Man of Steel (2013) - Review

If only the film were as good as this Mondo poster.

Director: Zack Snyder

Cast: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Kevin Costner, Laurence Fishburne

Country: United States / United Kingdom

Rating: PG-13

Run Time: 143 min

In honor of the highly anticipated pseudo sequel/blatant cash grab, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, I decided to revisit Warner Bros' first film in their DC extended universe, Man of Steel. Directed by Hack Zack Snyder of 300 and Watchmen fame, Man of Steel immediately became one of the most divisive superhero films ever made upon its initial release. Unsurprisingly, the film is still divisive years later, with some claiming the film to be a masterpiece and others despising the film to its core for its alterations of the character. While I was one of the people who disliked the film upon its release and have yet to see it since, I decided to give the film a second watch a solid three years later in order to reevaluate my opinion in the wake of Batman v Superman. 

Unfortunately, my opinion still stands. Man of Steel is just as exhaustive, manipulative, and overlong as I remember it to be. Snyder, much like the equally maligned and divisive Michael Bay, knows neither restraint nor subtlety when it comes to his film's thematic implications and action sequences. Not only does the man fail to understand pace, but he also can't grasp that a climax should only last a finite amount of a time, not a whopping 45 minutes in length! Still, even with Man of Steel's immense flaws, the superhero epic is occasionally a shining ray of hope, especially in the form of an incredible score by Hans Zimmer and solid performances by Kevin Costner (The Untouchables), Russell Crowe (Gladiator), and Michael Shannon (99 Homes). Otherwise, Man of Steel has done nothing but remind me of the pains I felt when I saw it the first time.

I honestly forgot all about this amazing prologue by the film's end.

Before I get into the review, I thought that I would explain my history with the Superman character in order to explain my reading and opinion of the film. After all, Superman is widely considered to be the most iconic comic book superhero of all time. In all honesty, I have never been a big fan of the character, although I have never disliked him either. Growing up, I was always a Spider-Man or a Batman kind of guy because I found their characters more relatable, as well as more grounded in the type of realism that I gravitate towards. Therefore, Superman and his invincible powers have always left me distant from him. 

As far as Superman media comes, I was a big fan of the Richard Fleischer Superman cartoons as a child and still am; not because they feature Superman, but because I adore their animation style and old fashioned tales of heroism. As far as live action Superman tales go, I have seen no Superman television series, and only two of the previous theatrical adaptations, Richard Donner's widely beloved, Superman: The Movie, and Bryan Singer's hugely divisive but cute, Superman Returns. Therefore, understand that I myself have a brief understanding of the character, although I am no authority in any way, shape, or form. And now, for the review...

Man of Steel opens up with an immensely memorable and powerful prologue that depicts the fall of Krypton and sets up Superman's origin as an alien on planet Earth. I personally believe that the rest of the film does not stack up to the amount of tragedy, emotion, and excitement on display in the opening 20 minutes. It's truly a Shakespearian tragedy, and proof that Superman's origin is one of, if not the, greatest superhero origin of all time. The opening prologue is unabashedly hardcore science fiction thanks to its fantastical creatures and technologically advanced gizmos, something that I always admire in a studio picture (i.e. see Guillermo Del Toro's Pacific Rim for more unabashed hard core science fiction). For all of the complaints that I am going to lay out against Snyder, I can whole heartedly admit that he knocks this prologue out of the park. 

BTW: big black penises shoot into outer space in this movie.

It's important to note that Man of Steel was produced by Christopher Nolan, the writer and director of Warner Bros' massively acclaimed and successful Dark Knight Trilogy (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises). It was also written by David S. Goyer, the co-screenwriter of Nolan's Batman films. Therefore, it comes as no surprise once Man of Steel starts incorporating numerous Batman Begins-styled flashbacks that bounce back and forth between the present and the past in order to explain Superman's upbringing. It is within these flashbacks that we get the bulk of Superman's adoptive parenting from his Earth dad, Jonathan (Kevin Costner), and Earth mom, Martha (Diane Lane). In all honesty, Man of Steel feels more like a Nolan film than it does a Snyder film with its dark color palette, usage of flashbacks, and brooding characters. There's no denying that Nolan's fingerprints are all over this movie, especially because it operates as a movie long origin story, something that comic book fans have grown immensely tired of.

