Adding to the posters point: one of the largest complaints I've heard is the "Superman doesn't kill" but of course he did in the movie. The thing I don't get is if you're a fan of Superman from the movies then you know he's killed before because he killed in the 2nd Superman movie, and if you're a comic fan then you know he's killed Doomsday, and at one point killed three criminals in the phantom zone, and heck there might be more that I'm not recalling. The point is that killing is an absolute resort for Superman, and the movie did that, perfectly, well at least in my opinion. Overall I think the movie was great, I agree with a lot of the points Smart_Dork_Dude made, and I don't understand why I've heard so many complaints. Oh well, that's my 2 cents on the subject.

@smart_dork_dude: Um...Most of the negative critics come from people who expected this to be like Donner's Superman. I guess the meaning of the word reboot got lost in time.

Too long and I didn't read but you had me at the title. I'm getting tired of sticking up for this movie and I'm glad others are too. People keep bitching about the tiniest things and I'm tired of it.

Man of Steel has a Superman that is more true to the books of the modern age. People are still living in the 70's where Superman exclaimed "Great Scott" before tackling a golly gosh darn quandary.

@smart_dork_dude: I'm a Batman fanboy. Well not as much I used to be. I still love the character but not as much as some of the guys on here who defend Batman, Nolan and everything else like their life depend on it. I kind of grew up a bit haha. Anyway, back to the point though. Man of Steel is one of my favourite comic book movies ever. I was truly amazed by it. I really don't get all the hate it’s getting.

All I keep reading is that it’s not a proper representation of Superman. This was a very inexperienced Superman. You can't expect him to automatically have the wisdom and experience of Superman from the comic who's been around for the past 75 year (In my opinion there will never be a 100% true to source film adaptation of any superhero. Even if there was, someone will still moan). Superman doesn't kill (Well he didn't really have a choice, Zod was getting stronger all the time. He did the right thing. Plus he’s killed before in film, and the comics). Why didn't he try to save more people during the battle? (He was dealing with Zod and his crew who are at the same power levels. He can't pause a fight and help civilians while in a big battle).

This film was fantastic. I wouldn't change a thing about it. One the best superhero, and Superman things ever.

sure, lets settle for crap instead of a good movie. pfffff. who wants quality anymore these days?

You know, you'd think think pepole would get over the fact that some pepole just didn't like the film.

@jonny_anonymous: no. not good enough. 100% must be achieved or die typing.

Pretty much this. I haven't even seen the Batman movie so I fail to see it's relevance in regards to my opinion of MoS. In fact, I haven't seen any Superman film except for the 70s ones (is that right -- was it 80's too?) and there is no way I am comparing that to what I saw.

Bottom line, it was okay -- I understand the difficulty in getting across a good movie, especially tackling Superman but I have to admit, there were some areas they could have easily polished up and didn't. That's all.

But I can understand if people are outright disgusted with the film -- I don't think it deserves that level of derision.

Superman has killed before, the collateral damage that has been caused is similar to the damage during the greatest super-hero comic book battle ever done, a.k.a. Death of Superman/Doomsday vs Supes. You didn't like the film? That's ok. I didn't like "The Dark Knight Rises". I will not watch it again and I will continue my life. Right?

on a lighter note

Good post. I just don't understand all the bashing MoS is getting, especially from Superman fans. It's not a perfect film, sure, but it's a great comeback for Supes. I'm someone who actually enjoyed Superman Returns for what it was, but I think back to all the criticism it had --- no action, Superman doesn't throw a punch, story drags, Lex Luthor again, Kryptonite again, it can't recreate the charm of the Donner version etc, etc. Now we have MoS which looks like it was made to deliberately address those points: action is non-stop, Supes throws a lot of puches (most of them right in Zod's face!), pace of the story is super-speed, no Lex (yet), no green rocks, complete break from the Donnerverse --- and lo and behold, people aren't happy.

