
Sorry to butt in, but what about the movie Sunshine? It's a bit off topic, but I think it's deserving of attention.
Sunshine is on the list. Great movie.
GoodBadFlicks It is by far one of the most underrated movies of all time.
And I want to say, I just found out about you yesterday (the WTF PG-13 video). And been kinda binge watching your videos. You make a lot of good points. Keep it up, you've got a new fan.
I got mixed feelings about the movie. I wish Kal El smiled more, more optimistic and hopefu saving people until he met Zod, turning him from Golden Age to 52 Superman.
Great review of an underrated movie.
Chuck Watson thanks!
1st video: Exploring DareDevil
Thoughts- I like this guy, he brings up good points
2nd video: What happened to PG-13
Thoughts- Even more good points, and something that needs fixing
3rd video: Exploring Man of Steel
Thoughts- Said it better than I could have ever done
I.E 3 random great videos is not a coincidence, keep being awesome
alasdair burgess aw shucks, thank you! :)
I've been waiting for someone defend this film. I remember Erod's review of the film and your review answers a lot of his complaints.
I couldn't take Erod seriously in that review after he literally started crying over how the children, oh god the children, now have to live in a world where Superman kills. STFU.
Hey I got another video for you. Its called man of steel the verdict. Its an even longer review thats 50min that address what good bad reviews did and more.
Its my favorite cause he breaks it down as: Lack of insight; Legit; and personal taste.
MrHootiedean I like what insight this video had to say, but Erod's review was the perfect analysis for me. It summed up 100% everything I felt after watching the movie.
Vinny792 Superman didn't destroy Metropolis. That was Zod and his World Engine. Why doesn't anyone see that??!!
GameStation3 That was clear to me. But what bothered me was how much less concerned Superman was for saving peoples lives than he was for fighting Zod and the other Kryptonians and not taking into consideration how many innocent bystanders in the way could get killed while crashing through dozens of walls and buildings.
Even in at a younger age, Superman's priority should be saving and protecting the people first and fighting the enemy second.
It's the same way how whenever Goku in Dragon Ball Z has to fight an enemy, he always requests to the opponent that he fights away from people. Superman man's thought process isn't any different.
My problem with Pa Kent's death is that Clark chose to let him die. In the 1970s film, Pa Kent died of a heart attack and there was nothing Clark could do to save him. It's a difference between choosing who lives and dies and learning you can't save everyone. It was a small thing that I hated that reflected itself through the whole movie as a base for Clark's character.
Mos was bout becoming the man clark wanted to be.
I really loved Man of Steel *shrug*. It was pretty good apotheosis story and I didn't think any character motivations were out of place. Given that he was put between a rock and a hard place, Superman did the best he could.
What you say in the video is not the real problems in this movie. These are what people (who are stupid) said about it. There are many more problems with the movie. I didn't hate it but i lost my interest in it while watching. There are good segments but ultimately I think it was boring.
I dont know about the part where you called people stupid, but I agree that this movie was boring. It was nowhere near good enough to be as long as it was. After the fight in Smallville, I just stopped caring because I thought it should have ended. When he broke Zod's neck, I was happy because that meant the movie would be over soon.
Platypus of Death I was a bit harsh. People like to be clever and they say things the don't understand or they don't have the knowledge to understand. Like people hate man of steel but they love transformers and adam sandler movies. They are just avg consumers who like sitting in front of movies without care and deeper thinking.
Rekettyelovag
Fair enough. I don't really watch movies to have "deep thoughts" or anything like that, I'm a big fan of popcorn movies. That being said, Transformers was mediocre at best, and Sandler hasn't made a good movie since the Waterboy. There are a few movies he was in that were good, but they were good in spite of him.
yes boring is a description that sums up most of the super hero movies these days. I didn't even bother watching the end of Man of Steel.
I love this episode! Love the sucker punch rant! I look forward new episodes. i am glad I stumbled upon your channel. I get so sick of negative reviews. Now that I have lost all my college database.
Much appreciated! I agree, there is way too much negativity out there.
Couldn't agree more! Fantastic film, best soundtrack ever, Snyder fucking ROCKS. His love of the genre is in every frame! Cannot WAIT to see what he does with the sequel!
I'm glad you pointed out these things, i have singing the praises of this movie since everyone in the world seemed to hate on this movie. The movie was a MASTERPIECE of a reboot damn it!
While I agree with most of your responses to the typical MoS criticisms, the one about Pa Kent dying might be a bit off. For me, the intention there wasn't the problem, it was how the scene was shot. It made it very hard to tell how far away from each other they were, and with the very close zoom on both of them, and the establishing shots before it, it just felt like a very small area.
