Thursday, June 20, 2013

Leave "Man of Steel" alone!

Is it better than Superman (1978), or Superman II (the "Richard Donner Cut," at any rate)? Is Henry Cavill better as Superman than Christopher Reeves? Is Michael Shannon a better Zod? Is Man of Steel a better movie than 2012's The Avengers? The answer to all of these questions - perhaps unsurprisingly - is no.

A far more important question, however, is this: Was it, and were they, supposed to be?

What, exactly, was everybody expecting? This was never going to be (at a guess, from all the flack this film is catching) the next Lawrence of Arabia - not when all it ever really needed to be was better than Superman Returns!

You know two words that I would use to describe Man of Steel? Try "resonant," and "relevant." When did everyone become so incapable of just appreciating a movie for its thematic elements and emotional core?

This film has moved me on a personal level in a way that few others ever have. Consequently, I've now seen this movie in theaters a total of four times.

Seriously, people: Quit slagging on Man of Steel! Not only is it a good movie - it's maybe even a great one.

EDIT - I'm calling it now: Man of Steel - the most misunderstood, unfairly maligned movie of recent times.

I might someday write an additional post wherein I'd detail exactly what it is that makes me feel the way I do about this film, in the hopes of offering up another point-of-view on a subject about which others may have been too quick to judge. You know, if there's actually a demand for such a thing.