After the amazing opening prologue and several Nolan-esque flashbacks, the plot kicks into gear once Kal-El/Clark Kent/Superman (Henry Cavil), all grown up and handsome, goes in search of his origins. When he discovers an old Kryptonian ship in the Arctic, he accidentally triggers the reappearance of General Zod (Michael Shannon) and his soldiers. They come to Earth searching for Kal in order to extract the codex, the Kryptonian genome and history of their planet, that Jor-El (Russell Crowe), embedded into his cells upon saving him from Krypton's destruction. What follows is a massive alien invasion in which Superman and the United States Military fight against Zod and his soldiers in order to preserve Earth, or at least what is left of it after Metropolis suffers a nearly post-apocalyptic level of destruction.

The casting of the film is quite excellent, with mostly everyone perfectly embodying their roles despite the lackluster direction or script they had to work with from Snyder and Goyer. Cavil, more or less a newcomer at the time of the film's release, is very good as Superman, although he portrays a far more foreboding and dark Superman than any to come before him. Gone are the days of color and joy, as seen through Donner's heartwarming Superman adaptations and Christopher Reeve's iconic performance. Nowadays, everything tends to be dark and foreboding, which is a shame as it has been quite a while since 9/11 struck and sucked all of the fun and violence out of blockbuster cinema. Regardless, Cavil makes for a solid leading man, and I for one fully support him as Superman. Although, he is never exactly referred to as Superman in the film, just saying.

Supporting performances by Costner as Superman's Earth dad and Crowe as his Kryptonian dad are without a doubt the biggest take aways of the film. Each embodies a different type of parenting style and sacrifices themselves for Superman's well being. Lane is fine as his mom, Amy Adams is decent as Lois Lane, and Shannon is solid as Zod, a surprisingly well defined and highly motivated villain. The only characters who barely make an impact on the film are the employees of the Daily Planet, as few of them get any screen time and easily could have been left out of the picture altogether. I still laugh every time at the scene where Metropolis has already been under attack for over ten minutes, and Perry Mason declares, "Okay everyone, we are leaving," as if they all had to wait for his instruction. Trust me, I would have been out of there at the sign of the first attack. Unfortunately, Man of Steel is nothing but down hill from there.

This was me towards the end of the film, nearly asleep.

Man of Steel features oodles of flaws that make me grind my teeth. Here is a list of everything in the film that rubs me the wrong way: the overly digital action is shot in a particularly shaky manner, the color scheme of the entire film is drained to pure desaturation, the attempts at humor are lame and unnecessary, the entire film is overly manipulative and thinks it is important, the thematic implications are overtly obvious (i.e. the Christ stuff), the product placement is horrendous, and a majority of the film's action scenes, almost all found within the final hour, are boring.

Once Man of Steel moves into its final hour, the entire picture crumbles a part and turns into what I like to call a "third act build up film" of the worst kind. A "third act build up film" is a film that saves all of its action, energy, and special effects for the very end in order to send off everyone on a high note, almost as a way of thanking the viewer for sitting through the awfully slow and dull first half of the film. The worst offenders of this kind include all of Michael Bay's Transformers films as well as Mission: Impossible II (note: successful films of this style; The Matrix, District 9, Hard Target). If you were mistaken, you might think that Man of Steel is a Bay film in and of itself with its immensely long finale, extensive alien invasion, and strong military presence, albeit more mature and deadly serious in comparison to Bay's canon. 

In all honesty, the final hour of destruction and sci-fi violence featured in Man of Steel is one of the most exhausting and grueling experiences in cinematic history. While one may find themselves invested in the initial attack in which Superman fights two of Zod's soldiers in Smallville, all investment and dedication to the picture goes out the window once Zod unleashes the world building machine upon Metropolis and partakes in one of the most devastating depictions of disaster movie destruction ever to grace the screen. Man of Steel might be the only superhero film to turn into a full blown disaster film by its end, which is not exactly what I go to superhero cinema for, to be honest. 

