Finally, at least in the realm of film, Superman has joined their ranks, and I for one am glad for it. The big-ol'-teddy-bear finally has to face the consequences of both "not acting" and "acting." This was done in previous films, but to a much lesser degree, always with an attitude that Superman was just one of the "good 'ol boys" and would get a pass. Not so much these days. Man of Steel places Kal-El in a complex world where choices are never easy, and sometimes you make the wrong choice, even though it's for the right reasons. The best heroes are those who are brought low only to rise above tragedy and failure with a stronger moral center.
The plot of Man of Steel takes a winding path, looping back in forth in time, starting with Jor-El (Russell Crowe) facing the death of his world. After repeated warnings, it appears his people have brought about the destruction of Krypton. For Jor-El, the end is inevitable. The Kryptonians' only hope is in a newborn baby boy, who came about in the natural way.
However, Papa-Superman faces stiff opposition in the form of General Zod (the brilliant Michael Shannon), who attempts a coup but is foiled and banished to the Phantom Zone. Like the best of villains, you almost feel sorry for Zod, and sympathy makes antagonists more terrifying because their plight is sympathetic.
Krypton cannot escape its fate, and neither can Kal-El. The baby blasts off into space, heading for Earth, and Krypton implodes.
Fast-foward, and we find a young Kal, now Clark Kent, discovering his powers in a brilliant sequence. How terrifying it must be to see through the skins of your teachers and classmates; how overwhelming it must seem to hear everything with ear-splitting clarity. This scene is handled in a wonderful way when Clark's mother, Martha Keny (Diane Lane), is called to school to coax Clark out of a closet (hehe!).
Truly, these early scenes of Clark with his Earth-parents are the best of the film. With a quiet yet moving performance from Kevin Costner (Jonathan Kent) leading the way, I found myself feeling for the boy from Krypton. When, after learning about his heritage, Clark asks Jonathan "Can't I just keep pretending to be your son?" My heart about broke, and I wanted to give the poor kid a hug, too. And in one particularly heart-breaking scene, Costner proves just how effective a simple hand gesture can be.
Years later, that same feeling continued as we watched Clark as an adult quietly moving about the country in search of a purpose, helping people out whenever needed. Though, when he burst through a door, shirtless, his body on fire, I would have passed on the whole hugging thing. Save that for later when Clark was merely smoldering and not on fire.
But I digress...
Another wonderful touch is the characterization of Lois Lane (Amy Adams). In pervious versions, Lois has always been smart and driven, but not smart enough to figure out Clark's real identity. This has always bothered me, and it was something which my dad pointed out frequently. Yes, I realize that when it comes to Superman, like with the most intelligent when facing a love interest, Lois got a little stupid. Still, knowing a few reporters, that journalistic instinct of putting things together is never turned off. Never. Adams plays Lois as intelligent, driven, yet never once is she fooled by a pair of goofy glasses, and I like that. Like with Pepper Potts in Iron Man 3, this is a woman who can handle herself.
Spoilers Ahead, Be Warned!
If you've seen the movie and have been following some of the responses to the film, you probably know that a bit of a controversy has cropped up, all revolving around Kal-El's choice at the film's climax. Superman makes a choice that has upset a lot of faithful fans. This choice doesn't upset me, but it is a curious addition to the rhetoric of the Superman legend.
After decimating much of Metropolis (hey, it happens when gods duel), Kal-El and Zod are locked together in death grips, Kal with the advantage. A group of people are huddled in a corner, desperately wishing they had avoided the train station I'm sure. Zod then tests the limits of Kal's morals by blasting lines of red fire from his eyes. Slowly, the burning lines approach the innocent civilians. Kal pleads with Zod to stop, but it's clear he won't. In a final act of desperation, Superman violently breaks Zod's neck, killing him.
"Superman does not kill!" is the criticism many have lodged against this act. While I must agree, I have to address the situation in which Kal is placed. Metropolis has been attacked (in scenes that eerily remind us of 9/11), and Zod has said that his place is protecting the legacy of Krypton at any cost. Hell, that's what he was bred for. Here's a man who is trapped. Zod cannot change, nor does he want to. His final act, I feel, is two-fold. First, he recognizes the futility of his actions and longs for release, longs for death. Second, his final act is a test to see if Kal is capable of descending to Zod's level of ruthlessness; it's his proof that Kal is no better than he.
This act, while definitely sullying the reputation of Superman, is a part of a larger rhetoric on American society, and thus an intriguing element of the picture. Superman, who has always stood for "Truth, justice, and the American way," is lost, like so many of us after 9/11. What exactly does it mean to be an American when our morality as a country has been so severely tested? Like Superman in this film, we've lost our identity, to an extent, and are desperately seeking to find our place in this world. Kal-El's primal scream after killing Zod is the scream of millions of Americans when forced to see the consequences of our country's actions. Man of Steel is a clear representation of our times, and any attempt to bring back the happy, dopey Superman of past incarnations would not have had such a powerful effect (see Superman Returns).
Spoilers Finished, You May Continue:
Man of Steel is probably my favorite blockbuster of the year (sorry, Star Trek!) because it is the only blockbuster that had my braining whirling after watching it. In fact, that's why it took so long for me to write a review; I felt I had to process what I'd seen before putting word to page. My only critique is that the action and destruction hardly give us a break, an effect of the blockbuster market, I know, but still, I would have loved a little bit of a breather. Hell, the final battle takes forever, and it doesn't even seem like Superman is trying to protect the people of Metropolis from the destruction, at least not until the end.
However, on a lighter note, I came across this video regarding the true power of Superman. And now that I think about it, the destruction in the film is mild compared to what could have happened.
Either way, I hope the filmmakers follow through with the complexities presented in this film. This is a Superman who I can stand behind, not because he's flawed, but because he is willing to sacrifice his own soul in addition to his body for the rest of us. He's a hero who knows that his actions have consequences in the real world, and that sometimes terrible choices have to be made under the worst possible circumstances. Superman has always represented America at its best, and in this film, he shows that even fallen heroes can rise above the horror of our world and reveal the beauty hidden beneath.
