Man of Steel, Man of Expectations

Man of Steel is the most recent film version of Superman, and frankly, it is the best Superman film I've watched. To be fair, I've only watched Superman Returns and Man of Steel, so I can't speak to the previous versions. I did follow the comics, and although not entirely faithful (as any new media has to take liberties with stories), Man of Steel has an engrossing character and stylistic action. However, with only a 56% tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes, Man of Steel could be considered a flop.

This is the universal symbol for "Curse" | Sourced from Google Images

When portraying Superman, directors, actors, screenwriters, and studios have the extreme difficulty of providing a character for people to relate to. Superman is invulnerable and, depending on lore, infinitely powerful. How do you make a god relatable?

What to take away from all this is that critics are becoming inconsistent and close-minded in their judgments.

Movie Critics Aren't Always Right

Reviewers are criticizing Man of Steel for its lack of humor in Man of Steel and the over-stimulating visuals. Let's take the humor aspect first.

Since Iron Man, Superhero movies can never be the same. People expect the same types of jokes that Iron Man and the Avengers provided: witty remarks during combat, quippy comebacks, and physical humor (the Avengers scene where Hulk smashes Loki around comes to mind).

Physical humor is funny. | Sourced from Deviant Art.

Superman has humor - ex: Superman telling the US military that he's from Kansas - you don't get more American than that. But there's no humor in combat, which to me, isn't a bad thing. That's like asking a general does he find humor when he has to plow through a city with his forces.

A Genre of Movies Does Not Require the Same Elements

It's not the same type of humor as the other Superhero movies or even the original Superman films (I hear they're a bit campy), but just because Iron Man and the Avengers have set recent tones, it's not bad for it to be different (somehow the Dark Knight Rises is so easily forgotten in critics minds with its dark brooding atmosphere).

Horror movies are constantly redefining themselves. Paranormal Activity pushed horror in a new direction, yet many new horror movies do not use every element Paranormal Activity created. Similarly, Superman does not need to have the exact same type of humor as the Avengers.

In fact, the humor in Superman is a bit more subtle. A lot of it has to do with visual irony as well as the history of the character: Superman in handcuffs is as effective as using a cardboard box as a jail, and Superman's day job is smartly done.

Zack Snyder Was Born for Superman

I am not a fan of Zack Snyder. I think his movies are completely over the top. Suckerpunch (which I did not see) seems entirely dedicated taking the visual sexuality of 300 (I remember my girl friends telling me they were watching 300 for the eye candy) and turning it toward men. I found Watchmen's glorfication of violence discordant with its themes (failure of superheroes, and the corruption of power). And 300 felt like it was 90% slow-mo, but I understand why it was there:  propaganda piece within the story to incite the rest of the Greeks to fight. It's a frame story, and many people seem to forget that. I still didn't like it though. I did enjoy watching all his movies for being fun action movies, but they aren't something I would wholeheartedly recommend.

Stating that Man of Steel's action sequences were long, drawn-out, and over-the-top is directly the opposite of the problem with Superman Returns. Superman Returns (which has a 75% tomatometer from critics) had a lack of a great struggle. It was an "intellectual" Superman film because it questioned what makes Superman, Superman. And they were left with a movie that had Superman stop a big earthquake and throw land into space.

Superman is Over-the-Top and Rightfully So

We pay to watch Superman fight. We expect him to. Superman is omnipotent. How do you make someone who is omnipotent and invulnerable struggle? Mentally, we see Superman struggle with his heritage and his adopted world. We even see him falter in his trust for humans, and in the movie, we do see what it means to be Superman. Physically, we see a being who can leap over several buildings, fly over buildings, and hurl buildings, get smashed through hundreds of buildings.

We see from his perspective how everything zooms by as he clashes. We see from our normal perspective what it would be like to see a superfast individual fight a group of soldiers. 

I don't see people having a problem with her smacking them around. | Sourced from Google Images

The destruction in the Avengers is arguably just as extensive, but it seems like there was no problem with their gratuitous action. In the Avengers, when Hawkeye shoots an arrow at a speeding alien without looking, that's about as gratuitous as Superman punching someone into space.

A Gritty Reboot

When looking at Man of Steel, we have to remember that it's a darker superhero movie. It's in part penned by Christopher Nolan, so it's not the shiny exemplar we've come to expect. This is the Superman story I've been waiting for because it tells of a Superman who has had to deal with strife in being different, in facing bullies, in knowing that he has the strength to destroy anyone of us, but he has to be more.

Just because it's not what critics come to expect, doesn't mean it's a lower grade. Critics are human and err. They are not superman.