MAGNIFICENTLY DARK AND DIFFERENT: A NEW LIGHT ON SUPERMAN

How Man of Steel touched ground and gave enlightenment through darkness

It’s pretty ironic that Man of Steel is the subject of my first movie review given that I’m not a Superman fan. Still, I feel pressed (and inspired) to write about it. It just really left an impression on me.

NOTE: Spoilers ahead.

NARRATION STYLE

As many have said, MoS is really different from the Superman movie and TV series we all have watched. Perhaps, it is because Nolan and Goyer wrote it and Snyder took the chair.

My family and I came to the theater expecting a movie that starts from Kal-El’s birth up to his maturity as Superman. We got that but in a different manner. Yes, it began with his birth but once he left Krypton, everything was fast-paced, actually skipping. I was starting to get disappointed because after the scenes in Krypton, Kal-El already became greenhorn –a moniker he got while working on a fishing ship here on Earth. ‘Work’ meaning he was already around his 30s. Then he went on to save a handful of men while at sea– his first rescue mission as the movie rolled. However, when he fainted and dropped into the sea and had a flashback of his childhood, that’s when I understood the style of the film and the strategy to separate it from the Superman movies of the past. The movie decided to show Kal-El as a mature Clark Kent and only flashed back to childhood memories that were of great significance: childhood scenes which would explain why he became ‘Superman’ in the literal and metaphorical meaning of the word. The flashbacks were triggered by scenes or dialogs familiar to the characters like the school bus that passed by when Clark was at the sidewalk after regaining consciousness from his fall after his first rescue mission, or the dialog where Martha Kent told our superhero that his adoptive father Jonathan Kent foresaw his great future.

DIFFERENT TAKE

As this piece will repeatedly say, MoS is really different from the Superman flicks we have been used to.

Krypton

Starting with Krypton which we know as a foreign Iceland, the movie showed the planet as the opposite. It was like a planet of fire though not literally (except for its final moments). It came across to me as a hot and exhausted planet waiting to be consumed, making its expiry logical. It mixed technology with fantasy with the presence of aircrafts and strange airborne animals. The dark take on the planet was unique but admittedly, I wanted to see the old Krypton because I liked its coldness and purity.

S logo

It was refreshing that MoS gave the logo meaning except for the obvious. Plus, it’s interesting that they chose it to represent hope.

Characters’ Changes

Superman/Clark Kent 

          As Clark Kent, our superhero donned a beard. The past actors who played the role were all clean looking. It can be taken as a symbolization of his years wandering trying to find out who he really was or it could just simply be a disguise or still, it could be both.

As Superman, his suit was altered. No more trunks. For me, that change gave a more masculine look to our superhero. The change of color did the same. It made Superman look more serious and human. Having the similar suit as General Zod and the others made his costume make sense. It didn’t just happen to be designed that way; it (blue suit) was the inner suit for Kryptonian soldiers as seen in the general during his final scenes with Superman. They also had the cape. Going to the hair, the signature ‘kiss-curl’ was also dropped. That was also a great change, for me.

Another thing I really liked was that the movie gave a logical explanation why his weakness was his weakness. His body had been exposed for too long to Earth’s atmosphere that it cannot readapt to Kryptonian atmosphere of any kind thus making him weak to it.

With his relationship with Lois Lane, he was not instantly drawn to her. During their first encounter, he was focused on discovering his origins and didn’t want to be sidetracked. He also tried to resist knowing her perhaps because of possible dangers to both of them and he didn’t know if he could trust her.

Lois Lane

        She’s not a brunette and has a role other than being a damsel in distress and Superman’s love interest. She was ‘put to use’ when Jor-El taught her how Zod and his forces could be stopped from destroying Earth as it was. It was also refreshing that she was given her own fight scenes though they were few.

Moreover, she became a confidant of Superman before becoming his ladylove. She provided him the comfort and trust he needed and didn’t think possible. She knew the personality and mystery of Clark before Superman – one major positive change in the plot. Plus, I saw Lois as a reporter when she tracked down Clark Kent; I saw the ‘nose for news’, curiosity, and fearlessness of a reporter in her in this movie.