I just don't get it. I loved MoS. Yes, the action was relentless but we FINALLY got to see Superman face enemies of equal strength - something fans cried out for after Superman Returns. Now folks are complaining about too much action. What? Too much destruction! Hahahaha, what did they think would happen when Superman goes toe-to-toe with other super-powered Kryptonians. MoS's fights were everything Superman II wanted to do, but couldn't due to SFX limitations of the time.

In MoS's final fight between Superman and Zod I was on the edge of my seat! When Zod catches Kal by the cape and spins him round before hurling him through about 4 skyscrapers, I wasn't thinking, oh but what about all the collateral damage! I was too excited because, at that moment, the comic books I read as a boy were alive.

@smart_dork_dude: Don't you think you're overreacting? Why would Batman fans pay for a Superman movie if they don't like the character, the movie has been very polarizing, look at the 2nd weekend drop, it was more severe than Superman Returns. It was okay. People are allowed have different opinions.

Yeah and how much of that second week drop is due to all the whingeing and whining from superman fans that has put people off going to see the movie! I agree with the op, give it a chance. It has its flaws but its not as bad as some people on here are making it out to be.

i agree. people who give this movie a negative view thought this is Christopher reeve superman. I'm not hating on it but it seems they are stuck on Reeve's superman. His era is over , this is the new superman.

I have a lot of issues with the film. And your opinion won't change that.

The fact that Superman killed Zod doesn't really bother me.

The way they handled it was 100% crap though. And I literally laughed out loud in the theaters when that family stood and watched, then ran and hid in a corner that was like 10 feet away. Superman puts Zod in a headlock as Zod slowly pulls a Goldfinger and slowly begins shooting his eye laser towards the family, who can EASILY drop to the ground or just freakin' run. Don't think they could have? Ok. Superman has Zod in a headlock, enough leverage on his neck to break it easily. How about..... moving his head upwards, or down? Or....perhaps...throw him through the wall and knock over some more skyscrapers?....

That's one stupid moment in the movie, the others have already been addressed, Supermans complete failure to save anyone.

ALSO... Air force guy is true hero of the movie.

@biteme_fanboy: Zod probably could have flicked his eyes over and killed the family. It was slow for story. To give the audience time to see Superman and the decision he has to make. As it is, even if that family survived, it is without a doubt untold numbers more would have died if Superman didn't finish it when he did. And furthermore, who is to say Superman would have another chance to win? Zod may have gotten the upper hand and finished our hero. Then the world is over as we know it.

I agree with you, in that our Air Force guy is definitely a hero. Perry White too. He was going to stay and die to comfort Jenny and not allow her to die alone. That level of conviction is definitely heroic.

The whole scene of Superman's reason to kill Zod was badly done. They could have done it so much better...

But overall I enjoyed the movie, I just have problems with it.

Man of Steel Superman trusted humans a bit too much, he trusted them to the point in which he gave them the position to stop Zods main ship while clark could have made the decision to stop that ship but his trust of humanity shows that he at least followed what hes fathers message they will join you in the sun Jor El never said he would lead them. Matter a fact that is what makes sense in MOS then in the Donner Films superman in the donnerverse he kept helping mankind he was doing the opposite he was leading them to the sun. MOS superman he was seeing humanity has Jor EL told him join him into the sun. This plays great with Lex Luthor in the future cause he thinks superman is leading mankind to the sun , he wants to be the guy to do it. When the irony is Superman wants humanity to join him in the sun. That's another issue with Donner Superman and other versions of superman i have is that at times it feels that superman is forcing his ideal of a Utopian vision this is where Lex Luthor makes more sense cause essentially superman in general has always been a hero that is giving utopia or trying to give humanity Utopian vision.

