Man of Steel

I don't get all the hate heaped on Superman Returns.  Granted, I don't think I've seen it since it was in theaters, but it's not a bad movie.  If you want a bad movie based on a DC comic character, there are plenty to choose from --- ignoring the low-hanging fruit of Superman IV and Green Lantern, do you remember Steel?  Superman Returns' only real crime was being a movie that didn't act as a proper tentpole for a franchise.  It was designed to look and feel like a Richard Donner Super-film, and it succeeded in that regard.  That doesn't make it very exciting to watch, maybe, but it wasn't bad.  DC and the movie producers were not shy about their intentions for Man of Steel; if this movie was successful, it would be the first in a string of DC superhero movies, culminating in a Justice League film.  Basically, they saw what Marvel did with The Avengers and thought, "We should probably do that, too."

Aside from Superman being a hitchhiking hobo and direction from Sucker Punch creator Zack Snyder, the trailer looks pretty good.  I was curious as to whether or not they would explain what Superman uses to shave, since even flames don't affect his body hair, but that is a fairly minor point.

SPOILER ALERT: they don't

Man of Steel begins on the planet of Krypton.  Actually, we spend a surprising amount of time on this world, following Jor-El (Russell Crowe), the preeminent bodybuilding scientist on the planet, as he tries to convince the ruling class that their world is going to end.  They don't believe him, which turns out to mean absolutely nothing because they are promptly murdered by Krypton's preeminent shouting soldier, Zod (Michael Shannon).

"Kee-rist, Zod!  Inside voices, please!"

So what's the point of these scenes?  Well, Jor-El takes some desperate chances while Zod's forces battled the government; he grabs something of great importance to Krypton's people (a skull) and does something questionable with it (dissolves it over his infant son), because science.  Sure of his apocalyptic conclusions, Jor violates almost every FAA rule and sends his baby boy to Earth, via rocket, all by his lonesome.  And then Zod kills Jor and Krypton explodes.  Not before Zod and his forces are overcome and punished by being trapped in another dimension, though.

Zod looks like the sort of guy who types with the caps lock key on

On Earth, that infant grows up to be Clark Kent (Henry Cavill), and his alien physiology makes him different from normal folks in a variety of ways: super-strength, heat vision, super-speed, etc.  You know the super-drill.

Or maybe this super-drill is a little more angry than what you're used to

Clark was taught by his adoptive father (Kevin Costner) to keep his head low and hide his extraordinary abilities.  The logic to this being that people fear what they do not understand and...um...a super being might get his feelings hurt?  Whatever the reason, Clark grows up to be a do-gooding drifter, helping random people out whenever he can and then slinking off into the shadows before they can ask him any questions.  Eventually, Zod and his minions come to Earth, looking for the son of Jor-El.  Their entrance is dramatic, and they essentially offer to spare the Earth if their fellow Kryptonian turns himself over to Zod.  But what does Zod really have in mind for the people of Earth?  And what does this mean for Clark?  Where does Clark fit in, as the child of two worlds?  What kind of "man" is he?  (The answer is "super.") 

The acting in Man of Steel is all pretty much above-board.  Henry Cavill carried the angst of his character very well; this is easily the best acting I've seen from him.  Cavill also looks fairly tough, so the concept of him being able to punch through your face seems a little less far-fetched than some other actors who have played the part.  While Cavill's Superman was certainly sympathetic --- I would argue he gave the most vulnerable Superman performance on film to date --- he doesn't show much personality beyond the angst; but that is more of a script issue than a fault in Cavill's portrayal.

"Alright Henry, for this scene, imagine that your iPod has nothing but Morrissey on it"

Superman's love interest, Lois Lane, is played by Amy Adams, and this is the best Lane we've seen on the big screen.  She actually seems strong and intelligent, like an award-winning reporter should.  Almost as important, her "plucky reporter" bit wasn't obnoxious.  I thought Kevin Costner did a pretty good job as an overprotective parent; Costner can be a little one-dimensional in this role, but it was refreshing to see anyone in this movie look genuinely concerned over Superman's well-being.