However, just when you thought the film's onslaught of action was over, Snyder saves Superman's penultimate showdown with Zod for the very end of the picture, thereby stacking three massive computer generated set pieces back to back with no breaks in between them. I have to confess that viewing Man of Steel a second time honestly felt like a homework assignment. By the time Superman and Zod started to fight, I got up and started to do things around the house as the film played in the background. You couldn't pay me to be invested in that overlong fight of super powered heroics and villainy. The film had already exhausted all of its energy by the conclusion of the alien invasion. That another fight scene is saved for the end of the picture truly baffles me. Without a doubt, Man of Steel's finale is a complete and honest to goodness endurance test if there ever was one.

Me = On the Left / Snyder = On the Right

It's a shame that Snyder's Man of Steel is such a lopsided picture undeserved of Hans Zimmer's honest to goodness masterpiece of filmic music and heroic motifs. Say what you will about Zimmer as a person and a composer, but the ensemble of music compiled for this picture almost makes up for the plentiful story problems. There are a few moments of cinematic greatness in the film, such as Kal's birth, his discovery of his origin, as well as his first time flying, that benefit from the sheer emotion of Zimmer's excellent score. But alas, that is only a few scenes, and scenes aren't enough to save an entire picture, let alone one that is half dominated by a single epic action sequence.

At the end of the day, Man of Steel is one quarter Shakespearian tragedy (the fall of Krypton), one quarter superhero origin story (Supes growing up on Earth), and two quarters alien invasion movie (Zod's attack on Earth). To be honest, I only find one half of this film, the first half, to be tolerable and engaging. The second half is nothing but torture for me. While I respect other people's opinions about the film, there is simply no way that I will ever come to believe that Man of Steel is a masterpiece, let alone in my life time. As for the haters and detractors, I'm all ears. Unless 9/11 inspired death and devastation is your cup of tea, stay away from Snyder's Man of Steel.

Rating: 4/10 - One of the most exhausting and overlong superhero films to date. Moments of raw emotion from several great performers and Zimmer's score shine through the mess though.

Franchise
Man of Steel (Zack Snyder, 2013)
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Zack Snyder, 2016)

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) - Theatrical Review

Director: George Miller

Cast: Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, Hugh Keays-Bryne, Nicholas Hoult, Rosey Huntington-Whiteley

Country: Australia / United States

Rating: R

Run Time: 120 minutes

Before I start this review, let me say that I had planned on reviewing the two Mad Max sequels (Mad Max 2 [a.k.a The Road Warrior] and Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome) before I wrote about Fury Road. However, I don't think I could live with myself if I waited any longer to share my opinions on George Miller's latest masterpiece. Therefore, just know that I love the Mad Max sequels with all of my heart, flaws and all. I'll do lengthy reviews for the sequels some day, but you can check out my review for Miller's 70s classic here. (Note: I wrongly proclaimed Mad Max a post-apocalyptic film in my review even though it is set before said apocalypse. However, it might as well be one since it foretells a future on the brink of destruction and demonstrates many of the elements of a post-apocalyptic film. It's more of a pre-apocalyptic film if anything.)

After a 30 year hiatus, George Miller's Mad Max is back! It fills me with glee to see a reboot to one of my very favorite action franchises of all time be written and directed by the man who wrote and directed all previous Mad Max films. After years of development, reshoots, and delays, Mad Max: Fury Road has finally made it to theaters. And all I can say is, wow. Mad Max: Fury Road is destined to become an action classic. It is an action film so brave, so confident, so fully realized, and so bat s*** insane, that other action films wish they could match the sheer level of filmmaking on display in its two hour run time.

#bloodbagforlife

In today's day and age of overcomplicated and overcrowded summer blockbusters, Mad Max: Fury Road barrels into theaters with a simplistic and straightforward plot. Max Rockatansky (Tom Hardy) is a widowed father and former police officer who now wanders the post-apocalyptic wasteland alone. He is immediately captured by the War Boys, a cult-like group of men who worship Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Bryne), their leader and water supplier. On the day that Max is captured and turned into a blood bag, Joe sends off Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron) to gather gasoline for their citadel and commune. However, Furiosa has secretly snuck Joe's "wives" and breeders out of the citadel in order to offer them a life of freedom. As Joe and his many worshippers take off after Furiosa to reclaim their breeders, Max is dragged along for the ride atop a car driven by Nux (Nicholas Hoult), a War Boy desperate to enter the gates of Valhalla. What follows is two hours of straight post-apocalyptic mayhem the likes that has never been seen before.

