Man of Steel

2 out of 5 Covers

I feel I should preface my review of the recent Superman movie by stating that I went in biased.  Superman may not be my favorite superhero, but as an avid comic book reader and scholar, am I versed in the history and characterization.  So I have certain expectation of what Superman should be like.  My proprietariness of a cultural artifact is a discussion for another time. 

The earliest previews teasers for Man of Steel, with their introspective navel-gazing, did not meet my expectations.  While later previews did a better job of advertising the movie, they were hard-pressed to overcome my initial reaction.  So I went into the movie not expecting great things.

The short review: it was better than Green Lantern, in that Green Lantern was woefully miscast and often 

boring.  Man of Steel was adequately cast and had way too much action.

My long review is going to go into detail, so here be spoilers.

I was physically disgusted by the level of destruction and violence that occurred in the third act.  It may seem odd for someone who enjoys comic books and superhero movies to be moved to an almost visceral reaction to violence.  But I am fine with action when it is in service of the story, propelling the characters and conflicts.  This was violence for violence’s sake, and I have a very low tolerance for that. 

A key part of the third act is the destruction of a portion of Metropolis.  One problem is that Metropolis had not been established as in any way important to this Superman and his story.  They could have picked any major city (or better yet, any isolated location that would not have involved millions of people).  They only used Metropolis for the pre-existing knowledge that the viewer had to bring to the story. 

That the attack on Metropolis resulted in several blocks of skyscrapers and people being pulverized into dust was repulsive. Why?  Because superheroes are supposed to save lives.  There were two machines on opposite sides of the world involved in the attack, but as shutting down one would shut down the other, why did Superman have to go to the far distant and isolated one?  There was no narrative reason for it.  My father said he found the destruction no different to the battle of New York in The Avengers.  There is a key difference in that the Avengers worried first about protecting civilians and setting up a perimeter to contain the invasion.  The loss of (fictional)lives in Man of Steel served no purpose in the story, especially when contrasted with Superman’s action stopping the villain Zod from killing a family in the finale.  What made that family so special that Superman would save them but not anyone else?

So the third act ruined the entire movie for me.  What about the first two acts?  They were okay, if you can get over the idea that Clark Kent could be thirty-three and still have no idea what to do with his powers. Jonathan Kent, really messed up his son.  Jonathan is supposed to be the one who instills values and morals in Superman, but in this story he seems to do the opposite.  This is highlighted in Jonathan’s death scene where he acts to save lives while telling Clark not to. The underlying message was “Do as I say, not as I do.”

While I found the portrayal of Jonathan Kent wrong-headed, I will say that Kevin Costner did a great job with the material he was given.  Most of the actors did good with the material.  Yes, this means I am putting the blame for the awfulness of the film partial on director Zack Snyder (in particular the ugliness of Kryptonian design), but almost entire on the script by David S. Goyer.  The regular flashbacks resulted in poor story structure and while there were themes introduced, they were never developed in any meaningful way.

Like I said, the actors did a fair job with the material they were given, sometimes taking a thin and thankless part and fleshing it out nicely.  Henry Cavill was adequate as Superman.  He looked the part and emote what the scene called for; but there were terrible inconsistencies in how he was being asked to portray Superman.  So he wasn’t definitive, but he didn’t hurt the mythos.

What did hurt was Amy Adams as Lois Lane.  I would be fine with Lois being a redhead if I for one second could believe it was an intelligent and driven reporter on screen and not Amy Adams.  The intelligence wasn’t there as she did some really dumb things (‘Oh, the FBI just showed up at my building as part of a massive manhunt for me, but I bet they didn’t secure every exit’).  She was placed in situations because it was important narratively and not for any logical reason.  Why did Zod need her to come to his spaceship?  I don’t know, but it was important she was there to set up the next plot point.  And Adams acting was weak.  I wasn’t necessarily a fan of Kate Bosworth as Lois in Superman Returns, but at least she had spunk.  Adams’ Lois was completely lacking in the steely resolve of an investigative journalist.

And then there was the non-romance.  I don’t think it’s the actors fault that Superman and Lois didn’t have chemistry; the script never called for them to flirt or be coy or romantic.  As such, when they do kiss (in the field of ashes of 100.000 people), it was the funniest moment of a movie that desperately needed humor.  It wasn’t funny ha-ha; it was so ridiculous and out of place that it was unintentionally funny.

So I’ve ripped apart the movie pretty well.  Was there anything I liked?  I liked Russel Crowe as Jor-El; he was actually more heroic than Superman, though he stuck around longer than he should have.  And I really liked the portrayal of the military.  It is so easy in these types of stories to make the military a villain or at least a bully, but there was none of that here.  They did their jobs and did it heroically.