I get what it was going for, but the framing sabotages it completely.
Also, the comparison with the Avengers doesn't really work, as that was about containing a threat and limiting the damage to a certain area. There was an obvious effort on screen to prevent escalation, with an actual goal in mind to cease the conflict. The finale in Man of Steel is just unfiltered, undirected chaos.
I'm not saying it's a bad finale, or that it should be like Avengers, I just don't think they're remotely similar finales and don't compare well here.
People in the comment section angry because someone is finally telling the truth about what this movie is.Man of Steel is a great movie & it gets better the more you watch it.This movie alone has more soul than some other Superheros have in their entire trilogy.I will defend this movie no matter what.It gave me a character I can relate to.A character I can care for.These days it seems like everyone just hates on something just to seem cool.Great job & great video.
Thank you so much. I really appreciated this video and what it had to say. I loved the film and I really feel that Man Of Steel was very misunderstood/underrated. You mentioned much of what I would say in defense of this film and I am so glad you put it out there. Thanks again!
Kat Rob Thanks! I appreciate it! Just happy to know others feel the same
I would have been okay with Sucker Punch if not for the "second layer" which was totally unnecessary IMO. They could have had their action fantasy happen from the first asylum layer, which was plenty awful- the stuff about the whorehouse didn't add any richness to the story and only confused what was happening. Or it could have eliminated the asylum all together and just started with the whorehouse.
Also gotta disagree that it was empowering. I'm a girl, and my opinions are not everyone's, but personally I don't get why anyone would try to escape a horrible reality by creating a just-as-horrible fantasy, and from there leap into an action fantasy. It came off as a teen boy's attempt to write empowered female characters. I guess I appreciate the attempt, but it didn't work at all for me. Plus there was a lot of bad music.
Man Of Steel was okay though.
Geospasmic I agree. The music was just grading and awful.
Actually, Sucker Punch takes notes from identity psychology. The first layer is the objective reality, the second layer is the perceived reality by others, the third layer is the perceived reality by the individual. Together they form the experienced reality. So if you took out the second layer, the whole movie wouldn't make sense anymore.
Don't feel bad if you missed this obvious parallel.
It's kind of sad that most of the critique this movie gets just proves how uneducated people really are.
Also, you were never ment to like the second layer because it showed the way men look at women in the most masochistic way. The third layer was there to counter that.
You said EXACTLY what I’ve been saying about this movie!! I never understood how people couldn’t get that...
Although I agree with most of the points you brought up here, there are some that, imo, Snyder missed the mark on. I wasn't a fan of the heavily copied Avatar and Matrix imagery on Krypton. I didn't like that Jonathon couldn't give Clark some type of foundation. The entire reason Clark is such a boy scout is because he was brought up by God fearing good people.
Jonathon Kent should not have died by a preventable method. The most impacting scene in both the comics and the original film was the fact that Pa Kent died in a way that taught Clark a valuable lesson: he can't do everything or save everyone. It was a powerful moment that helped shape his character.
Finally Snyder's over saturated dark tone does not fit Superman as a character. Someone color corrected this movie and made it look a billion times better. Once in the entire film we see him smile. I love that we watched him grow in this movie. I loved the action (except for the fight with the tentacles on the world changer which interrupted the flow imo). I didn't even mind that he killed Zod because I felt that would be what would help shape him later (although if I was Snyder I would have shown a scene where he at least tried to get Zod away from the city). Sadly it shaped him in the opposite direction as you can see from Batman v Superman. While Man of Steel was a good movie, BvS was a depressing, convoluted mess that I needed to take a prozac to get through (that's just a joke lol). I really wish Snyder would have went in another direction with these characters and stop trying to make everyone Batman.
One more thing, the difference between gratuitous scenes and awesome scenes are context. Pacific Rim is a giant robot vs monster movie. No one expects anything BUT destruction. Superman is different. People know what he stands for. People are aware of his "rules". By not even showing him try to help people or steer Zod away, the audience perceives him as not caring which is how it came across. Even showing a little concern would have changed this scene and the audiences feeling on it entirely.
Thanks for making this video.
Joshalots thanks!
I thought I was alone when thinking this movie was brilliant.
Rickbane01 you are not alone!