Donner Films superman in a way from what i saw was trying to inspire but at the same time give this weird join my utopia message which in the comics at times superman does come off like he is trying to make Mankind become Utopian has Lex sees it he is right Utopia is impossible for us cause we are human. Man OF Steel got me more because the philosophical question from Jor EL speech in All Star Superman and in this film which they took is Jor El said they "will" join you in the sun and remember at the beginning he said in time they will join you in the sun, in time you will help them accomplish wonders. Jor EL says in time So superman in this world or DCCU makes more sense he wants humanity to form there own road of a bright future, this is why in MOS he trusted humanity so much he allowed them humans to stop Zod ship while he went after the world engine. TO me MOS is the first superhero film that actually makes the Superhero trust the public its always the public much trust the hero MOS to me was the hero has to understand if he can trust us, not a lot of superhero films period do that. That's the point MOS was getting the complaint that the supporting characters where more heroic then superman that's the freaking point, it works perfect absolutely perfect when Jorl El says in time they will join you in the sun. For many years superman in various versions not all but a lot has always been the one leading mankind not humans themselves having superman has a guide to accomplish great things like jor el said you will help them key work help he wont spoon feed them, to accomplish wonders.

To me at the end of MOS when Superman fights Zod its him saying humanity took Zod ship out wow me destroying the world engine worked out for then and now Mankind themselves have managed to take that out without me being there ( till he comes last minute) so my father was right jor el and John i can stand proud in front of the human race and what jor el said they will join you into the sun. Thats how i view MOS and it fixed many of the problems i had has a long that superman fan for 30 years reading his comics was that superman to me felt like he was giving hope yes but in a way bringing mankind to a utopia ulike what jor el said in all star and in MOS is that they will join you and you will them and guide them to humanities on state of Utopia you will not force utopia to them.

Well....So did TDKR last year....

@SandMan does this guy understand MOS was a success lol it made more matter a fact it surpassed superman returns is he high lol

@smart_dork_dude: Considering that I at least haven't complained about those things and in fact have defended the claim that Superman killing isn't a problem I think you should actually read my arguments instead of presenting a strawman argument that most people who are taking real issue are only mentioning, if they are, tangentially.

If you aren't going answer the actual problems raised by people, like me, who present numerous points of problems then you really have no business using a title like "to those of you bashing..." I'd be more than happy to go scene by scene, part by part and try to point out every error that I can think of, but you don't seem to be interested discussing things, but rather forcing your view that for a good number of people who look at these things don't agree with you on.

That's not saying critics are all right or always right, but we should consider why they are saying the things and explain why they may be wrong and distinguish between what is good/bad and what is going to result in people saying the enjoyed something or indeed enjoying it. In this case there are more than enough elements to explain such the extreme reaction for why a lot of people are saying they do enjoy it.

If you want to discuss things, go to one of the threads I posted where and why things are bad and respond to that rather than these nonsensical bad strawmen.

It already surpassed SR its on its way to 500 million. It still has a lot of places where it hasn't open yet.

Making a shitty movie that has a high gross take or even a high net take doesn't mean anything other than a lot of people wanted a movie to be good and were sold on what they thought it could be. It also means that there are a lot of gullible people and a perhaps a lot of tasteless people.

I think whatever it's take ultimately is is largely due to what people think they got rather than what they really got. I can see how it can appeal to some people to have a live action CGI superman in a superbattle, but other than that there isn't much else in terms of it's actual content that is worth anything and in the long run it will likely be forgotten.

Jeez man, you already made it crystal clear that you don't like the movie, but must you curse? At least censor it.

Your opinion doesn't equal everyone's. You probably like a movie that I think its sh*tty, that doesn't mean I'll call you tasteless because you like it, its just your personal preference.

@sandman_ said:

I will use whatever word I like that adequately fits what I'm talking about.

Look at my post before that last one and I clearly distinguish that there is a difference between something being good and something that I like. Liking and not liking is an opinion. Good and Bad is a factual claim. It's the same thing with things like cooking. People do like foods that are badly prepared, but that doesn't mean that the food is suddenly prepared well because someone, or even the majority likes it. Those people who tend to like these things that are badly prepared... we call them tasteless, especially when they like lots of bad things and can't distinguish between what they like and what is good.

As to me liking bad movies. Yup. I like tons of bad movies. I however don't call them good or think that because it had a writer, artists, director, what have you that it must be good. Especially when people can point out bad directing, editing, writing, etc all over the place in that movie or whatever I'm talking about.

