Most Superman or Batman movie fans would name 'it's dark' as Christopher NOlan's main signature on Man of Steel. But I say the man Christopher Nolan signature here is the non-linear storytelling style. It worked for Batman Begins and it works here. The way story information is disseminated is impressive. This is carried out through a combination of the writing, directing and editing. It all works together well, culminating in a really new kind of movie experience. This retelling of the Superman story highlights the sci-fi aspect of Superman's origin. It features huge fights between super-beings, more destruction seemingly on NYC than we've ever seen (oh sorry Metropolis), but it's all wrapped into a coherent story that should satisfy any movie fan, and targets both super hero fans and sci-fi fans. That's why the re-introduction of the Superman brand to the marketplace was inevitable. Sci fi and super hero movies are the two top-grossing genres there are.
I have a couple of nitpicky questions, however, that go toward the Superman story in general. The first will become more of an issue as the years go by and it is: Why do the people of Krypton look exactly like humans? Humans who all look like they're from Kansas? And here is the biggest issue with the people of Krypton all looking like they're from Kansas: The coincidence of the spaceship containing Krypton's last son LANDING IN KANSAS. This issue will never be resolved because the Superman story is too old and too beloved to be altered.
Next question: Why does Superman have muscles? Simple answer is that he's strong, right? How can he be strong without muscles? Well in both Superman 2 (the half-Richard Donner one) and in Man of Steel, we have super villains with less muscle than Superman who seem to be faster and stronger than our hero. The explanation has to do with Earth being closer to its sun than Krypton was and having a different gravitational force as well (which really actually answers little). So then, back to the original question: Why would Clark Kent/Superman have muscles? How would he have even developed muscles? It would be like Neal Armstrong living on the moon and lifting weights there and expecting to develop muscles. He'd have to lift cars instead of dumbbells. So I just don't get it.
Still, all that aside, I was entertained.
I have a couple of nitpicky questions, however, that go toward the Superman story in general. The first will become more of an issue as the years go by and it is: Why do the people of Krypton look exactly like humans? Humans who all look like they're from Kansas? And here is the biggest issue with the people of Krypton all looking like they're from Kansas: The coincidence of the spaceship containing Krypton's last son LANDING IN KANSAS. This issue will never be resolved because the Superman story is too old and too beloved to be altered.
Next question: Why does Superman have muscles? Simple answer is that he's strong, right? How can he be strong without muscles? Well in both Superman 2 (the half-Richard Donner one) and in Man of Steel, we have super villains with less muscle than Superman who seem to be faster and stronger than our hero. The explanation has to do with Earth being closer to its sun than Krypton was and having a different gravitational force as well (which really actually answers little). So then, back to the original question: Why would Clark Kent/Superman have muscles? How would he have even developed muscles? It would be like Neal Armstrong living on the moon and lifting weights there and expecting to develop muscles. He'd have to lift cars instead of dumbbells. So I just don't get it.
Still, all that aside, I was entertained.