So, what about Superman remains constant? His suit has changed. But he still has a suit. The S symbol is stranger and meshy. But it is still the S symbol. He doesn't fight for truth, justice and the American way. But he is still fighting for the human way. He inspires hope differently. But he still inspires hope. "Krypton had it's chance" and it lost that chance because it took away the element of chance. There is the one resounding word throughout all of Man of Steel, dare I say it, the one constant word? When he was a boy and bullied for being different, it was not because he looked different or acted different, there was just something about him that felt off. Like that one guy in my Grade 10 year who was trying to be a bully in a school full of people trying to be thugs. He moved to Prince George. He felt off. We did not give him a chance because we could not afford to. Look I love Man of Steel and I'm not trying to be philosophical right here or anything. All I really want is for you to watch this video:
But the fact remains is that people bash Man of Steel for being too much like Transformers: Age of Extinction. They are trying to say it is stupid. So I'm not here to defend the film, I'm here to tell you WhatCulture, that if your going to try and bash a movie because it's 'stupid', try and make sure it is first. Now I could talk about how even minor characters like Faora or Jenny have enough character development to make them important. Sorry WhatCulture, I guess this article is actually being sent to the Nostalgia Critic. Well, I mean, I'm guessing everybody realized he was full of bullshit after he said the new Spider-Man films were better than the old ones. But hey, everybody deserves a chance, right? So lets get started. What exactly defines a stupid movie? Well, dumb dialogue, more uninteresting characters than interesting ones, horrible direction, a load of Jack Black and an incoherent story dictation that makes much of what you've seen nonsense and yourself looking back at the years wondering if it was all worth it? Man of Steel does not have any of that in large degrees. A lot of dumb dialogue, check. I mean it's written by David Goyer, which is why I can expect Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, written by Chris Terrio to be a much more intelligent film in that regard. But the reason most of the dialogue appears dull and bland is because Goyer was trying to make inspirational quotes that people would put on kitty posters and try and have people quote them like they do Gandalf or yeah, Batman. Why do people quote The Dark Knight Rises? Well, it's because the quotes that were meant to be intentional were far and few and stuck and those that weren't did because they didn't come off as forward as: "That's what the symbol means... hope". So, the dialogue isn't bad, it's just that when it tries to be smart it ends up not being that. Just because of a few choppy quotes though, the movie is not stupid.What is stupid is that the idiocy of some of these quotes remains quite constant throughout.
Now lets go to uninteresting characters. Unfortunately Man of Steel had a major character who was boring: Lois Lane. Others were minor and forgivable, but Lois Lane was just so unfortunate that I find myself wondering, maybe it's better if they go the comic route and have Superman end up with Wonder Woman. Just one main uninteresting character, though. Many comic fans will punch you if you called Faora uninteresting. Superman himself, people said had no character development and was bland. An unfortunate lie, but I can't change those peoples minds and if I delve further into the topic, the worse it will be for the internet. Jor-El was cool enough and Michael Shannon ripped it up as General Zod and even though we never learned about his past, the fact is, I want to. That's how interesting he was. So, one bland character makes a movie stupid? Saying that like you mean it makes you seem stupid, whether you are or not is a different matter. It just makes you seems stupid.
No Jack Black. CHECK!
As for story coherence. The story was well done, intricate enough that it did not get labyrinthine. The only thing that might have confused people were the people who were told by their parents that genetic modification is just a myth. It was straightforward, Clark hears something that might relate to his past, checks it out. This draws Zod and his crew who give him a choice, finally belong and be a part of his own people, or choose those who will always shun him, despite their overall innocence. That seems like a very well done story to me.
So, if you want to bash the movie, don't just say it's stupid. Take one of the points I have placed in a paragraph and explain why you think one of those points makes the movie wrong for cinema.