[Movies] How is Man of Steel only 56% T-Mete on Rotten Tomatoes?

[Height]

I heard it was good, but for some reason I cannot bring myself to go out and see it. I'm just not a big fan of superman. He has never interested me nor has his villains. It could be a great movie, but not my cup of tea.

[Korgoth]

this is how kids these days think...

Ha kids... isnt this the point where you cry about how they raped your childhood! I am an adult, I dont need a super hero movie that caters to a comic book to its detriment.

[MisterMxyzptlk]

It shouldn't even be that high because it's Superman. Only the lamest superhero ever.

agreed i HATE superman which is why i LOVE Mxyzptlk for annoying superman all the freaking time

[mmoscreenshotproof]

I somewhat enjoyed the movie, and this was definitely the best Superman movie. I can see why some people absolutely love it.

I personally didn't enjoy it that much because I don't really care for Dragon Ball Z style fighting. I'm sorry, but if punching a dude so hard that it makes him fly through buildings doesnt even hurt or scratch the man, it was just completely pointless and a waste of time. Superman was supposed to be saving New York (the world) yet he was constantly hitting bad guys through or being punched through buildings/other things. This caused a lot of explosions and I dont even want to know how many unknowns were killed due to this style of battle. I know some people love pointless explosions and so this was entertaining to them, but for me it was just a waste of time.

[Curanhadin]

if you go check out other movies you will see most reviewers give bad reviews if the movie is pure entertainment, if it has nothing to say about politics, liberalism or some anti religious stance it wont get a good review. Seeing as 99% of us go to movies to be entertained, I ignore all reviewers nowadays and look at what the people say.

I agree with you on the ignoring reviewers, but the rest sounds like Limbaugh bullshit.

[MisterMxyzptlk]

Another note, I heard that Superman did kill Doomsday though in the comics? Not sure if that's accurate, my friend told me that, which would mean he has killed before. But I think that scene was needed honestly, how else would they really deal with Zod? Can't really lock him up...and if Superman let him kill those people it would of been even more awkward.

That was the only time in the comics that he kills and both he and doomsday kill each other. see The Death of Superman for more details

[Kraenen]

And yet every point he made has merit to it. Just because you don't want to admit it, doesn't mean they're not true.

no no, it's just that the way he thinks and the words he uses are so indicative of a youth culture strung up on "bro"ism

[Curanhadin]

Wrong. Superman killed Zod and the other Kryptonians in Superman 2. This idiotic thought that superman doesn't kill is pure wrong. The only JL member who doesn't kill is Batman except in Dark Knight Returns when he finally kills Joker (in a separate universe). Superman has killed many, many enemies of the US and the planet Earth. This idiotic line of thought that "Superman is a boyscout" needs to stop. Superman is one of the most violent creatures in the DC universe. He tries to mask it but anyone who can read sub textually knows he is one switch away from becoming a villain.

Superman himself said if he ever killed a human then he would hang up his cape and retire. I don't know where you got this idea from.

[Woltereck]

Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIIXWDz0A7E, it's an awesome take on how bad Superman can really be. It's the entire Injustice: Gods Among Us cut scenes put into a movie-esque format.

[Xyanide]

People seem to forget that there isn't just ONE superman, just like there isn't ONE of any other super hero/villain. There are multiple universes where shit can be completely different.

[Nearmyth]

I honestly didn't think it was that spectacular. Like a 6.5/10, maybe a 7 from me. But I won't deny that it was entertaining.

[random296]

I was going over critics on Rotten Tomatoes and noticed that Man of Steel was only at 56%?! I went to the opening and I freaking loved the movie, at the end when the Credits rolled people got up and cheered... I don't see how it got 56% in my opinion.

Detective Stabler from Law and Order:SVU ended up saving metropolis instead of superman, in the superman movie. Seriously, Christopher Meloni killed all of zod's henchmen and destroyed his main ship, and the only power he had was a pilot's license. He even had better lines.

[Jester Joe]

Detective Stabler from Law and Order:SVU ended up saving metropolis instead of superman, in the superman movie. Seriously, Christopher Meloni killed all of zod's henchmen and destroyed his main ship, and the only power he had was a pilot's license. He even had better lines.

Eh? When did that happened? Only time I saw him accomplish really anything was when he sealed them away after Superman destroyed the World Engine thing, because he couldn't do it before that. I'm not saying that's really "nothing", but he definitely couldn't be giving credit for saving the world when Superman also did part of it.

[Anprionsa]

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-man-of-steel/

that's why

I watch them all the time. This time they are wrong.

[Sylf]

It's obviously because Zod never said KNEEL BEFORE ZOD.

[Deleted]

I've not seen the movie yet, but the whole rating system is bollocks.

Never, ever take ratings into account. If you want to get a good idea of what the film is like without seeing it, find a review that takes certain points of elements and expands upon them (As much as possible if we're talking spoiler free) giving us an explanation as to why the review/critic disliked/liked those elements.

At that point we can determine for ourselves whether or not it is a valid point or whether or not we agree.

Back on topic - reviews are reviews. They're never, ever 100% un-biased. Everyone, even the most critical of reviewers will prefer an element that another reviewer didn't like. We just so happen to have a movie which touches a character many have grown up with and many will prefer an older or different portrayal of Superman over this one.

I don't see any point in comparing the comics or older movies to this Superman - if a new writer can't re-interpret the character in someway then what's the point in a reboot? I understand many don't like the new interpretation, but opinion is opinion. Argue that Superman must do this, or he musn't do that if you must - but do you really want to see the same character recycled over and over again? Surely there's only so much you can do with one interpretation, have a fresh direction can make things much more interesting.

Quick edit - I'm completely ignoring any flaws with things like continuity within the movies plot. There's no justifying a straight up bad thing like that - it's either a problem or it isn't.

[Dhrizzle]

[Redmage]

It was okay, Star Trek 2 was better.

[Bluesftw]

For me this new superman movie was kind of a let down, they tried to pack everything into it and to me it seems like they lost sense in the proces, shame.

[slackjawsix]

It was too much action to get good reviews, good reviews go to movies like cloud atlas that make you think and remember the ideals in them for days after