Guilty by Association: A case for Man of Steel

With the release of Wonder Woman, the DC Extended Universe (DCEU) has finally delivered its first great film, rightly receiving both critical praise and (at this early stage) serious commercial success, which will hopefully result in at least one sequel. Wonder Woman proved to be the perfect answer to the missteps of both Batman V Superman and Suicide Squad and will hopefully guide the DCEU going forward.

There have been four DCEU films so far. Wonder Woman; an undoubted home run and one of the best comic book films out there. Batman V Superman; a trilogy of films condensed into a tonally chaotic mess that has Batman using guns. Suicide Squad; the lesser of 2016’s two evils and Man of Steel; the film you don’t remember correctly.

But don’t worry, you are not alone.

“Man of Steel is a bumpy ride for sure. But there's no way to stay blind to its wonders.” Peter Travers – Rolling Stone

Because quite simply, Man of Steel is nowhere near as bad as you think it is, if anything, it is guilty by association. Which is being associated with Batman V Superman. It may not belong among the genres greats, but does not deserve the derision it receives.

Before we get to the negative, lets talk about the positive and the parts of the film that worked unequivocally, as the later far outweighs the former.

Krypton. Oh, how that sequence just works, yes there are few strange zoom shots of Jor-El flying a giant dragon/butterfly creature, but other than that, it just gets it right. The film treats Krypton seriously and instantly introduces the smaller character stakes (Jor-El trying to save his son) and the bigger, world stakes (Jor-El trying to save his planet) and continues to ramp them up, right until the final shot. Russell Crowe and Michael Shannon bring their characters to life in such interesting ways that they instil their relationship and the world with so much history, that when he catch up with them later, interacting with Superman, it feels like a direct continuation of Kryptons final moments.

“The casting is impeccable, beginning with Cavill as an uncommonly brooding but refreshingly deep Superman. The script doesn't give him much to say, but it doesn't need to.”  Peter Howell – Toronto Star

While I’ve touched on Crowe and Shannon and what they brought to the film, it’s hard to find a cast member who didn’t deliver in Man of Steel. Like Batman Begins and Superman: The Movie, all of the roles are filed with top level actors and they all bring an immediate history to their roles, especially Kevin Costner, who draws on similar fatherly characters he has played in the past, but brings in a confusion and doubt that we rarely in him as he struggles to come to terms with keeping his son safe, but also helping him become the man he could be.

“[Cavill is] a superb choice for someone who needs to convincingly convey innate modesty, occasional confusion and eventual strength.” Kenneth Turan – LA Times

Henry Cavill takes over the iconic suit, but is the first person since Christopher Reeve to play the character on screen in a different way. This Superman isn’t instantly sure of himself and has doubts over who he is and what he can be. Cavill plays it with frustrated restraint of someone who knows physically what he can do, but knows that he has to keep it secret even though he can’t help but help the people he comes across. Its only when we see him in the suit that he begins to see the man both his fathers hoped he would become, a man sure in his beliefs and someone who wants to do good.

“David S. Goyer's screenplay benefits from Goyer's ambitious script structure, a thing of interwoven flashbacks and memory-triggered leaps into Superman's past.” Michael Phillips – Chicago Tribune

Like the best origin films, it focuses on its central character and keeps the plot under control and Man of Steel does that. After the Kryptonian prologue, the first half of the film follows Clark/Kal-El through the years, much like Batman Begins did with Bruve Wayne, from painful formative moments in childhood, to later points in time closer to he will become where the character discovers important information about himself that inform who he is (The Kryptonian ship in Man of Steel and the League of Shadows training in Batman Begins). The second half then focuses on the threat from Zod and his army as we finally get to see the hero cut loose, for good or bad and discover what he is capable of.

“There’s very little humor or joy in this Superman story.”  Richard Roeper – Chicago Sun Times

The central criticisms that were raised against Man of Steel from its release up to know were, the level and depiction of the destruction during the finale and how Superman didn’t save as many people as he should have and the lack of fun and joy in a story about a character who traditionally has belonged on the brighter side of hero spectrum.

“The crowd at a "Man of Steel" preview the other night exited the theater not excited, not chatty, but quiet, vaguely shellshocked. Was it the ridiculously loud volume levels? Or the pounding inflicted by the most protracted action sequences? Or both?” Michael Phillips – Chicago Tribune

The criticism of the finale is one I can understand as Zack Synder approached the battle between Superman and Zod in a “realistic” way. Buildings collapsed, people died and everything was coated in a ghostly concrete dust, no doubt calling on images and memories from 9/11 and warzones around the globe. For some this imagery could be too much and while it wasn’t upsetting for myself, it would be stupid and cold-hearted to not see that some people could be affected by it. It was no doubt intended, but was it intended to deliberately offend and upset? No. It stayed true to the tone of the world and the story it took place in.

