FILM REVIEW OF ''MAN OF STEEL" (2013)

The new Superman movie, “Man of Steel” (**** OUT OF ****), ranks as the best about the Last Son of Krypton.  After the lackluster box office response to the flawed but entertaining “Superman Returns” back in 2006, Warner Brothers and D.C. Comics must have retreated into their own collective Fortress of Solitude to contemplate the future of the Man of Tomorrow.  Clearly, since he received story credit, writer & producer Christopher Nolan played a part in shaping this Superman reboot.  As the genius behind the hugely profitable Christian Bale “Dark Knight” trilogy, Nolan qualified as the ideal choice to guide the thinking behind the reboot.  If you’ve seen Nolan’s “Batman” movies, you’ll spot his influence on “Man of Steel.”  First, like Nolan’s “Batman” epics, “Man of Steel” deplores comic relief and holds humor to a minimum.  Comparatively, “Man of Steel” is nothing like glib “Iron Man 3.”  Second, Clark Kent ventures out into the world incognito like Christian Bale’s Bruce Wayne did in the early scenes of “Batman Begins.”  Clark holds down several jobs before he dons his distinctive apparel and then plays everything straight.  “Smallville” fans will appreciate this rite of passage, especially where the trucker is concerned at the truck stop. “Watchman” director Zack Snyder and “Blade” scenarist David S. Goyer rely on Nolan-like flashbacks to break up the monotony of conventional chronology.  Clocking in at 143 minutes, “Man of Steel” maintains a sense of spontaneity that tweaks its formulaic plot.  Third, this Superman movie boasts no more connection with the previous Superman outings than Nolan’s “Batman” movies had with the Batman adventures that toplined Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, and George Clooney.  Fourth, just as Nolan changed the way that the Caped Crusader appeared, Superman doesn’t dress up in his traditional attire.  The biggest change in Superman’s costume is that he doesn’t wear drawers outside his outfit, and he flies around in the equivalent of dyed blue thermal underwear.  Nevertheless, Superman hangs onto his cape.  All these alterations make “Man of Steel” a better movie than if would have turned out had Warner Brothers stuck with the “Superman Returns” storyline. 

Genre movies, such as westerns, crime thrillers, and horror chillers, rely on surefire narrative formulas, and “Superman” movies are no different.  Not only do good genre movies strive to top each other, but they also redefine themselves so they can appeal to different generations.  Superman appeared first in 1938 in Action Comics.  Since his debut, the Man of Tomorrow has evolved.  Other media outlets adapted him and came up with new ideas for the character.  The radio show introduced kryptonite as the substance that endangered Superman.  “Man of Steel” takes a traditional but at the same time a revisionist approach to its subject matter.  Like “Superman” (1978), “Man of Steel” opens with Superman’s origins as the son of Jor-El on the dying planet of Krypton.  Unlike “Superman” (1978), “Man of Steel” expands the action on Krypton.  At the same time, the Jor-El character does get slighted as he has in virtually all Superman movies.  Russell Crowe portrays Superman father Jor-El in a performance of commendable restraint.  Cleverly, the filmmakers have devised an imaginative way to extend Jor-El’s presence beyond the opening battle on Krypton with the treacherous Krypton military commander General Zod (Michael Shannon of “Mud”) who hates him with a passion.  The Krypton battle scenes amount to a mini-epic with homages to both “Star Wars” and “John Carter.”  “Man of Steel” provides three times more spectacle here before it plunges into the “Smallville” years.  

Teenage Clark struggles to conceal his identity with his father Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner of “Wyatt Earp”) and his mother Martha Kent (Diane Lane of “Hollywoodland”) backing him up.  The scene where he prevents the school bus from sinking into a river after it topples from a bridge is invigorating stuff.  The death of Jonathan Kent—he doesn’t croak from a heart attack like he did in “Superman” (1948), the “Superman on Earth” episode of the 1952 “Superman” television series, or “Superman” (1978)—differs, and Snyder and Goyer tie it into Clark’s ability to discipline himself.  Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane becomes interested in the sensational exploits of a nomadic troubleshooter after he saves her life while she is in the Arctic writing about a mysterious spaceship trapped in the ice.  Eventually, she tracks him down to Smallville and entreats him to let her let his story, but he refuses.  He wants nobody to know about him.  Lois’ editor Perry White (Laurence Fishburne of “The Matrix”) refuses to publish her story about a stranger from another world.  Ironically, while no human can convince Clark Kent to divulge his identify as Superman, General Zod forces him to take credit for his heroic deeds and surrender himself to the authorities of Earth.  “Man of Steel” synthesizes the first two Christopher Reeve movies by imprisoning General Zod in a Phantom Zone and then releasing him to serve as the primary villain.  Basically, “Man of Steel” boils down to “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” versus his own elders.  Zod and his minions show up out of the blue and insist that Earth give up Kal-El.  At this point, we Earthlings don’t know who to trust.  When it comes down to clash, both Zod and Kal-L constitute targets that we fire on without a qualm.

British actor Henry Cavill is the sixth actor cast as an adult Superman.  You’ve probably seen Cavill in “Immortals,” “Tristan + Isolde,” and “Cold Light of Day.”  Ironically, he auditioned for the Clark Kent role in “Superman Returns.”  Cavill looks every inch like Superman, with his muscular physique ripped and chiseled like a Michelangelo statue.  Happily, he doesn’t impersonate Christopher Reeve.  If he comes closest to imitating any Superman actor, he delivers a performance reminiscent of George Reeves.  Cavill has his head in the right place, and his Superman takes himself seriously.  Of course, if you’re yearning for something more like “Superman” (1978) or “Superman Returns” (2006), you’re going to be disenchanted.