"Son, just calm down...and please don't murder me and your mother"

I have some serious issues with the writing of his character, but Costner did a fine job acting.  Diane Lane was also okay as Clark's mother, although her part is pretty conventional.  I will say that it felt odd seeing her play a part that was a touch too old for her.  Russell Crowe was good as Jor-El; he was suitably stoic when he played a hologram, but his action hero turn on Krypton seemed a little un-scientist-like.  Still, he was in a lot more of the movie than I expected and wasn't bad by any means.  Ayelet Zurer had a small part as Superman's Kryptonian mom, but it didn't really amount to much.  Michael Shannon's work as Zod was tough for me to rate.

And, at times, identify

Yes, he was suitably intimidating.  Yes, he provided a physical threat to Superman, something that most Superman villains do not do.  I think my issue has less to do with Shannon's performance than with how the character was written; when given the opportunity, Shannon made this awful monster sympathetic --- but we have to wait almost the entire movie to get to that point.  Until that moment of insight, he comes across as a gigantic asshole.  Nothing more, nothing less.  Antje Traue was Shannon's right-hand-woman, and she was decent; I liked what I saw, but she didn't really do much more than glare.  Christopher Meloni had a fairly substantial part and he played an aggressive authority figure.  Go figure.  I like Meloni, but his movie roles have been pretty bland lately.  Richard Schiff and Laurence Fishburne did very little aside from lending their familiar faces to bit parts.

I have to admit that Zack Snyder didn't do a terrible job directing Man of Steel.  Snyder curbed his tendency to throw needless slow-motion in every scene and instead played to his strength: visuals.  This is a fantastic-looking film.  The set and costume designs were good, the cinematography felt epic, and the super-battles were suitably huge.

Above: epic super-fart

Snyder still can't direct his actors to do much more than shout, but that's less noticeable in a superhero movie.  I did start to get bored during the action sequences, though.  Superman and Zod knocked created a lot of collateral damage, but a lot of it looked awfully similar.  The important thing is this: Snyder is a director with visual flair, and he made a gorgeous Superman movie.  He didn't write the movie, though.

That was the work of David S. Goyer and, to a lesser extent, Christopher Nolan.  This screenplay certainly achieved one of its goals; I can definitely see this film spawning sequels and tie-ins, just as Iron Man set the stage for the films leading to The Avengers.  It also told a solid origin story and left some plot threads dangling that will doubtlessly be used in the inevitable sequel.  From a branding perspective, I suppose this script also sets the DC movie universe apart from that of the Marvel universe; there is a distinct science fiction vibe to this superhero movie, and that could open a promising door to some of DC's other characters.  Having said all that, I must admit that I didn't actually like the writing in Man of Steel.  For every character that was done well (Lois Lane, Jor-El), there were three or four that took everything with straight-faced indifference.  I don't blame the actors or the director for that.  The script leaves very little for them to do, aside from pose and look upset.  The worst case of this was Zod, who was a raving lunatic for 90% of the movie and then, finally, had a humanizing moment, although it came an hour too late to make up for his behavior in the rest of the film.  But that's not the biggest problem with Man of Steel.

My biggest problem with Man of Steel is with the tone.  To say that it is "dark" doesn't do it justice.

***SPOILER ALERT***

Superman's Earth-Dad straight up tells his son to not save people.  Hell, his character basically commits tornado-assisted suicide just to teach his son a lesson.  What's worse is the fact that our Superman-to-be lets it happen.  He could have easily saved the life of his adoptive father, but he opts not to.  That is not exactly the sort of thing you typically see in a movie with a hero in it, super or otherwise.  Of course, the back story is also pretty bleak.  The Kryptonians had colonies spread across the galaxy, equipped with terraformers to make hostile environments suitable for their settlers.  When Krypton decided that they did not want to expand their empire, they sent out a bus to pick everyone up and bring them home cut off provisions to those colonies, and everybody died.   Later, when Zod is preparing to end the human race by terraforming the planet, he ignores the fact that Kryptonians can, over time, get used to Earth without killing every living creature on the planet.  Why?  Because he would rather eliminate an entire species than be patient.  Of course, he also could have used the terraformers on any of the other dozen former colonies that he visited, but that would have robbed him of the chance to destroy all human life.  That's pretty bleak stuff.  And then there are the approximately three million civilian casualties from the Superman/Zod battle.  The city of Metropolis is ruined.  Completely.  Most of those collapsed buildings had to have people inside them, and that ignores all the people running for their lives as their world fell on top of them.  