Let’s not forget that the final confrontation is two near-invincible beings knocking twelve bells out of each other in the middle of a densely populated city, where one of the near-invincible beings has made it clear that he is going to kill a lot of innocent people, making them suffer along the way, unless the other near-invincible being stops him. Zod, by this point has lost everything, has nothing to lose and wants to punish Superman as much as he can by hurting the people he has adopted as his own, choosing them over the Kryptonian people. 

Superman is left in a no win situation, no doubt deliberately engineered by Zod, he can either save the people from crumbling remains of Metropolis after the failed terraforming, or go after Zod, the tangible, immediate threat. Unsurprisingly, Superman Zod, without much attention given to the people of Metropolis. While this isn’t a complete misstep, it was a missed opportunity to show off Superman’s full potential. But the fight shows us that this is all new to him, where an when an experienced Superman would have acted differently. The moment that stands out the most for me is the fuel truck that he easily floats over, allowing it to crash into a building. It would have taken nothing for Superman to stop it, but he chooses to avoid it, focusing on himself and Zod, causing needless destruction and putting lives at risk. Even an inexperienced Superman wouldn’t have made this decision, in this moment, he is angry and wants to stop Zod and it would have, at least to me, felt more natural for him to use it as a weapon. But also, this is only second real fight Superman has been in and it is against a much smarter tactician in Zod. Superman making mistakes and learning from them was something that we would have seen looked at and explored in a sequel I’m sure. If we had gotten one that is.

Timing didn’t help this style of finale, a year earlier The Avengers had used a very similar style of climax, where the number of civilian casualties is meant to be dramatically lower, there are several scenes that show The Avengers saving civilians from the alien invaders. I don’t remember seeing any innocents being hurt, never mind killed during The Avengers finale, but in Man of Steel there is undeniably a high body count as the gods do battle in the skies above. I’m not arguing for against either one, both of them fit the tone of the story that has come before and feels like a natural progression and culmination of those stories.

As I mentioned before and what was an important thematic element for the film is that Superman is till coming to terms with who he is and understanding what he is truly capable of. From his discovery of the Kryptonian ship through to the end of the battle in Metropolis, a matter of days pass and while he has tested his powers, he has never been tested on a scale anywhere near what he experiences in the second half of Man of Steel.

Putting the timescale into perspective, within days of finally discovering who you are, an army of your own people turn up and threaten the planet and people that have taken you in and where you have made your choice. Every question you ever wanted to ask to better understand yourself could be answered. Also, there are moments of joy and fun and upbeat, they are just used moderately, in keeping with the tone of the story. Clark learning to fly as his father talks to him (also one of the greatest Superman moments in a film), is a scene steeped in it. Then final scenes where Clark tells Martha that he knows what he is going to do with his life and where we, the audience finally get the feeling that Clark knows who he is and where he belongs.

But in between those moments, is a man trying to come to terms with what he is and who he is, while the fate of the world depends upon the decisions he makes. Realistically, not a situation conducive to a story over flowing with joyful moments, it is a story of inner struggle (and yes, “Gods” knocking each other about) and self-discovery.

I won’t be so blind as to say that nothing could have been done differently or changed for the better, there are few that I regularly think of when Man of Steel pops into my head. I’d have liked to have seen the Superman and Lois scene in the interrogation room go on longer, the hand held style at points didn’t work for me, although that isn’t specific to Man of Steel, it is just a style that I find is very hard to make work. Although it did give Man of Steel a visual style that sets it apart from the rest of the genre. Finally, the finally, for me would have been stronger, if it was a bit shorter, but also if there was more of Henry Cavill and Michael Shannon fighting practically during the finale. I realise with these characters, some aspects just couldn’t have been done, but for me the best parts of the fight is when we get up close and personal with Zod and Superman (like the construction site and the train station).

I’ll drop into spoiler territory for this paragraph. But the way that Superman stops the fight came in for a bit flack, although that was mainly from people arguing “Superman would never kill”, or “Superman wouldn’t do that”. But this is a new Superman in a new world and the threat that he and humanity face is unique, spectacularly aggressive and near unstoppable. The prior battle has shown us what destruction Zod can and will cause and faced with the situation at the end, between Zod and innocents. Superman makes the only choice he could. Zod knew what he was doing, he created the situation, Superman was running out of time and options and made the choice he felt he had to.