Fury Road is one of the most unique reboots to date. As I stated before, the film is written and directed by George Miller, the auteur and creator of the Max Rockatansky character. Therefore, it is interesting to see the man who started it all reboot his own franchise with a new actor in the lead role. Fury Road is not only a great reboot, but it also operates on a level of insanity never before seen in any Mad Max film before it. Miller fleshes out his vision of the post-apocalyptic future more than ever before thanks to an expansive budget and numerous years of development. If you thought that the world glimpsed within Beyond Thunderdome was expansive in comparison to the first two Mad Max films, than wait until you see this. Fury Road is jam packed with more vehicles, characters, varying factions, and weapons than you ever could have imagined within a Mad Max film. Fury Road is essentially a classic Mad Max film but on steroids. $150 million steroids, that is.

Miller fully immerses the viewer into the film's universe and makes little time for exposition. Instead of having a whole film to explain Max's origin as he did with Mad Max in 1979, Miller introduces us to Max at his so called "maddest" and uses flash backs and an opening narration by Max to explain how he became the way that he is. While I personally did not need any of this information, as Mad Max fans know this stuff by heart, I understand that this is a reboot and newcomers need this information in order to understand the character. While contemporary reboots like RoboCop (2014) and The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) waste entire films explaining the origins of their time honored characters, Fury Road takes a whopping minute to get Max's origin out of the way and than moves on. Studios should take a clue from Miller's treatment of Fury Road and skip origin films entirely unless the character is being introduced to an audience for the very first time. If the character is a time honored property, like Max Rockatansky, than audiences don't need to see their origin play out over an entire film again. Give it to us like Fury Road, and we'll love you for it forever studios.

Theron shines as Furiosa, the true protagonist of the film.

Fury Road is a triumph of visual filmmaking, as it rarely relies upon dialog to tell its story. Characters speak or yell only when necessary or to convey characteristics about themselves. There is not a word or a frame wasted in this picture, Fury Road is that tight and filmic. Fury Road even visually feels like a classic Mad Max film thanks to Miller's trademark sped up footage. The film also contains many visual references to the classic Mad Max films (i.e. one of Joe's wives plays with a music box, Max's flashbacks reveal a character's bug eyed death, the War Rig crashes head first into a vehicle and causes its parts to explode over the front of it, and Max obtains his iconic sawed-off shotgun) that serve as fun callbacks for fans of the series like myself. I also love how Max's sawed off shotgun fizzles out when fired. It's a great callback to the scene in The Road Warrior when Max drives the tanker towards Papagallio's camp and fires his sawed off only for it to misfire on him.

If I had to express a gripe about the film, it would be that I am not a huge fan of Hardy's portrayal of the titular character. He sounds too similar to Bane from The Dark Knight Rises and grunts far more than Mel ever did. Hardy also doesn't convey the warmness of Mel's Max. That personal opinion aside, it is clear that Miller wanted to take the Max character in a different direction. Max is "madder" and more selfish than ever before, as seen evident in several scenes where he thinks about his well being before others. Fortunately, and as evident in all previous Mad Max films, Max's good natured side takes over and causes him to join Furiosa and the wives on their quest to safety. Max is also a darker and more tortured character than ever before. He repeatedly sees visions of his deceased daughter and regrets not saving her. These torturous visions control Max and shape him to be the person that he is more than anything else.

The other unique thing about Max this time around is that he isn't even the protagonist. Charlize Theron's Furiosa is the star of the film, as Fury Road is entirely her story. Max is simply along for the ride in a film about Furiosa's plight to save a group of women who want to be free from Immortan Joe's clutches. Furiosa is a fantastic character who chooses to break from her leader's wishes in order to save a group of girls from a life of imprisonment. Much of her past is left mysterious too, as we never come to learn what she was before she was an Imperator or how she lost her left arm.

An immortan villain for the modern age.

