How was it not Superman? Do you even know the character at all?

It was very good. There were a few things I felt they could have done better, but a very good film. I would give it 7.5-8 out of 10. I would rater The Amazing Spiderman and Spiderman 2 on about the same level. With Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and the original Superman being better films in my view.

I think too many critics went into this wanting to see Christopher Reeve's Superman. Hence the Metacritic score. I'm glad they've distanced this film from the Chris Reeve films, and done something different.

For me Henry Cavil and Amy Adams were what sold it to me.

I don't understand how trash like Iron Man 3 can make so much money, but something intelligently written like this gets criticised worst than that shite.

Spoiler: The biggest problem I had with the film is that the 'World Devastators' are alternatives for nuclear weapons, or just giant time bombs. I want to see better villain motives next time.

Better than the two Dark Knight films. Not as good as Batman begins. Not going to compare to Marvel as they are more light hearted than DC.

I know I can't recommend the movie to my parents. That's all good and fine when we're talking about Transformers or The Avengers, but if it's Superman, it's a problem.

And I know a thing or two about the character, yes. Such as the fact that he would not kill a man. Ever. No matter the circumstances. And putting him in a situation where he is "forced" to do so is a product of the post-2001 cynicism that has long since outstayed its welcome in our country.

You want a real Superman movie, try this.

Well, I suggest you research a little more

Actually, he would. Under very similar circumstances. And it was Zod as well, actually.  Happened in the comics in 1987, and he did kill Doomsday. Thank you very much. ;)

Man of Steel was a real Superman movie. And I've seen all the animated movies. Thanks again. ^_-

TDK > Batman Begins > Man of Steel > TDKR > Thor > Captain America > Avengers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spiderwhuss

Certainly you will find an instance in any of the various canons in which something has happened. No, I'm not going to "research a little more" by pouring over 75 years of comics, television, films, and so on.

That wasn't Superman, or whatever bastardization of Superman that was, I want nothing to do with him.

What the hell kind of Pa Kent was that, either? What happened to the guy who taught Superman all about Truth, Justice, and the American Way, who instilled in him all of the morals that made him a Superhero? Kevin Costner just cares about him not being caught with his cape on. "Maybe you should have let all of those people die to protect your identity" is something you should never hear from Pa Kent. Bull. Shit.

Seriously, there are a million different writers who have tackled Superman, and they each have their own idea of what he stands for and what he would and would not do.

Maybe you like this new Superman. Understand that he is the antithesis of my Superman, and that this film disgusts me for that reason.

You really didn't get that line from Jonathan Kent. He didn't say it like "yeah, screw them". He hesitated, and wasn't comfortable with the answer he was giving. But he was in character the whole time. A real dad would act in a similar way. He wouldn't want his son to be taken away by the power at be, and have him be treated like a lab rat. You don't seem to have put much thoughts into what happened in the movie, and you obviously came in with a pre conceived idea of how things should have happened based on the material you already saw of the character. Basically, you wanted a retell of the things in the exact same way as you already saw before.

Well, you know what's great about what came before? It's readily available for you to go back and watch it an other time. Because, obviously, the Superman you liked is somewhere there. Stuck in the past, sure, but there none the less.

I'm glad Man of Steel did things in a fresh manner. Because you know what? I've seen most of the versions of the character, enjoy them all for what they are, and most of them depict the very same character. What happened in the movie, the situations he was put against, in the world and reality that he was in, and the way he reacted to it was consistent with the character throughout. 

It's a shame that you didn't enjoy this Superman, but as I said, go back to the one you like. Remain stuck in the past, if that's your thing.

And this is the attitude that disgusts me the most. It's exactly what I meant by our country's post-2001 cynicism. That the idealistic Superman is "stuck in the past."

Superman vs The Elite released last year. That's hardly Christopher Reeve's era. Now bear in mind that I am far from the only person who was disappointed by Man of Steel.

I'm not a huge Superman buff. I don't really care about him. I don't have a "history" to go back to -- I'm not going to be revisiting Superman Returns, that's for sure. But I do like him, and I know what I like about him.

It takes little strength to kill a man. You or I could do it, and do it easily. What puts the "Super" in Superman is that he is strong enough to not kill. So I guess what I'm saying is that Zack Snyder's Superman is weak. Too weak to not kill. Which means there's nothing "Super" about him.

Previous live-action Superman films have been FAR from perfect. There's a cheesy charm to the very first one, but it doesn't exactly pass for great story-telling. Nonetheless, there is exactly ONE facet of that film -- and of all later Superman films sans the latest, as far as I can recall -- that absolutely, perfectly, completely encapsulates everything that Superman stands for. The epitome of Superman, in my opinion. And now I understand why that one thing is excluded from Zack Snyder's Superman. It doesn't fit his "vision," or the way I see it, his "vision" doesn't fit Superman. I guess that's why they went with "Man of Steel." Maybe they were afraid of being sued for false advertisement if they used Superman's name in the title.

It's just a comic book, or a movie. It's a fictional character living in a fictional world. It doesn't have to be realistic... that's the point. Saying "realistically this is what would happen" is laughable in a series about an alien who is anatomically identical to humans but gets GODLIKE powers from the SUN of all things.

Superman 2>Superman>>>>>>>>>>Man of Steel