Really alot of tasteless people this is the crap i hate elitist that think there taste in film is superior then others here we go -__- i am pretty sure MOS will be remember superman killing zod that forever immortalized this film period you may disagree but i dont care that's my opinion just like its yours. But to pull the very common BS of i have better taste in film which is what your freaking saying really made me not care about your discussion if your gonna pull this type of crap and not respect film has subjective your speaking objective BS. So i will not respond t you Drekken cause your the same person that will say i have no taste cause i thought some parts in the Avengers and the Dark Knight where pretty BS in my opinion see the key word my opinion. Have a good day Drekken sir

@durakken: Yes, but this site doesn't allow it. Or would you like a mod to explain it to you?

That can all be boiled down to personal preference. :D

I never wrote that you like bad movies, just movies that I probably won't like. There is a difference. Question, did you like The Avenger and TDKR?

@drudox19 said:

It readily apparent you didn't read what I wrote. Liking something doesn't make it good. Being good doesn't mean that people like it. People like to think that artistic stuff is subjective but it isn't. There is clearly better ways of drawing, directing, acting, singing, writing, editing, whatever art form you want to talk about. There are ways of doing things that are better than other ways. It's not elitist.

Also, At the very least spell my name correctly. Why should I or anyone take you seriously when you can't even be bothered to do that much?

@sandman_: Please follow what I'm saying. Like is an opinion. Good or Bad is factual.

TDKR is a bad movie, so bad that it makes the rest of the trilogy it belongs to bad. I didn't enjoy it. I did however enjoy the other 2 movies before I started looking at them critically.

Avengers is a good movie. I also found it enjoyable, but upon trying to watch it a second time, not so much.

The Room and Fast and Furious 6 are both bad movies according to most people, but most find them enjoyable.

If you don't like what I like I don't care. Just don't say something is good because you enjoy it. You enjoying something doesn't mean it's good. Thinking that it does is the thing that leads to the limiting of art work and generally thinking that you enjoying something means that it is good or bad leads to people being tasteless because they do not develop their palette and think only things that elicit exhilaration and excitement are good and that simply isn't true.

Also I didn't say that if you like MoS you are tasteless. I said that people generally are tasteless and that it leads to things that are bad appearing to do good, at least economically. That's also compounded with the fact that a majority of the money coming in is not the result of the movie being good or bad. It's the result of the trailer appearing to be good and people thinking that it could be good or wanting it to be good. Think about it a little, how can a measure of how many people spent to go see a movie be a measure of how good that movie is if that money was taken before the movie was seen?

@durakken: We agree on something. TDKR sucked and Avengers is nothing special really.

Heh, The Room is bad, but its so bad its actually enjoyable of how bad it is. The FAF movies are meh.

Again personal taste.

Ok. You seem to be a person who over analyzes everything. Not that its bad or anything, but it can sometimes hinder you enjoyment. I'll take MOS for what it is, a Superman punching movie. If the movie enjoys me when I walk out of the theater then I think it did its job. But I'll say this, at least you are criticizing the movie for its flaws, not because it isn't a re harsh Donner movie like many seem to have though so.

Agree to disagree then? You will not convince me and neither will I. You did bring up good points and I will think about them, but I will still like the movie. :/

I don't agree with all of these points, but I think this does a good job of expressing how I feel:

@sandman_: I actually watch and enjoy a lot of bad stuff, or at least used to. I tend not to have the TV on in the background as much, but I used to just leave Disney or one of those channels on and they have notoriously bad movies, but I enjoy them. Over analyzing things doesn't ruin my enjoyment because I tend not to analyze while watching, but rather later when I talk about it. I can't enjoy horror movies because I see right through most of the effects and that ends up looking funnier than scary ^.^

As to good vs enjoy... I find that the language doesn't support discussion about the distinction and I think people have a hard time wrapping their head around the idea that something they don't like is good even though we can can and do make the distinction naturally. You can for example listen to a music genre that you hate, but can tell which tracks of that genre is better than others. Not everyone will have an exact match, but generally speaking good music of a genre will almost always be roughly similarly placed in ranking universally.

