The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part
The Walking Dead
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We want to hear what you have to say but need to verify your account. Just leave us a message here and we will work on getting you verified.
Please reference “Error Code 2121” when contacting customer service.
Man of Steel's exhilarating action and spectacle can't fully overcome its detours into generic blockbuster territory.
All Critics (322)
| Top Critics (54)
| Fresh (181)
| Rotten (141)
| DVD (3)
Christliness has always been an element of the Superman myth. But this film's near literal insistence upon it becomes absurd since director Zack Snyder and screenwriter David S. Goyer don't dramatize the analogy, they presume it.
No fun costume change in a phone booth, no wowing humans with his powers and no repartee with reporter Lois Lane.
The movie consists of endless declamation, endless violence.
There's very little humor or joy in this Superman story.
There's plenty to like in Snyder's hectic, rowdy film. But by the time we reach the bludgeoning excesses of the last half-hour it's hard to shake the sense that this was an opportunity at least partially missed.
Cavill broods handsomely as Superman, but this reboot skimps on fun and romance.
Man of Steel isn't going to win over those who are indifferent about Superman, but it does set the stage for future films with more interest in character than in spectacle.
Shannon is no great shakes as the shouty villain and Adams does little with a thankless role. As for Cavill, he certainly looks the part but lacks crucial charm and charisma, surely the two essential qualities any Man of Steel needs,
Man of Steel is grandeur and epic, but it's also deep and personal.
This is an origin story that is rooted outside the actions of one-Clark Kent is not really even the central figure molding it.
The key to great Superman stories is to have ones that give Superman a deep and complex problem that speaks to society at large. Man of Steel successfully reinvented him for the 21st century.
Man of Steel's schizophrenic structure acts as a microcosm for both the profoundly philosophical and the profoundly thuggish dialectic at the heart of the Superman legend.
For someone who has never been a fan of Superman as a character, this movie is not really impressive, as it relegates to flashbacks every dramatic scene that would help build him as a relatable person - and it does so in order to jump fast into brainless, inconsequential action.
A most difficult proposition here: a story over 50 years old that you want to enjoy but may be inclined not to (you've probably got a favorite already) - they've got to win us over. How to do that, keeping it fresh, while touching on all the familiar-as-your-own-family elements demanded by the never-to-be-denied true believers? The stars deliver, drawing us into a story made fresh by focusing on the inherent immigration aspect of it : like most Americans, Supes comes from someplace else originally and has to decide whether he's American or not. Particularly good are Adams as Lane, Costner and Lane as Pa and Ma Kent, and Traue as one mean b-tch. Crowe and Cavill have the biggest jobs, stepping into the shoes - and yet out of the shadow - of huge cultural icons.
Compared to what 'Superman Returns' offered in 2006, 'Man of Steel' come back with a stronger power to drawn the audiences attention by having a well-named director and incredible cast with a more interesting story too.. Henry Cavill gave a strong performance as Clark Kent with another lovely performance from Amy Adams as Lois Lane, but the star of this movie is no other than Michael Shannon who successfully as before portraying a ruthless villain in the name of General Zod.. Overall, since I haven't watched the original Superman in 1980's, this version is way better than 'Superman Returns' but just good not that great nor amazing..
It's hard to not pass judgment on a film without comparing it to its predecessors if the source material is well known. Unfairly or not, a critique of "Man of Steel" has to be helped or sullied by the muscle memory invoked by versions past. And with some past versions of "Superman" being quite good, it puts "Steel" in the precarious position of having some pretty big shoes to fill.
The film just struggles. You can feel the film struggling. Even with the things it does right, "Steel" labors to be interesting and in many ways creates a mess for itself.
Let's start with what it has rewritten. It has given Lois Lane (the miscast Amy Adams) and Jor-El (Russell Crowe) "more" to do and with that it effectively gives Superman/Clark (a stiff but physically perfect Henry Cavill) a lot less to do making him not as compelling in the story as he should be. And despite Lois' increased role, she's pretty inconsequential.
And those are just the few character shortcomings in the film. There are many others you can quibble with but the films biggest problem? It's boring. As nonsensical as it seems that a film with such extraordinary subject matter is so boring, it inexplicably is. Even the scenes with awesome effects like the great fight sequence between Superman and his two Kryptonian opponents is hampered by the corniest exposition dialogue. But the action sequences save the film from being a disaster.
Too bad Zach Snyder directed this film as his penchant for flashy visual effects without any substance hurts the film. He seems to not understand how to effectively use his camera to best showcase humanity. What he fails to understand with this and his other films is that it is not just an actors job to invoke substance, he needs to pace films to let humanity show appropriately. He needs to stage scenes to showcase these moments. He's too consumed by dazzling the eye and ear that he forgets about dazzling the brain.
View All Quotes