Yeah, I'm kinda late to the party... But I
I suddenly have the need to kind of "review" something, so here's my view on this movie (WARNING:
long rant & slight spoilers).
The movie started out with a pretty awesome sequence in Kripton. Then the focus moves to Earth, & it starts getting kinda melodramatic. It was at about this time when I made my prediction for the movie: it's going to spend the first half on establishing plot, backstory, characters, etc. & then the second half on all-out action that will take place in a surprisingly short in-universe timespan.
& sure enough, that's exactly what they did. (take into account that I say "half" for short, there was actually some transition time)
It didn't bother me as much as I expected though, it just misses a few points on pacing
Actually, it was the anachronic & sudden intrusion of flashbacks that got confusing at times O.o but I've only seen the movie once, I'd probably get it better on a second watch...
The graphics, as expected, where awesome
The kriptonian technology was such an eyecandy for a SciFi-Fantasy geek like me
& before someone starts going "U ST00PID N L1KE SH**** MOVIE 4 XPLO5IONZ!!1!!1!!!1!" let me remind you that movies are a visual
medium. To completely dismiss the visual part of it would actually be an unfair
judgement. But this being a mostly visual site, I doubt it'll happen here
most of us can appreciate the effort put to make something look good
There'll always be someone who says "Avatar wasn't great because of the flashy effects", but the graphics are what takes a movie from "great" to "awesome", they're the sweet cover & ornaments of a cake: they make it look good while also adding more flavor
Let's face it, with current CGI technology, people expect, no, demand
that their movies look freakin' awesome
. But I'm starting to think this might actually be a hindrance... & not just a development hindrance due to the fact that pouring all your money in the graphics leaves all other areas underdeveloped...
Here's my theory: the general public loves the effects but with the critics, it backfires; they get almost obsessed with maintaining a "sophisticated"
image, to make it clear that they're so not impressed by flashy effects
that they may actually end up getting biased the other way around & go hunting for even the slightest of offenders.
For example, one common critic is actually the lack of "humor"... somehow
...Humor. Really? What part of the action-gorged trailer or the dark & edgy posters made them think there was going to be humor in this movie? Or did they miss the opening credits that stated that Chris "The Dark Nolan" worked on this movie?... & even then, I remember a couple of funny moments in there
Now, if they tell me that the comics where not so dark & that they where expecting it to be a little more lighthearted, I understand that. It makes us angry when an addition to a franchise is quite dissonant with the rest of it. I know that anger, believe me, I've experienced it firsthand
... But to hate the people who genuinely liked it is just a bad as those who cannot understand how could somebody not
like it. It's simply Opinion Myopia.
But back to the point, I've never been such a huge
Superman fan; I only saw Superman Returns
& that was waaaaaay too long ago, I don't remember a single thing about it
so I can't compare it to that one. I did read some New 52 Justice League
So, let's talk about the story. Stories, as I see it, can be broken down to 3 parts: The setting, the characters, & the plot (sequence of events) itself.Thor
, for example, had a nice "extended" setting (Asgard) beyond the simple 20-minutes-into-the-future Earth, which I wanted to know more about but the movie would barely oblige MoS
shows more of Kypton than Thor
did of Asgard though, It even shows some of the working of their society. It left me fairly satisfied, but still wanting to know some more
The characters, to keep the same example, in Thor
they where what actually got me to like the movie as "above average"
not quite a masterpiece but nice (Though, I liked Thor mostly in The Avengers
). They where also the part that made the most lasting impression on me (& apparently most of it's fans) in FFXIII. Basically, I watch it for the plot, return for the setting & stay for the characters; so if I like the characters they pretty much have me hooked already
for the reasons stated before, the characters are mostly developed through the first half or so, & most weren't exactly the highlight of the movie. Superman himself was pretty nice since he "officially" became Superman
, all the way to the end (well, it would have been sad otherwise
), Lois was pretty interesting in the first half, but for the action part she just kinda disappeared
I mean, she was standing there but, aside from [SPOILER hover over to see]
, she might as well have been a prop O.o though Jor' El was pretty badass [SPOILER]
he managed to make a lasting impression in a secondary role, much like Crane (Scarecrow) in Batman Begins
Kudos for that
Though, on a side note, Zod get's most of his development in the action half O.o & the female Kryptonian was kinda scary...
Some people complain that superman was out of character because of all the gratuitous destruction that he seemed not to care about in the least, though, given it's expanse, it should have left a lot of victims. Frankly, It's actually only in some parts of the action half but, I was bothered by that too
thing is, I really can't directly blame Supes for that because, for one, one could fan wank that he just started his career as a superhero & hasn't learned to be careful, but mostly because the movie itself forgot about it too
O.o. No one. Ever.
About it. Makes me wonder if it was supposed to be a "needs of the many > needs of the few" kind of thing, but as it seems, the writers simply didn't think about it because the fight would look awesome like that & THIS is when graphics become a development hindrance...
On the actual plot, at it's core it's pretty simplistic, like in Avengers, "save the world from the big bad aliens",
& The Avengers
doesn't really stray too far from that, but MoS
takes it further by actually letting you know why the aliens are doing this, & what it's like to be a "child of two worlds"
but I think the reason that there are, admittedly, more plot wholes & unexplained things than average for people to complain about, is that they where trying too cram too much story, about as much story as they would put in, say, The Dark Knight
, while not whiling to cut back on the action parts. The effect is that some events look sort of... spontaneous; like they should have taken a lot longer than they seemed to take, or where just done on a whim.
Things like why Clark [SPOILER]
or why Lois was on that plane often get called out. The bad thing is that, many times, these are not pointed out as constructive criticism, but simply to say "DIS M0VlE SUX!!!1!!1!"But maybe that last one is just people who think not liking a hyped-up movie makes them "smarter" than everyone who did...
The pacing was nice, if a bit rushed during the first half, while the action half dragged a bit. In average it was OK
It was also nice how they managed to touch on so many little details, like what it's like to grow as a superpowered child, & what's so special about Kal' El that his parents would go to such extents to save him [SPOILER]
. Though it was also a bit disappointing how they only touched
& then there was the music and...
No, I better not get started
on Master Hans Zimmer's music or this is never going to end
So... All in all, I can say I really enjoyed this movie
In fact I want to see it again
I'd give it a 7.5/10; not without it's faults but pretty good in the end