As for critiquing it... I take creative pieces for what they are. I only maintain that the characters (which includes a city) should be recognizable as that character even if noone names them or dresses them how they've always been dressed. I think Donner does a better job showing and keeping those characters, but the general premise of the story of MoS is probably better and it definitely is workable to make it better than it, but there are so many flaws and things that just aren't right that it's really apparent.

While I agree that we disagree and that you might not be able to have your mind changed I'm ready willing and able to listen and change my mind if someone gives me convincing reasons as why these flaws aren't flaws and not only aren't they flaws but they are somehow great when they need explaining to make them good or ignorance to not notice them as flaws in the first place. That sounds like a dig, but really it's another critique. Analyzing art shouldn't make it worse, but better, it shouldn't reveal flaws but new ways to look at something or places where the art to go.

Don't know what you're saying, What does TDKR has anything to do with MoS?

@biteme_fanboy: I can understand your position, but I can't say I am in that boat. I have wanted a good Superman movie where there is no time travel, land grab schemes, saran wrap S shields, or great wall vision for so long, that this is like Manna from the skies for me.

It's a shame some people can't/won't see past their own preconceived notions of what they think Superman should be. Personally, as a huge Batman fan, Man of Steel is a better film than Batman Begins.

Dont worry TDKR bashing is pretty common across comic sites,most comic fans want to believe that it was the second coming of Batman and Robin when in reality critical acclaim puts it barely below it's predecessor.

MoS was amazing.

And Superman had literally no other choice then to kill Zod.

@smart_dork_dude: Funny how you say film is art and art is subjective and then bash people who didn't like it for the next couple paragraphs. Many people have legitimate reasons that clearly aren't based on fanboyism.

I liked everything that guy said up until the part about 9/11.

I couldn't be bothered watching after that, it was too ridiculous that guy who seemed as smart as him would say something so idiotic.

The people wanted this again and get mad they cante get back to the past

People are allowed to bash movies, including this one. It's their opinion. And batman has nothing to do with it, why is he always brought into conversations about superman?

Well I think it was a good movie :P

Treat it as an elsewhere story, if you find this Superman not to be up to your standards.

Or just ignore it completely. Either way I cant wait for the sequel^^

I was simply shocked by how many people harped on the flashbacks. They acted as if it was too confusing and jarring to follow the story, but most of them were the same people who were complaining before the movie released that they didn't want to see the whole origin story again. It's as if they suddenly forgot what non-linear storytelling was when they decided that they wanted to hate this movie. Just goes to show that you can't appease people who have already decided to hate the thing you're giving them. I believe it was Mahatma Gandhi who said, "Haters gonna hate." In the end, you just can't get bogged down in the hate. If you like it, no one can stop you, and if they're the kind of person who can't respect your opinion and needs to know that you're as unhappy about everything as they are, then you need to get off the internet right away, 'cause it's PACKED with those people. If somebody else wants to stay on the ground forever, that's their problem. Me?

I only see people like this on game sites, and comic sites

"Bad tastes"

"Tasteless people"

(a movie gets good reviews and makes money at the same time)

"it was over hyped"

I don't know if it is just a thing with smart people, but many of the gamers and comic people I speak to are brilliant but arrogant, they talk down about anything they can, they call other people tasteless or say their movie tastes are bad, and make what they said is fact, when really it is an opinion that is articulate and smart making it sound like a fact.

That's really the downside of talking to other comic book people at times, their flat out arrogance.

People can dislike things all they want, I love a debate as much as the next guy, but no need to insult people and try to pass off your thoughts as facts.

OK I liked MoS VERY much. But I disagree with killing Zod.

1. People say reeve killed zod in superman II. This is false. After kicking him in the fortress, he spins back time so they are never released and Lois doesn't know his identity.

2. People say "he killed before in comics". It was once and he EXILED HIMSELF TO SPACE. We didn't get that same depression in the movie.

3. "What else could he have done?" "He didn't have a choice." Okay, many people find this logical. But SUPERMAN DOES NOT HAVE THAT MINDSET. Superman will always try and find an alternative. He has hope for those that we would call hopeless, so he won't kill, typically.

So that's my rant. Please give feedback if you feel I'm wrong. Again I enjoyed the movie