Where the character would have gone after he comes to terms with effectively killed off the last his species was a great weight, thread to explore and dive in to in the next film. But it never truly found out the effect this had on Superman and that is perhaps the true cost of getting Batman V Superman, for all the early hype and people exalting that we would finally see the two greatest superheroes meet and fight on the big screen, was that we were denied a true sequel to Man of Steel. 

While Batman V Superman may have touched on, or used part of these questions or ideas in its film, that was such a wide array of directions they could go in and consequences and developments that could be explored. The ones that were used, but all to sparingly or prematurely dropped was the Senate/House hearings, the developing relationship between Lois and Clark and the world in general adjusting to having a god amongst them. But also, they could looked at the potential religious angle to Superman appearing and the forming of a church or belief structure devoted to him, how world leaders and politicians would respond to a powerful force they can’t control. Hopefully, one day we will get a sequel that puts Superman front and centre again, it may be the upcoming Justice League, but I’m not holding out much hope.

Superman, also wasn’t a financial failure, it made around $668m worldwide, which isn’t bad for a reboot of a character that needed  bringing into the modern world. Batman Begins by comparison made $374m and Iron Man $585m, although they both received more critical praise than Man of Steel, $668m surely shouldn’t have been that bad of a performance to cause Warner Bros. to panic and press the Batman button.

Ultimately, what we got from Batman V Superman was a trilogy of films (Man of Steel 2, a rebooted Batman film and then a Batman/Superman film) which has kneecapped the Man of Steel series and gave us a portrayal of Batman that was closer to The Punisher than Batman. Although, it did give us Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and that is something to be truly thankful for.

Hopefully, the Wonder Woman team will be given the time, patience and support that The Dark Knight team were given and allowed to make at least one more film that focuses on Diana and her world, it’s rich enough and unique enough to do that, without trying to jam in any other Justice League characters.

So go and see Wonder Woman, if you’ve seen it already, go see it again and let the people in charge know that we want another Wonder Woman film that puts her front and centre. Then, go and watch Man of Steel again. You’ll be surprised.

Man of Steel

Superman has always been my number two comic book hero, and in all honesty will probably always occupy that spot behind Batman. In terms of films, Superman has largely lagged behind Batman, only really offering two great additions to the genre (Superman The Movie and Superman 2), but with Man of Steel, the creative team behind The Dark Knight trilogy and Zack Snyder aim to help the first ever superhero to close that gap and take his place at the top table.

In Man of Steel, we follow Clark Kent from his birth on Krypton amidst a military coup, his journey through space, his formative years in Smallville and his search across the globe to find out who his biological parents and he was sent to Earth. Meanwhile, the events of Krypton, which I won’t spoil, ultimately leads General Zod to Earth in search of Kal El.

It’s a big role to fill in the eyes of both the general public and the more hardcore fan, but Henry Cavill has taken on the role of Superman (although he is only referred to as this once in the whole film, and apologetically at that) and truly making it his own, by taking the core elements of the character and updating it for the current time. One of the most original aspects of the portrayal, as well as the way the character is written, is his loneliness and growing isolation with the people of earth. This is something that wasn’t touched upon by any of the previous films, but is a key part the of best Superman stories (Kingdom Come by Mark Waid is a key text for the subject). But the journey through the film that Clark/Kal takes is the one of the most enjoyable and rich origin stories ever put to film.

Although, not all of Clarks character arc falls on the very strong shoulders of Cavill. Cooper Timberline and Dylan Sprayberry are the two young actors (who play a 9 and 13 year old Kal El) who have some major scenes that really shape the viewers opinions on Clark and are instrumental in gaining their sympathies and support.

Both have a key scene with one of the Kent’s, Timberline has a scene with Diane Lane, some of which was seen in the trailers, where she has to talk him down after some of his powers suddenly manifest themselves and he begins hearing everyone’s voices. Sprayberry spends more time with Costner’s Jonathan Kent, including a scene that features the infamous “maybe” line. It’s in these scenes that we see the difficult upbringing and childhood that Clark had, as he fought against his powers and his parents tried to keep them a secret to keep him safe.

The structure Man of Steel follows a similar structure to Batman Begins, with the first half cutting back and forth between three of four timelines, introducing a number of plot threads, which then breaks into the single driving events of the second half. This last half and everything that is at stake all comes as a result of the various triumphs and tragedies that have led Clark Kent to this point.

