REVIEW: World War Z

Directed by Marc Forster
Watched June 23, 2013

Is it weird to say that World War Z is a pretty decent zombie apocalypse flick, but the worst part is undoubtedly the zombies?

Now, I don't mean the zombies themselves. They look fine. They are appropriately creepy. They aren't the same old re-hash of the zombie stereotypes (shuffling along moaning "braaaaaaains", etc). In theory, these zombies are pretty scary.

The problem with the zombies are in the execution. The whole zombie apocalypse, as told in the film, unfolds somewhat realistically. Then, all of a sudden, you meet zombies that are flinging themselves through the air, climbing all over each other to scale walls and take down helicopters, literally clicking their teeth at characters on the run. The zombies come off very campy, which doesn't juxtapose real well with the otherwise-realistic feel of the film. TV's The Walking Dead demonstrates that things like zombies can successfully populate an otherwise realistic world.... why is that not possible here?

And yes, I realize how unfair it is to compare WWZ with The Walking Dead, but it's an inevitable comparison you are sure to make if you've ever watched the show.

The film is also riddled with plot holes and massive jumps in logic... but that's pretty much a staple of big-time summer blockbusters. Sure, it makes no sense that the only person that can stop the zombie apocalypse is a retired United Nations investigator with luscious, flowing locks... but if you just accept that (along with a few other leaps), it doesn't prevent an enjoyable time. And I really did enjoy the movie. It's a great popcorn flick, full of suspense and tension and special effects and excitement. I'd recommend it for anyone that likes action suspense flicks.

But... just ignore things. Like the zombies.

About the Ending of MAN OF STEEL...

Warning: I'm going to be discussing the ending of the film... so, obviously, spoilers abound.

I've been doing a great deal of reading on Man of Steel since I wrote my review on Friday night. All of the reviews talk about one moment at the end of the film, the moment where Superman kills Zod. I feel like I have to write a little about that, because apparently it's a real big deal.

Panel from Alan Moore's 1986
"Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" Story

The adage is that superheroes don't kill, and that's mostly true. In their epic battles with various villains, one of their primary concerns is to protect the innocent. And when it comes down to the ending of that final battle, the villain typically destroys himself (or herself, of course), or are merely apprehended (there's also the third option of simply disappearing.... for the convenience of a later film or story arc). There is a definite code of conduct for these characters. But in Man of Steel, in his first big battle as Superman.... the code of conduct is broken. The fist fight with Zod destroys, seemingly, about 90% of Metropolis, culminating in Superman killing Zod with his bare hands.

Now, I know, I know, the murder of Zod clearly effects Superman. After doing the deed, Kal-El lets out a visceral scream and the look on his face is clearly a "what have I done?!?" look. Naturally, Lois runs to the hero and comforts him. To be completely honest: I'm fine with the ending up until this point. I can see the worth in having Superman haunted by, essentially, the blood on his hands. As the love interest, I feel the audience would be robbed to not see Lois comforting Superman. Fine. What bothers me is what follows.

Mere moments later, we have a scene in the desert where Superman, charming as ever, tells the General that he's all-American and the people have nothing to fear about him. Where is the remorse? Apparently whatever time jump we just saw heals all wounds in our hero. Then in the next scene, the secret identity of Clark Kent, Reporter is born... and the effects are even more invisible and distant.

I understand wanting to have an uplifting ending, but I'm not so sure the ending actually given works for the character. In fact, I know it doesn't. I'm assuming the ending was done like this to give the illusion of this being a standalone film, not just a set-up for a second film. How foolish.

How would I have ended the film? I would have much rather seen the murder affect Kal to the point where he leaves Lois there in the train station (or whatever that final building was), heading straight for the Fortress of Solitude. Then they could have some other time jump to when Metropolis is on the road to recovery, perhaps dedicating a statue or something to Superman, with a voice over by Lois talking about how a hero was born... while also showing clips of Superman still struggling with his decision. Save the rest of the stuff after the murder for the beginning of Man of Steel 2.

Of course, there's nothing that says the murder won't affect him going forward; this reaction is simply based on what we saw in Man of Steel. In fact, I'd be surprised if he kills again, making the death of Zod the "birth" of Superman's code. But call me crazy, I'd like to see him in pain over what happened, not just a somewhat smug "That was unfortunate... musn't do that again!" kind of reaction. Hopefully Man of Steel 2 will address this.

REVIEW: Man of Steel

Directed by Zack Snyder

Watched June 13, 2013

Going into this, I freely admit that I was not a Superman fan. The original movies never grabbed me, the TV shows didn't interest me at the time, the comics bored me, the character just never clicked for me. The trailers for Man of Steel definitely had me excited, though, so I certainly had my hopes pretty high.

And the flick delivered.

The cast is uniformly great. Henry Cavill is absolute perfection in the title role, with Michael Shannon a great foil. Amy Adams plays Lois Lane with conviction for a change, not just the damsel in distress. Kevin Costner and Diane Lane leave a wonderful mark as the Kents, with Russell Crowe certainly a fitting Jor-El. The effects look great, with the flying especially being a highlight. In all prior Superman adaptations, the flying has been what's killed me, but the visuals here made it actually seem realistic. Director Zack Snyder uses quick zooms and camera effects heavily at times, but I don't recall feeling overwhelmed or distracted by them. For yet another retelling of the same old origin story, the story telling felt fresh and original to me, which is certainly welcome. The first challenge for the hero felt organic, personal and was interesting, more Batman Begins than Green Lantern (lucky for absolutely everyone involved). The film plays like an always surging roller coaster, the slow points only making the high points more fun.

Now, don't get me wrong, the film is by no means perfect. The "classic" love story between Lois and Clark is under-developed and rushed, and actually somewhat goes against the new take on Lois (she's not merely a damsel in distress type and is actually vital to the action-filled third act... but she still falls in love with the hero seemingly simply because he's the charming, sculpted hero of the story). The lack of development there also kind of makes Clark's decision to choose Earth over a new Krypton somewhat hollow and merely plot-based... aside from following his Earth father's lead, what inclination did Kal-El show that he loved Earth? He certainly didn't care enough to save Metropolis from near complete destruction, which was another of my problems with the film. Seems to me that when you are building a film series, you want to ramp up the destruction, not start off with essentially decimating Metropolis. This qualms, however, are overcome in the movie, I would say.

I know the movies don't exist to sell comics, but the first thing I did when I got home was to crack into Scott Snyder's new Superman Unchained comic. For the first time, I was exposed to Superman and craved more (the first issue of the series, by the way, is very strong, setting up what could be a great story). I would absolutely say the film has made me a fan of the character, which has been an issue for me in the past.

I don't think I could recommend Man of Steel enough. While I know I am solidly in the target audience, the film absolutely met my expectations (which have been set really high due to recent superhero movie experiences). To reuse the analogy from before, this film is much closer to Nolan's 'Dark Knight' trilogy than the messy, underwhelming Green Lantern. Bring on MOS 2 (and, dare I say it... The Justice League?)!