MAN OF STEEL's trailers were amazing. The second trailer in particular was pretty much perfect. It was gorgeous, mysterious, had intense and absorbing action and introduced some very thought-provoking themes for a summer blockbuster. Basically it was representative of everything anyone could hope for in a superhero film. Sure, it was odd to see Jonathan Kent so cynical, suggesting that maybe Clark should have just let those kids in that sinking bus drown. But he's Kevin Costner! And I didn't think too negatively about it. I mean it's produced by Christopher Nolan and looks like a Terrence Malick movie! But Terrence Malick and Christopher Nolan, Zack Synder is not. And while the film had the same gorgeously shot action scenes and intriguing questions of those impeccable trailers, what appeared mysterious and absorbing in the trailers is exposed to be a cold and joyless film populated with heavy-handed homilies and mindless destruction.
MAN OF STEEL is essentially an origin story. It begins on Superman's (Henry Cavill) home planet of Krypton which faces imminent destruction from an unstable core. The rebel, General Zod (Lexington's own, Michael Shannon), is attempting a coup because of his unwavering belief of the ruling council's incompetence with, literally, matters of life and death. On the opposite end of the spectrum, scientist Jor-el and his wife Lara (Russell Crowe and Ayelet Zurer) decide to launch their naturally conceived child, Kal-el (the planet has instituted genetically-controlled births in order to control population growth and create the most efficient society possible), on a spacecraft towards Earth, infusing his cells with their genetic codex in the hope of preserving the Kyptonian race. In the process, Jor-el is murdered and Zod is sentenced to 200 cycles in the Phantom Zone (an extreme, alien form of solitary confinement). Meanwhile, Kal's ship makes it to Earth and is found by Jonathan and Martha Kent who take him in as their son and give him a new name - Clark. As Clark Kent grows up, Zod, who has escaped from the Phantom Zone after the destruction of Kypton, begins his manhunt for the key to his race's survival - sending the two on a crash course towards one another that leaves the fate of our planet hanging in the balance.
Ultimately, the film seems interested in a particularly engrossing theme and tries to present it in a way that hasn't really been covered in any Superman movie up to this point. The idea that Clark/Kal is equally as human as he is Kyptonian and the fact that this alienates him (pun slightly intended) from both of the societies that should accept him with open arms is as topical as it is poignant. However, the impotent script by BLADE scribe, David S. Goyer, is less philosophical and more like when a little kid asks a randomly insightful question and before you have time to answer is off trying to catch and eat that bug you told him to leave alone. Nonlinear flashbacks full of hamfisted metaphors and inconsistent characterizations kill any momentum that the film gets going and just when it seems like they're ready to delve into those questions and themes that made the trailers so captivating, BOOM!... Literally. Every time MAN OF STEEL starts to go someplace interesting, Zack Synder feels the need for another lengthy and bombastic action scene. Yes, Zack, the way you shoot action is beautiful to the point of being nearly hypnotic. But without letting the audience truly get to know your characters, you can't hope for them to be emotionally invested in anything you're showing them. Sure, when Superman and Zod battle throughout Metropolis it's brutally magnificent. But I don't care why they're battling because the essential relationship between the people of Earth and their savior, Jesus Clark Super-Kent, isn't established properly. What results is a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Yes, some things in MAN OF STEEL are good, even great. Hans Zimmer's score is easily one of the best of the year. The way Zimmer is able to capture everything that seemed to be promised in those spectacular trailers despite the failings of the rest of the film is stellar. The blending of electronic sounds and a live orchestra perfectly reflects the duality of Clark/Kal's identity and the way Zimmer is able to combine the two into one beautiful whole is an absolutely wonderful representation of what Clark must do to rise to his full potential. Likewise, as I've already touched on, the film is dazzlingly shot and the performances, though admittedly hit and miss, include some amazingly well done work. In particular, though laden with dialogue that sounds more like a fortune cookie than a human being, Kevin Costner delivers a very stirring turn as Jonathan Kent. Amy Adams as Lois Lane and Antje Traue as Faora, one of General Zod's warriors, also present something that is rarely seen in a Zack Synder film - strong women. Whether it's Lois going toe-to-toe with military personnel and aliens alike, taking an active role in figuring out how to help Superman save the world, or Farora emanating a terrifying aura of invincibility and malice that rivals even the intensity of Zod himself, it's refreshing to see women (and other minorities such as Laurence Fishburne playing Daily Planet Editor in Chief, Perry White) taking such an active role in a Hollywood summer blockbuster.
All of this, however, is not enough to save the film from it's own austere steeliness and abysmal script. While the chiseled Henry Cavill looks amazing, until the final scenes at the Daily Planet you never get to see any other side of Clark Kent than a tortured outcast. He is quite literally the Man of Steel. That's not to say that that can't work. THE DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY focused on a dark and nihilistic Bruce Wayne and those films (apart from the final piece) were amazing. The difference, however, is MAN OF STEEL has none of the gravitas or dramatic weight to actually make such a dark film viable. We've seen two major ways that superhero movies can be done and done well. Either you take the route mentioned above, or you have a movie like what Marvel is doing with THE AVENGERS and the IRON MAN films which deal with similar themes of world destruction and terrorism but do so in a way that doesn't erase every ounce of joy from the picture. Sure, it doesn't hurt when you have the comedic sensibilities of Joss Whedon or Shane Black or Jon Favreau involved, but Marvel seems to realize that it's hard to have such a big blockbuster and not give the audience a little bit of joy to help them connect with the characters and the actions onscreen. Obviously a film can be as dark as MAN OF STEEL and succeed. However, to do so it has to be truly great. It has to be, dare I say it, SUPER.
And I think there's a reason that that word is nowhere near the title of MAN OF STEEL.
5 out of 10
