Man Of Steel

Man Of Steel

Tonight, I went and saw Man Of Steel. Well, with all the mixed views of the movie, its understandable why people are not enjoying this movie. I can also see why some will at least enjoy the action in the movie. I found the action a bit over used, and it feels like its compensating for the fact the character arc for Superman is rather lackluster. I thought the movie was meh overall, and needed a rewrite for some of the characters. The only character I liked and thought it was better than I previously had seen, was Zod. I at least cared about why he was doing, what he was doing. Everyone else, just felt like they were there for the sake of being there, to move the plot of the movie along.

In terms of acting, Henry Cavil does a good job with what he’s given. Same goes for Russel Crowe as Jor-El, both of them do well with what they’ve got in terms of writing in this movie. Although the writing is where things seem to fall apart for me. People will like the movie, simply for being a popcorn flick, but those of us who are comic book fans, may not like it as much. I’m not the biggest Superman fan, but even I know there are issues with the character arc for Superman in this movie. We’re given clips and pieces as to why Superman does what he does, but not enough exposition to give us how he came to this revelation. In terms of the previous origin stories, Kal-El as Clark Kent, learned to be a source of good, and be a source of hope and light to many and help others through his experiences with Jonathan and Martha Kent.

In this one, he is born with this instinct to save others, and has no fear of his abilities. Ma and Pa Kent just try to have him not use his abilities and let people around him die, instead of saving them. To keep his abilities a secret above all else, as if to turn a blind eye to suffering. Even though we have scenes where Jonathan Kent is wanting Clark to wait until the right time for him to save others. The Kent’s feel rather wasted in this movie, and the eventual death (no spoiler for anyone who know’s the lore of Superman) of Jonathan Kent is rather pointless in this movie.

There are major character flaws within this version of Superman, I can’t really elaborate, without spoiling the movie. So I’ll let you figure out those flaws on your own. They happen right towards the end, when the action picks up. Granted the Action looks great in some instances, but others feels way too long and disjointed. It reminded me of District 9, and the first 2 Transformers movies. Sometimes we don’t see the details of how the Kryptonians do actions. We just see sometimes a jumble of jump cuts and odd camera angles. One annoying thing though, don’t watch it in 3D, otherwise you’ll get nauseous, the “Shaky cam” effect is really starting to become old and a headache. I actually felt nauseated and had a headache from the shaky cam being enhanced further by the 3D.

I liked Crowe’s Jor-El in this movie, granted I only enjoy his scenes on Krypton, where out of everyone there, he feels the most three-dimensional, but only to a certain point. Zod does feel three-dimensional but not as much until later in the movie. I liked his character arc much better than in the old movies, where Zod was wooden in the old ones. I just wish Superman was more fleshed out in terms of his normal character qualities. I might be spoiled with the previous versions of Superman I’ve seen. Christopher Reeve did an amazing job in the old movies, and in the cartoons I’ve seen, those versions of superman are great too. It’s just in this one, while we have Henry Cavil doing his best, it’s just the material he’s given, doesn’t do the character justice.

I’ll end this here, as there isn’t much else to say without spoiling the movie. I just was wishing for more in terms of the movie’s story.

Advertisements

DVD Rental: Gulliver’s Travels

gulliver039s-travels-2010-poster-artwork-jack-black-jason-segel-emily-blunt

So, as the title says, I rented the 2010 adventure comedy, Gulliver’s Travels, with Jack Black. Now as forewarning, I went into this completely in the dark, as I had heard of the story, but never had read it or seen anything previous to it. I don’t think it’s really needed, as the movie is pretty self-explanatory. It’s basically Jack Black being Jack Black but named Gulliver, except instead of having fame in movies and music, it’s as if he’s just an office clerk working in the mailroom. For the most part it’s not a great movie; it’s certainly not the worst, but rather it’s on the mediocre side of bad. The movie suffers from a lack of humorous writing. They try, especially with Jack’s usual style of comedy, but very few jokes are legitimately funny.

Most of them just fall flat, because of how obvious they are. I know Jack can do awesome comedy, as I loved Tenacious D and the Pick Of Destiny, because the jokes are funny, and they work for the story and premise of the movie. This one, while the movie’s humor falls flat, the rest of the story seems fine. If they had made it more serious tone, or at least had better humor, it would’ve been a better, overall enjoyable movie experience. The rest of the movie seems fine, the plot and premise seem to work (for what I’m guessing) is the original story of Gulliver. Everyone but Jack Black seems to fit within the parameter’s of the story.

The problem with having Jack in an adapted story, is that the writer’s have to find jokes that make sense as per the character and the actor’s portrayal, especially when its made into a comedy. It’s not unwatchable. Anyone who likes Jack Black and enjoys that style of humor, which has been done before, and in a much better way. They will still probably enjoy this movie. I myself liked the story, it’s just the humor is where the movie suffers. Don’t get me wrong here, I love Jack Black as a comedic actor, it’s just the movie is a general sense of “Meh”. With the love interests and character development in the story, it works, as I can relate to Jack’s character in the movie. As I myself am not the most forward with women.

The movie just needs more to it, to make it enjoyable to everyone. I enjoyed the other actor’s though, Siegel, while the humor is flat, the rest of his character arc works as a man who loves a woman outside his reach. The primary villain got better over time, he was rather droll and uninteresting earlier in the movie, but his arc to becoming more and more villainous was good, if done before. Despite some plot holes, it’s an ok experience. It just needs more humor.

So without sounding like a broken record too much, I’ll sign off now. I’ll try to get the Total Recall remake review done at some point soon.