Rate "Man of Steel," 1-10 Scale

[Dark Knight]

I have to see this movie again. It's worth seeing at least twice.

[Crimebuster]

The second half was just invulnerable people punching each other for an hour mixed in with some blatantly manipulative post-9/11 destruction porn. Really, really tiresome.

 

Let me get this straight.

 

This is a movie about the probably the most powerful superhero of all time, and you are complaining that there was too much battling going on.

 

Really?

 

 

Yes. It's about pacing. Superman having an epic throwdown with another super powered Kryptonian is cool. But then he has another. And another. By the end, it is no longer cool, because I have just seen it. Several times.

 

Just because Superman is incredibly powerful doesn't mean we need to see him unleash those powers non-stop. If he does, like he does in this movie, it starts to lose its meaning. In comic book terms, Superman going nuts on Mongul in Superman Annual #11 is a shock because of the restraint he had shown in comics and in that story up to that point. If he had spent the entire issue blasting Mongul with heat vision, then the climax would have been routine and disappointing, like the climax of "Man of Steel" was.

 

 

Then you must not be fan of the Avengers then right? Cause that had the whole city of NYC in ruins.

 

This is false equivalency for a couple reasons, but mainly because the whole of NYC was not in ruins at the end of Avengers. There were definitely some buildings messed up, but most of the city was saved. In "Man of Steel," on the other hand, a huge portion of down town is completely leveled by the world engine, then another large section is trashed by Superman and Zod.

 

And most of that is because in "Avengers," members of the Avengers are specifically shown trying to save civilians and prevent collateral damage. In "Man of Steel," Superman is on the other side of the planet for most of the destruction. When he returns, though, he only stops to save one single person - Lois. But the rest of the time, he and Zod are just smashing everything in sight. And we know from the setup that the city is not empty or evacuated, but filled with people. Does Superman stop to save those people or protect them, other than the very end when he kills Zod? No. Not because Superman wouldn't care about those people, but because Zack Snyder doesn't care about those people. A hundred thousand implied deaths offscreen is not important to Zack other than the fact that he can make it look "cool." In "Avengers," Joss Whedon went out of his way to show the Avengers being heroic and proactive to prevent that exact scenario - Iron Man sets up a perimeter to contain the aliens while Captain America then evacuates the civilians within that perimeter.

 

So yes, I am a fan of "Avengers" and not "Man of Steel" because I thought "Avengers" was significantly better than "Man of Steel."

 

[NewWorldOrder]

The second half was just invulnerable people punching each other for an hour mixed in with some blatantly manipulative post-9/11 destruction porn. Really, really tiresome.

 

Let me get this straight.

 

This is a movie about the probably the most powerful superhero of all time, and you are complaining that there was too much battling going on.

 

Really?

 

 

Yes. It's about pacing. Superman having an epic throwdown with another super powered Kryptonian is cool. But then he has another. And another. By the end, it is no longer cool, because I have just seen it. Several times.

 

Just because Superman is incredibly powerful doesn't mean we need to see him unleash those powers non-stop. If he does, like he does in this movie, it starts to lose its meaning. In comic book terms, Superman going nuts on Mongul in Superman Annual #11 is a shock because of the restraint he had shown in comics and in that story up to that point. If he had spent the entire issue blasting Mongul with heat vision, then the climax would have been routine and disappointing, like the climax of "Man of Steel" was.

 

 

Then you must not be fan of the Avengers then right? Cause that had the whole city of NYC in ruins.

 

This is false equivalency for a couple reasons, but mainly because the whole of NYC was not in ruins at the end of Avengers. There were definitely some buildings messed up, but most of the city was saved. In "Man of Steel," on the other hand, a huge portion of down town is completely leveled by the world engine, then another large section is trashed by Superman and Zod.

 

And most of that is because in "Avengers," members of the Avengers are specifically shown trying to save civilians and prevent collateral damage. In "Man of Steel," Superman is on the other side of the planet for most of the destruction. When he returns, though, he only stops to save one single person - Lois. But the rest of the time, he and Zod are just smashing everything in sight. And we know from the setup that the city is not empty or evacuated, but filled with people. Does Superman stop to save those people or protect them, other than the very end when he kills Zod? No. Not because Superman wouldn't care about those people, but because Zack Snyder doesn't care about those people. A hundred thousand implied deaths offscreen is not important to Zack other than the fact that he can make it look "cool." In "Avengers," Joss Whedon went out of his way to show the Avengers being heroic and proactive to prevent that exact scenario - Iron Man sets up a perimeter to contain the aliens while Captain America then evacuates the civilians within that perimeter.

 

So yes, I am a fan of "Avengers" and not "Man of Steel" because I thought "Avengers" was significantly better than "Man of Steel."

 

 

Thank you for proving to me once in for all why MOS is .5 better than Avengers!

 

Superman the whole movie was coming to gripes with the notion about who he is so until the end of the movie wasn't entirely sure on his stance or the direction he wanted to take.

 

I still don't comprehend your stance on the battling. Avengers had more battles, so again why wouldn't you want to see Superman battling and flying as much as possible. This is a comic book movie you do realize. This was the first film for which I think Superman was done with proper special effects.

