Moroni's Review of "Man of Steel"

It's really kind of funny that my kids weren't looking forward to this movie.  I asked my 11 year-old son Aidan why.

"I don't know," he said.  "I guess I am really not that into Superman."

My kids prefer Spiderman, Ironman, and even Thor over Superman.  I liked those other heroes when I was little.  But the quintessential hero was, and always will be, Superman.

When I was about 4 or 5, my mom said that she didn't have any money for a gift, so she took some old fabric, and, on Christmas Eve, she made me a homemade Superman cape.  I loved it and wore it until it was ragged.

When the "Superman: The Movie" came out in 1978, I was ecstatic.  It was a dream come true to see the red cape and blue suit streak across the sky on the big screen.  "Superman II" in 1980 was just as exciting for me as "Star Wars".  I have a couple of memories about this movie.  First, I remember that my parents were shocked by the sex scene between Lois and Superman.  And when I say sex scene, I mean showing bare shoulders above the satin sheets.  I don't know what offended them - the notion that Superman would have sex?  Superman was too pure for sex.  I remember that my mom was offended that Lois and Superman shared a glass of wine in the movie.  I guess Superman was a Mormon, and I wasn't aware of it.  But, to my parents, Superman was supposed to be inviolate, which made him differ from other antihero crusaders like Batman.

I also remember going on a business trip with my dad.  We stopped in Yuma, AZ and got a hotel.  I noticed that the theater in Yuma was playing "Superman II", and I asked my dad if I could go see it.  He gave me some money, and I walked by myself to a theater in a strange town, watched a movie, and when I got back to the hotel, my dad was asleep.  It shows the difference in our times.  I would never let one of my 10 year-old kids go by themselves to the movies.  Ever.

I suppose this shows the difference between the heroes of yesteryear and today.  The superheroes of old were stalwart and pure, driven by the need to do good.  The heroes of today walk a morally ambiguous line.  Yes, doing good, but most often driven by needs other than the desire to be righteous.  And if their decisions are ultimately good, it is not before they must torture themselves into walking that path first.

I think that's why Bryan Singer's 2006 film, "Superman Returns" failed the way it did.  I personally loved it.  I was on a missionary trip to Pensacola, Florida at the time, and I made sure that I took time to see it.  But I think that Singer's version was nothing more than an homage to Richard Donner's Superman.  Brandon Routh even looked like Christopher Reeves.  And that innocence of yesterday didn't bode well with today's gritty society.

Enter Zack Snyder's "Man of Steel" featuring a tortured, conflicted Superman - who is not so inviolate that he does not resort to killing.  And to be honest - I really liked this vision of Superman.  It is suitable for our times.

The film is executive produced by Christopher Nolan.  I am a really big fan of Christoper Nolan's "Inception", but, honestly, I am not a huge fan of the "Dark Knight" series.  I just could not get into them.  But his vision brought a much needed grittiness to the Superman series.  I am, however, a huge fan of Zack Snyder - "Watchmen", "300", and even "Sucker Punch".  He brings a stylized, painted look to his films that is compelling, along with a type of narrative poetry.  This combination of producer/ director creates an explosive effect on screen.

The thing that I liked about this movie is that it felt less like a Superman movie than it did an alien invasion movie that happened to have Superman in it.  They paid greater detail to Superman's back-story than did previous films, telling the story of Jor-El (played emphatically by Russell Crowe) who is the only person who understands the impending doom of his world, Krypton, and in conflict with his mortal enemy, General Zod, played by Michael Shannon.  Some of it was a bit confusing, like the whole "codex" thing, but it was still pretty cool.

Once they set the stage, the rest of the movie was all battle scenes.  Much to the joy of the 10 year-old boy locked inside of me, these battle scenes made "The Avengers" look like a fight with wiffle bats.  The destruction and devastation caused by two superhumans combatting was monumental - buildings leveled to rubble.

My opinion is that Henry Cavill may be the best Superman yet.  I have followed his career since "The Tudors", and he nails it.  I can't wait to see him don the cape again, and I hope that a "Justice League" movie will soon follow.

This was a Saturday matinee in the summer at its best.  It delivers, and it has become one of my favorite movies of the summer.  I know that my review comes late.  But maybe this will inspire you to buy the DVD when it comes out.  I know that I will.

By the way, my kids - who are not ordinarily Superman fans - loved it.

Moroni's Review of "The Dark Knight Rises"

Before I write this review, I guess I should admit that I am a fan of Tim Burton's "Batman".  It was surreal and gothic, like a fever dream.  I was even a fan of the old Batman TV show.  It was pastel and campy.  The problem with reboots is this - I am not that interested in a life-like reality where Batman might really exist.  Batman belongs within the confines of the comic book universe.  He does not belong in the real world.

For this reason, I have not really been able to get into Christopher Nolan's "Dark Knight" trilogy.  Lord knows I have tried.  They are too dirty and gritty.  And they don't feel like superhero movies.  I must say that I liked "The Avengers" much better.  I suppose that if you go to see this movie , don't watch it as a Batman movie - but as a crime drama, then it is pretty good.

Ah, expectations!

I took my wife Martha on a date to see the last installment of the franchise - "The Dark Knight Rises".  Christian reprises his role as Bruce Wayne/ Batman - years after the death of Harvey Dent, retired and suffering from debilitating injuries.  (I can relate.)  There's a bunch of Wall Street intrigue and corporate intrigue involving Wayne Industries that goes on that had my head eyes drooping.  The one thing that kept my eyes open was a thief/ spy named Catwoman, played by the delectable Anne Hathaway.  It seems as if the person behind this is a villain named Bane, a luchero from the League of Shadows, the secret society from the first movie.  Bane is played by Tom Hardy, and his performance was superb - except that the voice amplified by his mask was pretty grating and annoying.  Bane and his henchmen concoct a scheme that sends Bruce Wayne into a prison halfway around the world, leaving Ban free to capture the entire city of Gotham and impose martial law.

The only resistance is put up by small bands of rebels led by Commissioner Gordon, played by Gary Oldman, and a young cop named John Blake, played by Joseph Gordon Levitt.  Bruce Wayne finally liberates himself and returns to Gotham City to inspire and lead an all-out war against Bane and his allies.

To me, the poignant scenes were about seeing the metropolis in the clutches of evil men, reduced to life under tyranny.  It made me realize that we don't need thugs and criminals to reduce us to such a sordid state. We have the politicians in Washington that are pushing us in that direction anyway.  Where is a Batman when we need him?  The sad reality is that there are no superheroes to rescue us in our moment of dire need.  Something to think about as this sham of an election draws near.

This really is the best of the three movies.  So if you have bothered seeing the other two, then you must see this one - for closure, if anything.  But if you haven's seen any of these, go rent the Tim Burton movie instead.