Despite not reading the Superman comic books very often I have a sizable collection of his screen appearances and have always enjoyed the Christopher Reeve movies. As much as I might like them, though (even the 3rd one which gets a lot of hate from other fans), I have issues with them that keep them from being on the same level as my appreciation of many of the Batman movies and pretty much anything that Marvel has done in the last few years. That's why I say that "Man of Steel" is in the running for the best Superman movie to date. This is a Superman reboot clearly geared towards the possibility of a Justice League movie sometime down the road. A lot is changed with the character, and those changes have to be set up. 

 

Foolish choices by the ruling council on Krypton have put the entire planet in jeopardy. Zod takes steps to save the populace, but his methods are violent which has put him at odds with former ally Jor El. The El family has broken tradition by having the first natural conception in many years – an act which will give their son freedom of choice rather than a preordained purpose dictated by artificial genetic design. With the planet nearing the end of its existence the determined parents send their infant boy to Earth.

 

Years later young Clark Kent searches for his purpose in life, awkward because he is so different but unable to stop himself from acting heroically whenever a situation calls for his extraordinary abilities. As he uncovers his heritage and takes up the symbol of his lost Kryptonian family Zod tracks him down. Still determined to save the Kryptonian race Zod plans to terraform Earth into an environment that cannot support human life. His willingness to commit genocide puts him at odds with the son of El, and Superman will stop the villain at any cost. Lois Lane, Perry White, as well as the combined populace of Smallville and Metropolis are in mortal danger if the fledgling superhero can't stop the mad general. 

 

Throughout the story we are treated to flashbacks of Clark's childhood in sentimentally touching scenes with his adoptive Earth parents as we learn about their influence on Clark and their fates. I wasn't sure if I was going to like this at first since all other Superman stories tell the childhood story in proper chronology. Ultimately I found them pleasing pauses from the intense action without spending too much time at any one stretch with slow-paced family interaction. Kevin Costner makes a good Jonathan Kent and reminds me a lot of everything I like about John Schneider's portrayal of the character.

 

I reserved judgment on Henry Cavill as Clark. To me, putting someone from the UK in this role is like putting an American in the role of James Bond. I have to say, though, that Cavill won me over. He has the right look for Superman and does an outstanding job with the role. Michael Shannon does well as Zod. Amy Adams doesn't have a Lois Lane look to me, but otherwise I have no complaints.

 

A few character changes come with some of the casting. Laurence Fishburne as Perry White? I like Fishburne. I can't imagine anyone else being Morpheus, but I don't think he brings anything special to the role of Perry. To me this seems like an excuse to bring in someone of color for a notable role. While I can appreciate the desire to add some different skin tones to the look of the film this strikes me as a forced attempt. If you're going to make such a change as this to a classic character there needs to be a better reason for it. Case in point: Nick Fury used to be white, but can you name one white actor in all the world that you would rather see in the role instead of Sam Jackson? The correct answer is “no.” (Note: his race was changed prior to the making of the movies and therefore does have precedent in the comics.) I don't feel that with Fishburne as Perry. My favorite Perry was Lane Smith followed closely by Michael McKean. Fishburne just doesn't match them. 

 

Other changes are brilliant. Lois, being the star reporter that she is, quickly uncovers Clark's full history. From there she must decide what to do with that information. This provides for some great character revelations as well as a speedy setup for her romance with the Man of Steel without it feeling forced. I much prefer this approach to her working side-by-side with Clark while having a crush on Supes without being able to put the pieces together.

 

I like the depths of Zod's character which works well with the pitfalls of Kryptonian society despite their obvious advancements. He's not just ego-maniacal, he's more or less programmed to preserve Krypton and does so with the coldness of someone who doesn't know love. If he had approached it without the need to exterminate humanity he and Clark would surely have been allies.

 

Supes fighting Zod creates a lot of collateral damage in Metropolis. That bothered me a little, as it does many fans, since Supes would surely try to avoid such massive destruction. I'm sure it was for the visual spectacle and the peril it causes for side characters during the course of the battle. On second viewing I realized that while not completely without merit the criticism is often overblown. Superman's first emotionally charged attack, the first attack he ever makes on an enemy, is really the one bad decision he is responsible for. From that point he's not the one causing the destruction until the final battle - a battle in which he mostly gets his butt handed to him over and over by a villian who could care less about human casualties. Supes struggles just to stay in the fight and did not choose the battlefield so I feel it's unfair to say that it's all his fault.

 

There are some big controversies in the story that I want to mention briefly. This will include some minor spoilers, but I'll keep the important ones vague so as to not spoil everything. I'm not enthused with how the death of Jonathan Kent is handled (if that's a spoiler I'm sorry, he dies in nearly every iteration of the Superman lore so it's expected here). I don't accept that Clark would just watch his father die no matter what the reasoning is.

 

And of course there is the fan-dividing neck breaking scene. Did Supes really have a choice? Could he have done something different? Should the writers have put him in that position in the first place. I rather like the emotional impact it has on him and can see how it might influence his stance on taking life.

 

Regardless of what I think about these moments I still greatly enjoyed the movie as a whole. They weren't make-or-break for me, and I can understand the intent behind the choices. I do wish the character had some of Reeve's levity, but I also like seeing him having to figure things out and learn to be a full-fledged superhero.

 

Shaky cams are over used. I don't mind some use of them to get a feel for being in the middle of the action, but it is too much too often. I found myself wanting the camera to stop shaking so that I could focus in on certain visuals at various times.

 

While I'm not satisfied with all of the choices, I was thoroughly entertained by this film. It's exciting, it's touching, it's thought-provoking. I even choked up a little at one point. If this is what we have to look forward to with the future of DC on screen then I'll be just as loyal as I have been with the Marvel films.