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.