Jonathan Kent 

           The only change I saw with this character was the nature of his death. As I said, I’m not a fan of Superman and thus, haven’t read the comics. I’m not sure if Mr. Kent’s death was in line with what has been stated in the comics. Nonetheless, he still played a key role in honing the man Clark came to be.

Jor-El

           He had more scenes here compared to the previous films. He was more than just a voice-over. The movie allowed viewers to know much more of his great intellect and courage. It was also interesting that he had a meaningful interaction with Lois Lane that was the key in stopping Zod and his men from destroying Earth.

General Zod and his forces

       They had armors unlike the previous characters making them look stronger and more threatening. Plus, they had a clear motive other than vengeance for conquering Earth; they were honed to be soldiers and protectors of Krypton and were obliged to live up to their role.

Relationships

Lois/Superman 

        Their relationship really saw great improvement. Both of them weren’t just head over heels for each other from the start. They built their relationship from acquaintances to friends with trust then obviously, to lovers (as shown by the short-but-passionate kiss at the end). The scene after Zod died wherein Superman was in grief for killing him and Lois comforted him with a hug, showed genuine concern on Lois’s part.

The nature of their meeting and how their relationship grew from acquaintances to lovers was laid well.

Jor-El/Kal-El 

         The biological father and son had more interaction in this movie. Jor-El wasn’t just a father who died early and came back through his consciousness. They had key conversations that influenced Superman’s decision of who he should be to humans.

Jonathan Kent/Clark Kent 

        This is where I was a bit disappointed because they were the opposite of Jor-El and Kal-El. They had few interactions. However, even though their scenes together were only few, they were all significant. The tornado scene was the most touching scene for me. It showed self-sacrifice and love in the actions of Jonathan; and helplessness, agony, and regret in the actions of Clark. Jonathan was willing to die to protect Clark’s identity; Clark was willing to reveal himself to save his adoptive father but out of love and respect, he followed his father’s last instruction to allow death to happen.

DOWNSIDE

Fight Scenes

For me, the only two unbiased downsides in the movie are first, the fight scenes which, I believe, were cut short. Perhaps, they were teasers to Zod and Superman’s final battle that really went on and on and gave the audience the complete package of a superhero fight scene they’ve been longing for as the movie played.

Futhermore, I was not convinced with Zod’s death. Although it can be justified that someone can be killed in such a way, I was expecting a ‘grander and darker’ way of his death. I’m not sure if anyone else has the same opinion given the traditional image of Superman; perhaps, I’m just used to watching movies with villains dying in that way.

Flashbacks

Second, the flashback style may not sit well with some viewers who are used to a single flow of scenes in a movie.

CONCLUSION

For an analytical person, I liked MoS because it enlightened viewers as to why the things in the movie were the way they were like the S logo, Superman’s suit, his weakness, General Zod’s plan to conquer the world, etc. It made the realities of the movie more grounded and logical. It gave justification to the details. Overall, I give it an A- rating for its boldness, darkness, and humanness.

Furthermore, their choice to not literally show the step-by-step transformation of Kal-El to Clark Kent to Superman was obviously a strategy to separate the movie from the previous ones. It was effective; although I for one wanted to see the crash landing of Kal-El’s spaceship and he lifting the truck while still a toddler.

It is still quite unbelievable that I made a review for Man of Steel but as I mentioned earlier, I felt pressed to write one. The movie earned it. I commend the cast and crew of MoS for their boldness in portraying the all-American hero and his story in a light very different from what generations of moviegoers are used to without losing the essence of Superman’s identity and story. Personally, I think the darkness and sadness of the movie made it more relatable.

My advice for those who are knowledgeable of previous Superman movies, is to try to be unbiased as you watch MoS. If you do, you’ll just feel more dismay than appreciation for the film. Try to watch the film only for what it is without the obvious expectations. Superman’s suit alone should give you a hint that it is a different film from the previous ones. Still, whether you have expectations or not, it is inevitable that you will leave the cinema house impressed. ;)

NOTE: All images used are borrowed and belong to their respective owners.