Much praise should also be heaped upon amazing supporting turns by Mad Max-alumni Hugh Keays Bryne as big baddie Immortan Joe and Nicholas Hoult's character Nux, a loveable and conflicted War Boy. It's fascinating to see Bryne, the villain of the very first Mad Max film, return as a new villain in the reboot. It's not odd unheard of within the franchise though, as Bruce Spence played two different characters in both The Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. Immortan Joe is truly one of the most despicable villains in recent memory. I can't remember the last time that I watched an action film and actively anticipated the moment when the lead villain died. You know a villain is great when you simply hate their guts. Nicholas Hoult is especially great as a conflicted War Boy who learns to think for himself and join Max and Furiosa. Nux heavily reminded me of the Pig Killer, the loveable and equally scummy supporting character from Beyond Thunderdome who eventually joins Max. I also think that the romance between Nux and one of Joe's wives makes for one of the cutest and most believable romances in a blockbuster lately.

Fury Road finds Miller exploring familiar ground within the Mad Max franchise. We are once again introduced to a group of crazed people who worship and follow a cult-like leader. Immortan Joe and his War Boys are very similar to Toecutter and his gang from Mad Max, Lord Humungus and his Gay Boys from The Road Warrior, and Aunty Entity and the citizens of Bartertown from Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome. Miller is clearly interested in exploring how powerful leaders rule others through power and sometimes religion. The film also explores themes of redemption and feminism, something that the film has received much praise for from feminists. Whether you want to call it a feminist film or not, Fury Road shows great progressive stride in depicting females as equal ass kickers who save the male hero as much as he saves them.

Miller has truly out done himself with the action sequences this time around. Fury Road is a wonderful throw back to the old days when actual cars crashed into one another and filmmakers relied upon practical effects as much as possible. It'll be tough looking back on The Road Warrior now, as that film's action sequences may seem dated or tame in comparison to the insanity on display here. Every single one of Fury Road's action sequences are so good that they all equal The Road Warrior's infamous final tanker chase. It's clear that Miller based Fury Road off of The Road Warrior more than any other Mad Max film, as the film depicts the chase between Joe and Furiosa's War Rig. You could easily replace Joe and his War Boys with Lord Humungus and his Gay Boys and replace the War Rig with Max and the tanker and you'd have The Road Warrior more or less. However, what differentiates Fury Road from all previous Mad Max films is that its central conflict is constantly in motion. The entire film is based around one long chase between Furiosa and Joe. Therefore, the action rarely lets up and forces the viewer onto the edge of their seat for nearly the entire running time.

Cirque de Max

One could write about Mad Max: Fury Road for a long damn time. I didn't even touch upon the film's incredible art direction, exhilarating score by Junkie XL, and the unforgettable supporting characters like The Bullet Farmer or the crazy guitar guy who spews fire out of his guitar. However, I think that Fury Road is an action film that will be revisited until the end of time. It is an action film so insane, so emotional, and so jaw dropping, that it begs repeat viewings. I immediately wanted to watch it again as soon the credits began to roll. To be honest, I don't think any action film has ever affected me in that way before.

I'm sure I should probably hold out for multiple viewings and further analysis, but Fury Road is easily one of the best action films to grace the screen in the last 15 years. Rarely do we see such vehicular mayhem on a scale as grand and epic as this. Most film buffs would agree that Mad Max was a game changer in 1979 for post-apocalyptic cinema and The Road Warrior was a game changer in 1981 for action cinema in general as well as how sequels stack up to their predecessors. If those were Miller's first two game changers, than I would argue that Fury Road is his third. This film will be viewed as a game changer in how it rebooted a 30 year old franchise and brought back practical action filmmaking to the modern blockbuster. George Miller essentially drove a War Rig straight through the summer competition and put blockbusters like Furious 7 and Avengers: Age of Ultron to shame. I can almost guarantee that Fury Road will top my list as the greatest action film of 2015.

Rating: 10/10 - An overwhelming tense, beautiful, and emotional action masterpiece that revives Mad Max for the modern age and proves that George Miller is truly one of the greatest visual filmmakers of our time.

Franchise:
Mad Max (dir. George Miller, 1979)
Mad Max 2 [The Road Warrior] (dir. George Miller, 1981)
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (dir. George Miller and George Ogilvie, 1985)
Mad Max: Fury Road (dir. George Miller, 2015)