Man of steel is one of those rare movies i like more and more with each viewing. The only real complaint i have is that it's to dark and grey. Ad by that i mean the color of the movie. But that looks like it will be fixed in Batman v Superman.
love this I'm a huge superman fan and tried to explain most of these points to people but you do it better and you pointed out things I did not even think about
Good points made but I still can't say I like this movie. The fact that there are no witnesses to his truck vandalism was my first warning sign, as the truck is sitting in the car park in plain view of the diner, yes he is faster than a speeding bullet etc, but I would imagine that impaling a big rig on the logs it was carrying would be quite a noisy spectacle., The final straw was Lois finding the ship after supposedly spotting Clark in a photo she takes( as well as the forced love story between her and Clark). I must point out that I think that the Smallville battle and the initial flight scene are great, but the Metropolis scene was too OTT for me, and the main Daily Planet characters are always in the 'right' place for dramatic purposes(Lois seems to have some kind of plot driven teleportation device).
That being said being said, I love your videos, Only discovered them this weekend and I've been binging on them since.
This movie was great. and the review was great.... gotta say i love those action scenes!
ArielAleXCo thanks!
i think man of steel is a smart, meaningful, and GOOD movie. it has its moments and is my favorite movie of 2013. its one of those movies you have to see multiple times to get it. Believe me when i say i had some of the same complaints on the first 2 viewings. but on my 3rd and 4th viewing, everything made sense. the kryptonians aren't perfect as they think they are, they're flawed. thats why they didn't do anything and why krpton was dying. Pa kent isn't perfect, he's flawed too. but thats alright, he's only human. they say superman is just a piece of wood, but i saw someone who's trying to fit in with society, someone who is happy with what he has, he's a symbol of hope where there is none. you can't have hope without despair which the latter is what zod brought. he's still obviously going through an arc like luke skywalker did in star wars. those of you who don't know what that is, its what we call character development. he starts off rash and still learning, by RotJ he's calm and focused. superman is now going to be tested in dawn of justice, the people now know of his existance and will now either accept him or shun him. sounds like an interesting conflict, a mirror to the community in frank millers the dark knight returns.
Half those examples are out of continuity, two of them are robots, Doomsday was an animal a mindless creature, and the rest is bad writing. Ok I get your point but you either ignore problems or hand wave them. I like your reviews (not sure it counts) but this so far is the only one I dislike so far. Superman has said time and time again he won't kill.
Love this analytical video, dude. I don't agree with everything, but will openly admit how I had ALL of those complaints you examined when I saw the film on release. Since then, I have come around to agree with your more logical thinking about these complaints. I could go on, but I just want to make one NEW complaint. You asked (paraphrasing): What does it say about humans if we are allowed to kill and Superman isn't? I think this is exactly the question I was considering in first complaining about Kal killing. The film uses a line from Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman comic book.
“You have given them an ideal to aspire to, embodied their highest aspirations. They will race, and stumble, and fall and crawl....and curse....and finally....They will join you in the sun, Kal-El. They will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun. In time you will help them accomplish wonders.”
I feel like based on your take, accepting your thinking, Snyder and Goyer should have not included this quote. It was misleading thematically. I can imagine the argument for keeping it in: Superman is a man who must accept he will make mistakes and model to humans how to handle that (?). I guess. I don't know. What do you think?
The problem with the carnage in the climax wasn't the carnage itself, it's that it wasn't building to anything. There was no end in sight because the two just kept punching each other to no visible effect. Neither one took any wounds, nor did either one look fatigued when the big neck-break scene happened.
The murder scene has the opposite problem: there's no build-up TO it. Zod focuses primarily on fighting Superman throughout the fight and makes little effort to go after humans, something that Terence Zod exploited in Superman II for a tactical edge. Zod said, "I'm going to make them suffer, Kal" doesn't have a lot of action backing it after the fact. And that line of, "This only ends two ways: either you die, or I do?" should've been followed by Zod turning around, dashing off and slapping some poor civilian into a building, killing them, or at least making the effort before Bob stops him.
If they'd had Zod go after civilians, that could've been the build-up the death scene needed as Zod comes closer and closer to crushing someone, with Bob just barely able to keep up with him because, like you said, Zod is a tactically-minded military guy. Then, when Zod has someone in a headlock about to pop their head like a balloon, _that_ is when Bob breaks Zod's neck. There's a clear and present danger to a civilian, there's no other feasible way out of the situation, there's build-up to the moment, and there's pay-off for the big fight scene.
But instead we get a long scene of violent nothing before a character moment that was never earned jumps in out of nowhere.
And, just to add insult to injury, the next scene completely forgets about it. We don't even get a shot of Clark overhearing a conversation about how Bob killed Zod followed by a look of shame and regret on his face, that would've been enough. Just SOMETHING to show that yes, this affected him. This changed his demeanour in some way. This developed what little character he had.