FILM REVIEW OF ''PROMETHEUS" (2012)

In a New York Times interview, “Blade Runner” director Ridley Scott described his third science fiction film “Prometheus” as “‘2001’ on steroids.”  This comparison is entirely appropriate, particularly if you’ve seen the enigmatic but thought-provoking Stanley Kubrick epic about the evolution of mankind since the dawn of time.  Scott’s first 3-D spectacle (“Prometheus” is fun to watch once in 3-D) has elicited a wide variety of commentary since it arrived in theaters.  Essentially, “Prometheus” (**1/2 out of ****) chronicles mankind’s search for its origins.  Two archeologists convince a wealthy corporate sponsor to create a spaceship that will transport them to the far reaches of the galaxy where they believe that they will find the answers to questions that the ancient etched in caves long ago.  Of course, what they find is not what they wanted.  Nevertheless, they do learn something not only about themselves but also their creators that will keep audiences arguing about the meaning of “Prometheus” until the producers shed more celluloid on the situation.  Ostensibly, “Prometheus” qualifies as a quasi-prequel to Scott’s own scary sci-fi saga “Alien.”  The chief difference is that “Prometheus” isn’t a tenth as horrifying.  Nothing like the pugnacious pickle-shaped predator bursting from the chest of a human appears in this tame sci-fi opus.  Meantime, Scott has stated that “Prometheus” isn’t a prequel. He concedes, however, that the seeds of “Alien” have been sown into it.  You cannot watch “Prometheus” without thinking about “Alien.”  The “Alien” space jockey—as it is referred to--appears in “Prometheus” and so does an “Alien” prototype.  Furthermore, the story unfolds like “Alien,” boasts a contemplative android, a tenacious female protagonist, and a couple of tentacled reptilian creatures icky enough to make you shrink in revulsion.  The problem with “Prometheus” is that it is more speculative than dramatic.  Everybody about the physical appearance of “Prometheus” looks dazzling.  The technology and the equipment look like each belongs in the future.  Some of the performances are extraordinary, too, especially Michael Fassbinder as a sophisticated android with a lethal sense of humor.   Like “2001: A Space Odyssey,” “Prometheus” spends more time contemplating our predicament rather than frightening the living daylights out of us above it. 

“Prometheus” opens on what appears to be planet Earth.  We are treated to some awesome vistas as we fly above the sprawling terrain.  A man in a cloak with alabaster-white skin and a muscularly sculpted physique walks up to a waterfall while a gigantic, saucer-shaped UFO hovers not far away.  He takes the lid off a container and consumes some blackish goop.  No sooner has he swallowed this nasty stuff than he suffers crippling spasms and plunges into the waterfall.  The man’s powerful body integrates and we see his DNA appear.  As incredibly visual and mysterious as this scene is, you find yourself wondering exactly who this dude is and from whence he came.  The next sequence finds a team of archeologists excavating a site in the year 2089 when Dr. Elizabeth Shaw (Naomi Rapace of “Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows”) finds a star map on the wall of a cave.  She summons her colleague, Dr. Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green of “Brooklyn’s Finest”), who also happens to be her boyfriend, and shows him a cave painting with a tall, thin, man pointing to an array a stars.  The importance of this primitive drawing is that Shaw and Holloway have found similar examples of it around the world.  They believe that they have discovered a star map that will take them to meet their creators.  The next scene finds everybody aboard the Exploratory Vessel Prometheus in the year 2093 as an android, David (Michael Fassbinder of “Centurion”), keeps track of them before they awaken from stasis.  Once Dr. Shaw and Dr. Holloway along with their colleagues have gotten up and eaten, they meet the CEO of the Weyland Corporation, Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce of “Lockout”), whose billions have brought them into orbit around a faraway moon designated LV 223.  He makes comments about the mission in a holographic presentation to them and then hands the briefing over to our heroes.  Not long afterward, Weyland’s dictatorial daughter, Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron of “Snow White and the Huntsman”) informs them that they answer to her and she controls the mission.  Basically, Vickers is the equivalent of Ellen Ripley from “Alien.”  She warns them not to contact any aliens until they have notified her about it.

Our heroes, David, and their colleagues land on the surface of the moon near a gigantic structure and enter it wearing space suits.  No sooner have they walked in than they discover that they can take off their helmets because they can breathe the air.  They find a Mount Rushmore sized alien head in one of the rooms as well as mysterious vases that contain the black goop that the exterrestial sampled in the prologue.  They also find tall, imposing aliens like the “Alien” space jockey.  Most of these fellows are dead and laying about in piles in what appears to be bunkers.  David checks out a room teeming with vases.  Their exploration is cut short because a storm is moving in and they are order to evacuate and return to the ship.  Two of Shaw’s colleagues are accidentally left behind.  The captain of the spacecraft, Janek (Idris Elba of “Ghost Rider, Spirit of Vengeance”), advises them to sit out the storm and await their arrival in the morning.  Creepy things begin to happen and the two men encounter a snake-like creature that latches on to them.  They are not prepared for what happens to them.  Later, it turns out that Dr. Shaw has been contaminated with an organism in her body that resembles an embryro.  She explains that she is not fertile and begins a mad dash to remove this organism from her body.

The monsters in “Prometheus” aren’t as scary as the “Alien” beasties.  Meantime, this two hour-plus, R-rated potboiler will make you think about what didn’t happen on screen more than what did.