Yeah, hold on to your coat.  That will help you.

Similarly, Smallville will take a decade to recover from Zod's visit.  The nameless Asian city off the coast of where the terraformer was probably took a lot of damage in the form of tidal waves, too.  Some people have issues with Superman killing Zod, but it makes sense in the context of this movie.  Zod was going to kill those stupid people in the railway station, and Superman did all that he could to stop it, because those random people were more important than the several hundred he punched Zod through during their battle.  Actually, I was a little surprised at Zod's execution, but there weren't many options, and that thematically confirmed Superman as a citizen of Earth.  Still, the presumed off-camera body count in Man of Steel is mind-boggling.  And that sort of destruction could work in another movie.  But in a Superman movie...?  I'm not so sure.  Hell, I'm not sure that more than one of those depressing-ass factoids makes sense in a Superman movie, much less all of them.  There is usually a sense of hope and optimism accompanying this character that can sometimes come across as corny Americana.

Not this time.  Man of Steel feels like someone saw what a gritty tone did for the Batman franchise and decided "If they like gritty Batman, they'll love gritty Superman!"  And I suppose they gave the people what they wanted, if the box office numbers are to be believed.

As a standalone film, Man of Steel is decent.  It was a relief that this movie didn't completely suck, and I hope to see more DC movies in the future, thanks to the success of this film.  Amy Adams and Henry Cavill are a solid core for this franchise and I wouldn't even mind Zack Snyder returning for another movie.  I honestly believe that they're going in the wrong direction with this, though.  Sequels have to up the ante, and the angst, death and destruction in this movie are already turned up to eleven.  Man of Steel was well-executed and impressive, but the questionable thematic choices kept me from truly enjoying it.

Pandorum

You would think that the science fiction and horror movie genres would be mixed together more often.  The core audience for both genres are roughly the same, right?  However, I can only think of a few films (notably Alien and maybe I am Legend) that actually have a hefty dose of both horror and sci-fi.  This might be due to the fact that it's easier to write a horror movie about dumb teens being way too curious about a creepy basement abandoned house murder factory for their own good than it is to write a script that has monsters and takes the time to logically plan out a future world or spaceship or whatever.  I like the idea of the sci-fi/horror hybrid, though, because a well-executed hybrid has a lot of potential.  So, with an optimistic heart, I watched Pandorum.

The movie starts out just fine.  Despite the credits, Ben Foster is the lead actor in the movie and Dennis Quaid plays a key supporting role.  Both men awaken from some sort of hibernation sleep to find themselves in a spaceship.  They don't remember their names, their jobs, what ship they are on, or why they are there.  Details start to come back to them, but only small details, and they come very slowly.  The only thing they do know is that there should be other people around, helping them get their bearings, but there are not.  The room the men awoke in is sealed off from the rest of the ship and the ship is experiencing frequent power surges.  Foster realizes that he is a technical somethingorother for the ship, so he has to find his way to the reactor core to reboot the ship's reactor and get power everywhere.  So far, it's a little dry, but there is a mystery established: what happened and where is everybody?  Ben Foster's pretty good and Dennis Quaid is the same character he plays in every movie.  Not fantastic stuff, but not a bad start.