+Ikrani What murder scene? Superman killing Zod wasn't murder.
IOwnTheSpire
You're missing the point, sir.
+Ikrani I think you missed the ENTIRE point of the movie. Did you even watch it? Or just read about it on Wikipedia and formulate your "opinion" based solely on that? I am beginning to suspect the latter the more I read your post. Let's break this down. Cecil did a nice job in the video, but since you can't seem to wrap your head around his version, here's mine.Clark spent his whole life among humans. He KNEW he had super strength. He didn't know much else about how far those powers went or what else he could do, besides the heat vision (used in the school when he was angry). When Jonathan Kent decided Clark shouldn't rescue him, it sent Clark on a journey of self-discovery. From this, we were able to ascertain Clark's character. We know he put that guy's truck on the pole, but only because he couldn't hit the guy through the wall, which he clearly wanted to do in that scene in the diner. We also know from Lois' tracking of him, that he was a generally nice person overall. When he shows himself to the military, he knows he could break out at any time; but, if he wanted the humans to trust him, why would he do that? It would just create mistrust and they would be even MORE afraid of him. During the final battles, in both Smallville and Metropolis, Superman did EVERYTHING he could to save people. Zod's people were creating havoc and destruction ALL OVER, but we (as the audience) don't get to see the collateral damage. We the those aftereffects in the preview of Batman V Superman, but I would guess that since Zod was trying to punch Superman through EVERY building in Metropolis, I think it is safe to say that it WAS building up to that. Plus, I think you forgot about Brainiac (aka The World Engine), and what that did to Metropolis. Zod told Superman what his plan was after they captured him. Once he was on the ship, Zod told him that they were going to terraform Earth into another Krypton and rebuild the civilization. Towards the end, when Zod tells Superman that he has nothing to fight for because all of his "people" are now gone, he is a man with NOTHING TO LOSE. That makes him unpredictable and DANGEROUS, like a cornered animal. Superman needed to keep Zod focused on him, so he wouldn't go off and kill people. That is actually just common sense for anyone with half a brain and know anything about military strategy. I mean, why do you think Britain kept up the resistance versus the Nazis in WWII? Because eventually they wore down the Nazi resolve enough for them to try something else. Like attacking Russia. Zod would never have stopped. If Superman had stopped fighting him, Zod would have become a power-mad dictator and ruled Earth with an iron fist. Instead, Superman fought him to a STALEMATE. Zod knew in that moment it was either him or Superman. So, he forced that decision ON Superman. Superman doesn't kill indiscriminately, but he does when the need suits him. Like in the case where Superman fought Doomsday to death. Literally. That is what happened here. He needed to make a choice, and that choice will carry a scar throughout the movies. We might not see that scar manifest itself, but I think that you can see what will be happening in Batman v Superman. Just when they thought Zod was gone for good, along comes a "doomsday" look-a-like with strange powers that are eerily similar to Zod's. If you watch the end of the film, I think that you will see that Clark/Superman is clearly carrying the burden on his shoulders, but trying to mask it because he DOESN'T WANT THE HUMANS TO KNOW HIS REAL IDENTITY. Would you want people to know that you were a Superhero? I wouldn't think so, because then people would be calling you every 15 seconds because they stubbed their toe. So, he carries those burdens inside. Much like Bruce Wayne does as Batman. Peter Parker does when not swinging around as Spider-Man. All true heroes carry that burden, because they can't tell another living soul. It is PART of who they are. Hell, even anti-heroes like The Punisher (my all-time fav) carry those burdens within them. There are always those you can't save, and those difficult decisions. Do you think that Peter Parker (in the original run of Amazing Spider-Man) carried the guilt around because of Gwen Stacy's death? HELL YES HE DID!! For YEARS in the comics he brooded about her death, until a red-haired girl walked into his life named Mary Jane Watson. So yeah. Your "argument," such as it is, doesn't carry much weight when you actually analyze the movie properly. Because it doesn't look at the movie so much as it just looks at the surface. You really haven't seen it properly, because the movie is quite layered. In fact, I have watched it 3 times personally (and plan to watch it another time here soon before Batman v Superman comes out) and I have seen new things I missed in other viewings. Go and actually watch the film. Really sit down and watch it. It will do you good. Because if you aren't feeling the tension in the final scene with Superman and Zod, then you have missed the whole of Superman's backstory.
Russell Waddel
Why don't you fix your "Enter" key and try again. No one's forcing me to read your comment, so you might as well format it well.
I had it formatted. Blame RUclips. Read it anyway.