In a yes or no situation about if I like "Man of Steel" I will admit every time "no". The film was meant to introduce a new generation to the greatest superhero in American fiction and one of the most important fiction figures ever created. The seventy-five years of legacy was to be continued in this film and instead of getting the loyal adaptation the world needed, Warner Bros felt the need to piss all over the smiles of comic book fans. This is The Panel Biter's Top 5 Worst Things About Man of Steel.
5. The Destruction of Metropolis
One of Superman's most noticeable tropes is his respect for citizens, property and ownership. Growing up on a farm meant Clark had to be respectful, he had to be careful too. Always making sure not to rip his front door off it's hinges, maul the family dog with petting, or cut through his dinner plate (Incredible reference, eh?). Superman is all about safety! You can destroy a Sears, you can destroy a Denny's, you can even destroy a 7/11, but an entire city is not necessary! Maybe this destruction will play a part in future films, but at the time it seemed like a way for the director and writer to have a big wank-off to destruction and death, elements that shouldn't be splurged in a film about Superman.
4. The Coloration
Why is it so dark? Really, why is it so dark? This is Superman! He should be bright and energetic! The coloration in this film left me more bored than entertained. The part that's especially annoying is the fact that when the suit was shown at conventions it was brighter, it had accurate coloration and the only reason it looks darker on film is because the makers of the film added a gray-filter to make it darker! He isn't Batman for crying out loud, why is Superman so muted in color. What's one of Superman's most defining physical attributes? Primary colors! Red, blue and yellow! I don't see those colors, I see burgundy, navy and jaundice. I see the fear of the writer and director of making Superman lighter because of how "embarrassing" he would look.
3. Pa Kent
I can get past John Kent's mixed messaging as a father, but why-why, in Rao's good name-did he die in a tornado? Was a heart attack not epic or dramatic enough for his death? Did the idea of Clark Kent-with all his amazing and hidden powers-not being able to stop his father from dying an early and natural death not seem heart-wrenching enough for these Emmy-hungry socialites? The beauty of an ironic death was ruined because the budget had to be spent on a CGI tornado, and don't tell me it's a more touching death because Superman could have saved him because feeling oppressed is not the same-nor is it worse-than feeling powerless. Knowing you could have saved someone does not serve the same effect as knowing you couldn't no matter how hard you tried. It was a moment of redeemable writing soiled by the need for destruction.
2. Krypton's Logic
Planet is going to go boom, people on planet send baby to other planet, planet go boom and baby grows up on other planet. Simple! But no, Russel Crowe-or however you spell his name, I don't care-needs to be an action-packed scientist with military fighting skills. The Kryptonians need to be all metallic and dark and their planet needs to look like a duller version of Avatar. Oh, and the architect is tacky. Why is there a "Birthing Matrix"? Was it not enough for the bad guy's plan to be "You don't want Kryptonians to take over this planet so I'm just going to kill you, have all my men and women breed a new generation of Kryptonians and wipe out the human race"? Instead, we have a special item nobody cares about, vague alien technology with no acceptable origin, and a pocket universe not utilized to it's potential. All because the makers of this film were too proud and stubborn not to use the simplicity of a timeless story.
1. The Absence of Happiness
No color. No comedy. No happiness. No amount of hope for a better tomorrow. No matter how "bow on top" this film was, nothing could make up for the boring, obnoxiously written, and overpacked with action this film is. They were trying so hard to be "epic" and "mythological" and "serious" that they forgot this was Superman! They forgot it was a movie about a comic book! DC/Warner is so obsessed with catching lightning in a bottle again like they did with the over-saturated Nolan Batman movies that they couldn't see that they were soiling a character who is the exact opposite of Batman! Batman is dark, so Superman should be light. Batman is always scowling, so Superman should smile. Batman is distant from people, so Superman should be the friendliest, most caring, most social superhero ever! I hate Man of Steel because it's not a Superman movie, its what used to be a Superman movie with the scribbles of a teenaged drama-punk all over it. "Superman can't wear underwear on the outside, that's gay! Superman can't be so colorful, it's annoying! Superman shouldn't care about breaking stuff, he's too cool to care". It's like Warner was embarrassed by Superman so bad they let the judgement of haters-who should not be listened to over fans-decide what Superman should be. And when the fate of an American icon is put into the hands of people who are afraid, we get a sequel where the company says, "put Batman in it, that'll sell more tickets".
Thanks for reading!
Facebook: The Panel Biter
Twitter: @ThePanelBiter
Podbean: Panelbiter.podbean.com
No comments:
Post a Comment