Don't worry, I won't be reviewing Man of Steel, because not only haven’t I seen it I have no plans to see it anytime soon. But my real confession this week is just how much time I wasted dithering over whether to see it or not. I'm not usually that kind of Comic Book Guy but I was already on the fence as to whether I was going seeing as how even some of the most positive reviews weren't exactly enthusiastic. But I was even more uncertain after some of my friends saw it; they either loved it or really hated it and the responses from the comic book creative community were even more across the board. On Facebook I read comments from people I respected which ranged from absolute raves to "I walked out halfway through."
It's not as if I expected opinions about the movie to be unanimous but given the level and volume of online backtalk Man of Steel seems more like a Rorschach blot than a film. Take the number of pieces that focus on the film's supposed "Christian message," which seems kind of odd since from the trailers there doesn't appear to be a whole lot of cheek turning in it. This was all part of Warner Bros.' marketing strategy. They hired a public relations firm to arrange screenings for pastors--there's even an "online resource guide" so they can "teach the positive themes of the movie to their congregants." Haroon Moghul wrote a piece called "Watching 'Man of Steel' in Istanbul” that calls the movie" an exercise in the language of racism, the politics of dispossession, and the danger of too much power." And you needn't read Stephen Marche's Esquire piece "Why Superman Sucks" because the bullet points of his argument are right there in the subtitle: "He's boring, inhuman and probably a fascist."
In spite of this opinion overload I eventually decided to not see it all on my own. Mostly because all indicators, spoilers included, suggested this wasn't my kind of Superman movie and Henry Cavill not my sort of Superman. One of the few things that most reviewers agreed on was its lack of "joy" and "heart" and that the film "wallowed in sorrow more than in soared" (as an online CBS story put it). And, bottom line, I can make myself miserable for free. I'll probably just do what I did with The Amazing Spider-Man. I'll wait a year and see it on Netflix… or not. I still haven't seen The Dark Knight Rises.
But, that being said, I actually learned a few things from the "obsessive history from 'Action Comics' #1 to 'Man of Steel' -- and Hollywood's struggle to get this guy right" that appeared in this week's Entertainment Weekly. For starters, I had no idea that General Zod's first appearance took place in three panels of a Superboy story in Adventure Comics #283. And according to a "Bonus Fact" from a piece on the 60's musical It's A Bird… It's A Plane… It's Superman, "Lex Luthor's henchmen in Superman Returns were modeled loosely on the gang in the musical." This almost makes me want to watch the 2006 movie again--almost. This issue also includes an interview with its director Bryan Singer who declares his Superman movie "probably a miscalculation." It's not the mea culpa that I've been waiting years for (see "Confessions of a Comic Book Guy--So Long Tokyopop"), but it's probably as close to an apology as we’re ever going to get.
There were also plenty of ads (Superman shilling razor blades, Superman flogging cell phones, etc.) featuring the Man of Steel costume created by designers James Acheson and Michael Wilkinson. This gave me ample opportunity to study all of its unnecessary hyper-textured detailing which is quite a bit different from the designs of the new Spider-Man and Batman movie suits. All of the raised bumps are undoubtedly supposed to suggest chainmail but in extreme close up it kind of looks more like something my grandmother could have crocheted.
But I actually kind of prefer the movie outfit to the steampunk Victorian NASCAR space suit Superman is currently wearing in the comics; because once you get past all the unnecessary detailing it actually looks kind of simple and elegant. What I definitely don’t care for is the new S-shield which, apparently, is a "glyph." Not an emblem or insignia or even the more contemporary option "sigil." Apparently a lot of thought and effort went into the design (there’s even a Website which allows you to create and download your "glyph, ancestral house and name in Kryptonian") which is a shame since a lot of the time it looks kind of dirty and/or beat up.
The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff of ICv2.com.