With all comic book films, a lot of responsibility lies on the shoulders of the villain. No matter how good your hero is, if he has no one struggle with or test him, then there is no tension or true stakes. Luckily for Man of Steel, Michael Shannon is on his best form, not only is he threatening and dangerous, but in a warped way his reasoning is completely understandable. He is the hero of his own story. His sole purpose is to protect Krypton and he is willing and capable of doing anything to make that happen. Shannon goes from calm and methodical, to crazed and emotional effortlessly, more remarkably, none of these transitions feel forced, but give us a fully rounded, almost sympathetic villain.

It’s no surprise that the story starts on Krypton, the original Superman did and so it feels only natural that the next version of his origin should once again begin there. That, apart from the destruction and Kal El being sent into space, is where the similarities end.

This sequence is amazing; it condenses so much history and social structure into ten or fifteen minutes, along with several action sequences that will leave you wanting more. This is down to the interplay between Crowe and Shannon, as well as Ayelet Zurer (Lara Lor Van, Kal El’s mother), which hints at a long and interesting relationship, twisted by differing ethics and morals, but united by a common understanding of Krypton’s fate.

Lois Lane can draw a similar response as Catwoman from some viewers, you either get the character and her interpretation, or you actively rebel against it, finding them clichéd as they try to force a strong woman into a male dominated narrative. With Amy Adams performance, we don’t get any of the irritating or helpless heroine that at times has plagued the character.

But instead we get a strong, independent journalist who you could see travelling the globe, searching out stories and chasing down this one of a guardian angel. In future films, this role and relationship with Clark is going to grow and could easily become one of the strengths of the series.

Man of Steel is huge, in fact that is a bit of an understatement, it’s an epic that spans not only our planet, but also other planets and another dimension. One of the criticisms of Superman Returns was that there wasn’t enough action, which is a fair criticism of that film, Man of Steel doesn’t make that mistake, it goes big, real big. The battle of Smallville is probably the highlight as we finally get to see Kal El’s powers in full force on screen. Buildings are torn apart, trains thrown through the air and fighter jets brought down left and right. Although, this seems to be a bit much for some people, who have found the level of action and violence in points to be too much, skewing the other way in terms of action content. It seems that some people can’t be satisfied.

This film is as much about Clark and his life going forward, as it is the story of his parents, all four of them. Of the three that Clark meets and talks to, they all pull him in different directions, offering their guidance and viewpoints, but never telling Clark what to do. They let him decide what he wants to, to aspire to be whatever he wants to.

Russell Crowes Jor El is so different from Marlon Brando’s that they almost feel like different characters; the only thing they share is their love for their son and the willingness to do anything to keep him safe. This Jor El is as physically capable as he is mentally, equally adept at arguing his case with Zod and the Kryptonian council, as he is fighting off anyone who stands between him and his sons safety. Another great part of this version is that we get to spend a lot of time with him, I won’t say how, but it’s in a similar way to the crystals from the previous films. It would be fair to say that Crowe almost steals the show.

Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent may seem like one of those obvious bits of casting, and maybe it was, but it pays off for Snyder, as Jonathan becomes the voice of reason as well as the heart of film, who above all wants Clark to be safe. I could go on about this performance, but watch the ‘Tornado’ sequence, a largely dialogue free scene, that shows Jonathan Kent at his most important and Costner at his best.

The easiest way I can sum up this film is in two quick comments, firstly I am going to go and see this film again as soon as I can and secondly, GO AND SEE THIS FILM NOW. This film will sit along side The Dark Knight Trilogy, and hopefully spawn sequels of a similar quality, in spite of an apparent craving for a Justice League film.

Believe in Superman, he is definitely back to his best.

Worlds Finest?

Earlier this week a story broke regarding Warner Bros and their hopes for a Justice League film. Initially, with the throwing out of Will Beall’s script, that the project was dead, how wrong we could be, as El Mayimbe from website Latino Review broke news that the project was still alive, but looked a little different, it was no longer the full Justice League but instead a World’s Finest film (Superman and Batman). The obvious casting of Henry Cavill as Superman had long been accepted in any version of this project, but when the name of who would be picking up the Cowl came out, that was the big news. Christian Bale was returning and if rumours were true, Christopher Nolan and David S Goyer were coming back with him.