Things start to get worse quickly.  Foster has to climb through some ventilation ducts that seem to have a lot of foam "We're No. 1" hands growing in them.  At this point, Foster asks Quaid over their walkie-talkie about the symptoms of Pandorum.  Hey...that's the movie's title!  It must be important!  Pandorum is basically the space version of cabin fever, where paranoia and homicidal aggression meet and cause ordinary folks to go crazy.  Symptoms include hands tremors (which both Foster and Quaid show) and hallucinations.  When Foster finds his way out of the ducts, he encounters two things: first, a survivor that attacks him and second, a monster that attacks them both.  Sure, the monster eats the survivor immediately, but Foster was able to learn that the survivor (Norman Reedus) had no idea what the monsters are or what happened to the ship, despite being out of hibernation for a few months.  These kind of things start to happen to Foster regularly.  He meets a survivor, they try to kill him (because...um...he is clearly not a monster?) and then the monsters attack, forcing Foster and his new friend to run.

Let's talk about the monsters for a quick second.  They are very bald, pale, and have beady eyes and sharp teeth.  They move like werewolves in the slow-motion scenes from the Underworld series.  They wear bizarre spiky armor (or is it part of them?) that covers their back and/or shoulders, like they went armor shopping at a Mad Max-themed discount store.  They don't talk.  They eat humans, live or dead, as well as their own wounded.  Basically, they are C.H.O.D.s: Cannabalistic Humanoid Outerspace Dwellers.  While nobody in the movie actually uses this phrase, that is only because they never thought of it.  When C.H.O.D.s are on the screen, ready for action, scenes have a strange habit of becoming dimly lit, poorly shot, and generally blurry.  I'm sure that's just an insight into their character, though, and not a lame way to disguise a low budget.

While all the monster chasing is going on with Ben Foster and friends, where's Dennis Quaid?  Right where we left him, in the room he awoke in.  He spends most of the movie sitting down, trying to walkie-talkie Foster (who lost his walkie-talkie about twenty minutes into the movie).  Quaid fills the time by finding another survivor (Cam Gigandet) in the same air vent that Foster escaped through.  This survivor claims to have killed his two crew mates because they had big time Pandorum.  Obviously, you don't want to restrain that guy.  So Foster is on the run from the CHODs and Quaid is killing time with a crazy.

This just isn't a good movie.  It''s trying to be two different things at the same time.  On the one hand, it is trying to be a creepy mood piece, like Alien.  On the other hand, C.H.O.D.s are eating people's faces.  The two styles don't go together.  All the subtlety of a suspense/mystery is lost as soon as albino cannibals show up.  The biggest problem with the movie is the title.  When the title happens to be an illness, one of the main characters is going to be afflicted.  If you make a movie called "Irritable Bowel Syndrome," it's not going to be an action flick...at least not one I want to watch.  But which which character has Pandorum?  The one that is trying to restart a nuclear reactor and save everyone, or the first billed actor that has been sitting around for most of the movie?  Hmm...tough call.

 The movie is not devoid of merit, but there's not much.  It's nice to see Ben Foster in a leading role for a change.  And...um...they had a pretty cool futuristic razor.  The first twenty minutes of the movie (basically, until the monsters show up) is promising, but then again, any movie can look decent for twenty minutes.  The acting isn't terrible here.  You know what you're going to get when you give a Quaid a role, but the rest of the cast (including Cam Gigandet, Antje Traue, Cung Le, and Eddie Rouse) was inoffensive.  If Quaid's role was played by an unknown like the rest of the cast, the movie's suspense would have been much more effective.  I will admit that it was a nice change of pace to see Norman Reedus playing a part that was not explicitly Irish.

Those somewhat positive accomplishments are nowhere near enough to salvage this film.   The writers and director have worked primarily in Europe until now, and it shows.  The dialogue is mediocre at best, and the explanations given for the key plot points (What are the monsters?  What happened to the ship?) are so poorly expressed, it feels like they've been mistranslated. I honestly don't think that the lead actors have anything to be ashamed about here (well, except for taking these roles), but the director is another story.  Christian Alavert not only directed this film, but he co-plotted it.  That means that he could have, at any time, said "Wait, that doesn't make much sense...let's try something else," but he never did.  Or, worse, he said that and this movie is the result.