WARNING: SPOILERS AND CURSING COMING AFTER THE 'WHY IT'S A GOOD MOVIE' PART.
So, here's the "why it's a good movie" part. No cursing from me here. Children and the easily-offended can read this with no fears.
First of all, MAN OF STEEL is a good movie. Even though I hated it, I can't in any way say that it was a bad movie. The director did a great job visually. The scenery (especially the stuff on Krypton) and the special effects are pretty awesome.
As far as the cast goes, I've got nothing to complain about there either. I especially liked Diane Lane and Kevin Costner as the Kents. Michael Shannon, even though he was playing a MUCH different General Zod than the one I know and love from SUPERMAN 2, was very good in his role.
Amy Adams was fine as Lois Lane, though Lois was a little boring compared to earlier versions I've seen of her. I blame that more on the writers (I'll get back to those clowns soon) than on Amy Adams.
As for Henry Cavill as Clark Kent/Superman...he was pretty great. He did a fine acting job and he definitely looks the part. Also, I admit to feeling sort of a kinship with him. In the scenes when he wasn't wearing a shirt, I felt as if I was looking at an exact body double of myself. It was somewhat eerie how similarly he and I are built.
So, yeah...beautifully filmed and a great cast. Good movie.
So, why did I hate it?
(HERE COME THOSE SPOILERS AND CURSES THAT I WARNED YOU ABOUT!)
I'll tell you why I hated it. Because the the writers, producers, and director didn't seem to give one single, solitary shit about the history of Superman. They changed so many things around that there were a couple times that I almost walked out of the theater. I sat there getting madder and madder. The only reason that I stayed was because I bought a big tub of popcorn and wanted to finish eating it.
I'll focus on just a few (of the many) changes that I hated. First of all, it was ridiculous that Lois Lane knew almost from the beginning about Clark's super powers. Excuse me, but when the hell has that ever happened before? A huge, huge (did I mention huge?) part of the appeal of the Lois and Clark story has always been the mystery of her not knowing who he really is. Yes, I know that in some stories they've eventually gotten married and she knew his identity then, but it always happened long after they met. Here, she knows who he is and what he can do before he even puts on his costume for the first time.
So, Strike One there for me.
Now, let's talk about Jonathan Kent, Clark's adoptive father on Earth. First of all, let me make it very clear that Kevin Costner was awesome in the part. My beef here is in how the movie makers killed off his character. Jonathan Kent has always died of a heart attack in all the earlier versions of the Superman story. He never died from a tornado before.
Yes, I know what the story makers were trying to do with his character and with the story. Jonathan had told Clark earlier that he may sometimes need to sacrifice lives in order to protect his secret so he could use his powers later for the good of the world. So, when the tornado came and there were a bunch of people around watching the whole thing, Jonathan doesn't want Clark to save him, so Clark doesn't and he lets him die.
Yeah, fuck that. If you have a chance to save Kevin Costner from a tornado, then you fucking save Kevin Costner from a tornado!
Strike Two there.
Now, my biggest beef with the movie: when Superman kills General Zod. Yeah, that's right, KILLS. Superman doesn't kill. That's it. Bottom line. Superman NEVER kills anyone!!!
Strike three there for me, boys and girls!
I'm sitting here thinking of even more things about it that I didn't like but I've got other things to do right now. I'm sure you do, too. Hopefully among your things you're doing is anything but seeing this movie. It's a good movie, but the filmmakers crapped all over the history of the character. They showed almost no respect for the writers of earlier versions of Superman at all.
I'll never watch it again, that's for sure.