By the sounds of it, the cast would feature Bale as Bruce/Batman, Cavill as Clark/Superman and I imagine some sort of composite of the cast from the previous films, plus some new faces. I wouldn’t bet against a certain bald man turning up during this film. Behind the camera is where it sounds the most promising, early indications are that Zack Snyder will take the directors chair, with David Goyer writing the script and Christopher Nolan producing, although with Goyer and Nolan’s track record of working together, I’m sure we will see them both working on the story.

With Bale and Nolan returning and Batman being involved, it seems as though it will be their Bruce Wayne that is returning to the screen , bringing back their version of the character, whose arc was so perfectly tied up at the end of The Dark Knight Rises. Essentially what we are getting here is both a sequel to TDKR and a sequel to Man of Steel.

As The Dark Knight Trilogy was brought to an end and most of it’s storylines concluded, bringing back this world, which admittedly looks similar  (at least in the trailers) to the world ofMan of Steel, means opening up these characters lives once again and following them through some new ordeal.

The main problem is that you have to essentially bring Bruce, as well as Selina, out of retirement in a certain way that doesn’t compromise the end of their story. As for how this could be done, I have no idea and thankfully that responsibility is not on my shoulders.

The other big issue, which the first would ultimately be tied to, is what happened to John Blake after he gets into the cave. Any continuation of this world has to deal with what became of him, as it promised so much possibility as to what kind of person he would become. In World’s Finest, we will need some sort of answer to this question, maybe he has failed, maybe he needs help, or maybe the threat doesn’t affect Gotham City.

Also, the belief that both Bruce and Batman are dead could be a problem, but one that would be fixed relatively easily. Especially considering that it’s easier to bring back Batman, than it is to bring Bruce back in the eyes of the world. We’ve also seen Bruce sneak around the world in each of the three films with and without his vast resources. Bringing back the Batman, would probably only add to his legendary status.

Finally, you would have the fallout from Bruce’s three surrogate fathers (or rather father and two uncles) in Alfred, Gordon and Fox. All of which would have something to say, all would be on different places on the happy and angry scale. In terms of character moments, these possible confrontations increase the potential for Bruce’s arc in this film. Although it could risk retreading some ground covered in The Dark Knight Rises.

As this speculation is all before most of the world has seen Man of Steel, it’s hard to judge what affect Worlds Finest will have on it. The biggest is that it could take the place of a potential sequel, or at least slow down production/release of one. But if the character arcs are carried across into Worlds Finest, then this obstacle may not be as big as we think it is. for example, Iron Man 3 seems to be attempting this, but in reverse, with the events of The Avengers affecting it’s story/characters in some way.

Most of the arguments against doing this come down to either personal preference in not wanting DC and WB to cram all their characters into film, or not wanting to damage The Dark Knight Trilogy. Both of which are valid concerns, THE trilogy was ended so that this world and it’s characters wouldn’t be run into ground like it was in the previous incarnation with no development on your main characters and a revolving door of villains.

Others would say that some characters are best kept away from the more fantastical characters, such as Batman and pretty much the rest of the Justice League. As it doesn’t suit Batman to have him meeting with these guys or interacting with them, he is at his most successful in a relatively realistic world, where he and his villains stand out all the more. There could be a risk of dwarfing or undermining his ability when you so closely put him next to Superman and eventually Wonder Woman, Flash, etc.

How do you pick a villain that caters to both characters and this new world, without going for the uninspired idea of simply picking a villain from each characters rogues gallery and putting them together. Yes (insert comma) there are ways it could work, but it would require more original thinking than going for each characters biggest or most prominent villain.

For the fans we get to spend more time with characters we have come to love and care for, this applies mainly to the Batman side of things. Anyone who doesn’t want more of Bale’s Bruce, Caine’s Alfred, Gordon, Selina, Fox or Blake are kidding themselves and at the moment it is the most exciting part of this project. Getting to spend more time with these characters. Given the cast of Man of Steel, I’m sure it will be exactly the same for those characters, but on a bigger more expansive canvas.

The biggest is obviously that we get to see Batman and Superman on screen together for the first time and see them clash, maybe not physically, but definitely in terms of their ideals and methods. Who is the scarier for a criminal, a god who by merely being there frightens you into submission? Or a man who is going to stop you, by any means necessary and undoubtedly painfully?

A film could almost be made without a villain, as their differences and similarities are so noticeable. As with all fictional characters, they have certain key relationships with other characters in their world (Batman has Alfred, Gordon, Joker. Superman has Lois, Jimmy, Lex Luthor), but in this case, their relationship with each other is so strong and important that it is more of the most vital