 

As a boy he saved that fat kid didn't he?

 

The implied deaths were something I admire about Zack's work on this film. To think the Avengers saved everyone is just not logical. I fully understand what you are saving about how the Avengers tried to save everyone, but I don't think it relates to this film. If Zod beat Superman then everyone on earth would have died. A couple hundred deaths to stop Zod seems like Superman saved billions.

 

I have to completely disagree with the damage factor. Avengers did a lot of damage to NYC and MOS just have a better visual to show it.

 

Your entitled to your opinion, but I just don't follow it.

[fantastic_four]

When he returns, though, he only stops to save one single person - Lois. But the rest of the time, he and Zod are just smashing everything in sight. And we know from the setup that the city is not empty or evacuated, but filled with people. Does Superman stop to save those people or protect them, other than the very end when he kills Zod? No. Not because Superman wouldn't care about those people, but because Zack Snyder doesn't care about those people. A hundred thousand implied deaths offscreen is not important to Zack other than the fact that he can make it look "cool." In "Avengers," Joss Whedon went out of his way to show the Avengers being heroic and proactive to prevent that exact scenario - Iron Man sets up a perimeter to contain the aliens while Captain America then evacuates the civilians within that perimeter.

 

Superman can't save everybody. Destruction on the scale that Zod was attempting without a ton of deaths would be super-unrealistic. Where were there "a hundred thousand implied deaths offscreen"? Looked to me to be a few hundred or possibly a few thousand deaths.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Your entitled to your opinion, but I just don't follow it.

 

[Maccai3]

can you communicate without some sort of jpeg or image file?

[RockMyAmadeus]

can you communicate without some sort of jpeg or image file?

 

 

via Imgflip Meme Maker

[zosocane]

The litmus test for how good/bad MOS really is comes down to how many times you feel compelled to see it.

 

For instance, I saw Batman Returns once, that was all I needed. But I saw DK Rises multiple times. Watch Amazing Spider-Man more than once? No, thank you. Avengers? I saw it three times in the theatres.

 

How many times will you see MOS?

[Maccai3]

The litmus test for how good/bad MOS really is comes down to how many times you feel compelled to see it.

 

For instance, I saw Batman Returns once, that was all I needed. But I saw DK Rises multiple times. Watch Amazing Spider-Man more than once? No, thank you. Avengers? I saw it three times in the theatres.

 

How many times will you see MOS?

 

in the theatre? top 2 for any film, never felt that i need to see any more than that, MOS will be a 2 viewer then Blu Ray buy

[musicmeta]

I gave it an 8 out of 10. Really good movie. I enjoyed it a lot.

[Bosco685]

Votes updates (10.0 x 1, 9.0 x 1, 8.0 x 1, 7.0 x 1, 2.0 x 1).

 

 

MEAN = 7.2

MEDIAN = 8.0

MODE = 8.0

[eightclaps]

People giving this movie a 1/10 are out of their minds or just not taking the poll seriously. There are some films out there that are complete trash and deserve a 1/10 rating. Not this one. Is Man of Steel perfect? No. But it's definitely not one of the worst movies ever.

[Lethal_Collector]

The back story was my fav part. The action reminded me too much of the last transformers at times and felt it went a little off balance there. But still very very enjoyable, glad I saw it!

 

8/10

 

 

Jerome

[Jiminy_Cricket-migration]

I gave it a 6. Worth a watch or two. Definitely an improvement for DC after GL and DKR debacles.

[Lego]

It was one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. Just blisteringly, insultingly dumb.

 

Example:

 

After destroying a pair of cities and having killed (conservatively) THOUSANDS of people, Superman cries at his killing of Zod.

 

Yank.

[Prince Namor]

It was one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. Just blisteringly, insultingly dumb.

 

Example:

 

After destroying a pair of cities and having killed (conservatively) THOUSANDS of people, Superman cries at his killing of Zod.

 

Yank.

 

Uh... Spoiler alert?

[bane]

It was one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. Just blisteringly, insultingly dumb.

 

Example:

 

After destroying a pair of cities and having killed (conservatively) THOUSANDS of people, Superman cries at his killing of Zod.

 

Yank.

 

Worst review ever.

 

[Unca Ben]

I am in the camp of lighter, not darker films, but I gave Man of steel a 9, I really liked it.

 

In comparison I thought Avengers was a CGC 9.2, Man of Steel 8.5/ 9.0 - I rounded up to 9.

 

 

...and to Maccai3:

can you communicate without some sort of jpeg or image file?

 

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth (sorry, RMA)

[Bosco685]

Some strong votes captured (9.0 x 1, 8.0 x 4).

 

 

MEAN = 7.2

MEDIAN = 8.0

MODE = 8.0

 

It would appear up to this point Man of Steel is more a strong performer versus a failure, statistically speaking.

 

 

 

[fantastic_four]

After destroying a pair of cities and having killed (conservatively) THOUSANDS of people, Superman cries at his killing of Zod.

 

Yank.

 

Not only was it the first person he had ever killed, but in doing so, he just cut himself off from his last available living link to his home planet given that he currently doesn't know how to retrieve those other Kryptonians from the Phantom Zone.