Login
If there’s any incredibly iconic but difficult to adapt figure from the modern era, it’s probably Superman. Despite being at the forefront of comic book and super-heroic iconography, despite the vast number of radio programs, television shows, films, toys, video games, collectibles and general presence in the pop culture psyche, he’s still looked upon as something of a relic. A carbon-dated hero from the optimistic Eisenhower era, an antiquated hero who sees the world in black-and-white, as wholesome and Americana as apple pie and baseball, and it’s an unfair image, for he is a vastly more complicated and interesting hero than that.
There’s a core of sadness and isolation within Superman – the alien who walks among us. So it is with great joy that I can say, while imperfect, Man of Steel manages to bring out the human qualities and darker emotions bubbling beneath the surface of the character. He’s finally gotten a movie in the modern era which doesn't completely suck. It does suffer from many of the same problems that other comic book adaptations fall into, but there’s a good foundation to finally go off and explore the more unique and intergalactic villains in his rogues gallery.
Producer Christopher Nolan and director Zack Snyder don’t exactly seem like a matchmaker’s ideal pair, and to be honest, their styles are sometimes clashing against each other. During various sequences one can practically feel Snyder trying to let his penchant for slow-motion action sequences out to play while Nolan scolds him away from it. But more often than not, they seem to have a middle-ground to play in. And it kind of works, sometimes.
A lot of the heavily lifting in making this world believable falls upon the actors. And Snyder and Nolan have assembled a fantastic team. I was originally apprehensive over Michael Shannon being assigned the role of Zod, partially out of character fatigue and because Shannon doesn’t seem terribly bulky and large enough to knock around Cavill’s Superman, but Shannon invests the character with an unhinged, despotic quality that brings something fresh to Zod. I always had faith that Amy Adams, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane and Henry Cavill would nail their roles, and I was right. Costner and Lane bring a lot of heart, spunk, homespun charm and realistic parental anxiety to the Kents. Adams is perfect as Lois Lane, headstrong, spunky, smart and tough. As for Cavill, he’s long been my fan favorite dream choice for the role, and he fits the role as perfectly as Christian Bale inhabited Batman. By bringing in a pretty tony cast, the list of Oscar, Emmy and Tony nominees and winners is pretty astonishing, the filmmakers really helped us believe in this murkier, unformed world of Superman, even as the script frequently goes off the rails.
The problems occur when the things need to fall and/or blow-up real pretty like. The action sequences seem to go on for forever, occupying valuable space that could have been used to flesh out some of the peripheral characters or given us a stronger connection between Lois and Superman. Or, hell, they could have even given more time to Clark Kent, who is the real person unlike, for example, Batman in which Bruce Wayne is the created identity.
The action sequences display a tremendous amount of craft and the special effects are top notch, but they just drag on and on and on. The tremendous amount of destruction also brings up images of 9/11 New York and I’m not sure how I feel about any superhero property tapping into that imagery for so primal a reaction. It feels a little sleazy and unearned. After a while watching artificial versions of Superman and Zod punching each other through building after building while the music swells and the sound effects roar doesn’t hold all that much charm. Call me crazy, but I much prefer the scenes in which we follow Clark Kent traveling the world, discovering himself, his powers and his purpose. In other words, I prefer the film that Nolan was clearly trying to steer DC towards making.
Except Nolan was also trying to foster on many of the eccentricities and character-specifics of Batman onto Superman. I don't think Snyder's vision is what's best for adapting the character, and Nolan's clearly has major problems as well, so I propose a third way. There's plenty of interesting tidbits and ideas brought up, but they're quickly tossed aside in favor of watching Superman destroy buildings by having extended fights with the same three people, over and over and over again. There's a better middle ground to find between these two extremes, and that is where DC needs to mine for future Superman films.
This blanket process of "grim and gritty" for all comic book characters doesn't work. Not every single character fits neatly into that mold. Superman is a lighter, happier character, generally speaking. While I appreciated that they took the time to explore the more humane elements of the character in the beginning, the heavy-leaning on Jesus symbolism is a bit tone deaf. Superman is clearly a symbol of Moses, if one must look towards the Bible for symbolic allegories. But if I had to chose between this messy new franchise, and the nostalgia-tinted, immensely forgettable Superman Returns, I suppose I would chose this one. At least this one feels like there's more stories to explore within the assembled universe.