I understand that Warner Bros. wanted this movie to tap into the same grim and gritty vein as Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy.  But grim and gritty is part of Batman’s DNA. It is not what makes Superman a legend.

Nothing Can Possibly Go Wrong

 

3 ½ out of 5 Covers

The high school only has enough budget for either new uniforms for the cheerleaders or to send the robot club to the national championship. And the decision will be made by the new student council.  In the middle of this is Charlie, the captain of the basketball team who is best friends with the president of the robot club and the ex-boyfriend of the captain of the cheerleaders who is also dealing with his parents divorce.  Even though Charlie is forced into running for class president, escalation between the two camps ends up with some unintended consequences and forces everyone to join forces for a robot fighting completion to raise the money they need.

If that description sounds like there are a lot of high school tropes and clichés, there are.  But writer Prudence Shen does them well.  And the inclusion of the robot club and robot battles does add an element of originality.  But that doesn’t change the fact that the story is familiar.

The characters are entertaining, but Charlie is the only one who has any development.  In fact, he seems like the only one with real problems in his life, still trying to cope with his parents’ divorce.  And this is because we don’t get any insight into the other characters and they just fall into their predetermined roles.  But just because the other characters don’t have depth doesn’t mean they aren’t written well.

The real star is artist Faith Erin Hicks.  She brings incredible expressiveness to everything she does.  Every character not only has an individualized design, they are also extremely expressive.  Because of this there is no challenge diving into the story; everything is immediately accessible.  The only issue I had with the art was the robot battles, as it wasn’t entirely clear what the action was. 

So while not the most original story, it is still deserving of a place on the bookshelf.  

Taran Wanderer

 

4 ½ out of 5 Covers

Life at the farm of Caer Dallben is the only life that Taran had ever known, having been raised by the pig keeper Coll and the ancient wizard Dallben.  Even though he has gone on several adventures now, Taran feels that he doesn’t know who he is without knowing about his family.  So he goes on a journey to discover his roots.

Despite it being a journey, it is not a milieu tale like other volumes in the series.  This is very much a character study.  Even though several of Taran’s friends show up throughout, he spends long stretches journeying alone, especially towards the end.  And the third act is really some of the best storytelling in the whole series, as Taran tries out several occupations to find if that is the work he should do with his life.  While this could very well have fallen into the trope of humorous trial and error, the author elevates the text by taking each job seriously and imparting a lesson through each one.  The lessons do get a little repetitious, but that is a small sin as Taran’s journey of self-discovery rings true.

There is one element that sticks out as a bit forced, and that is Taran’s encounter with a group of raiders.  While it is very likely that Taran would encounter such a band on his travels, turning them into the antagonist for the story did not seem natural.  But there had to be something to provide the action and provide contrast to Taran’s development.  It’s just not the strongest idea.

Taran’s journey of discovery is rich and compelling and rings true so that anyone who reads the book is sure to take some lesson away from it.

The Castle of Llyr

3 ½ out of 5 Covers

Princess Eilonwy must leave her friends at Caer Dalben and finish her training to become a proper lady on the Isle of Mona.  Of course, she doesn’t understand why she has to become a proper lady.  She is already a princess and she would much rather help her best friend Taran with his farm chores.  But she reluctantly travels, escorted by Taran and their friends.

Taran is also troubled by Eilonwy leaving, though he doesn’t understand his feelings for her.  Then there is Prince Rhun, who expects to be bethroned to the princess.  Taran sees him as a rival, but it is hard not to like the bumbling, nice guy.  But all is not what it seems on the Isle of Mona, as an old enemy kidnaps the princess to steal her magical powers.  Taran and Rhun must travel the isle to rescue her and learn what it means to be true leaders.

The author returns to the milieu travelogue format of the first book, though not in so episodic a manner.  All the events do build towards the climax.  But even as they do so, it is hard not to feel as though the main action is taking place elsewhere.  As the story follows Taran, the reader has no real sense of the terrible danger Eilowny might (or might not) be in.  Because we are not informed as to the princess’s state, there is less of a degree of danger and tension than there should be.

However, Alexander does have a gift for telling the complexities of the story in simple terms without ever  losing the expressiveness of the English language. Even though the series is written for children, the prose never feels like it is talking down to the audience.  And that is part of the reason why the series is still in publication almost fifty years after its original printing.

The Black Cauldron

4 ½ out of 5 Covers

The second book in the Chronicles of Prydain is perhaps the most well-known, thanks to a certain Disney movie based on it.  But its recognition is deserved, hence the Newberry Honor. 

The Black Cauldron refers to Arawn Death Lord’s greatest weapon: an enchanted cauldron that allows him to create his army of Death-Born, an indestructible force that threatens all of Prydain.  A council is called plan how to remove the cauldron from the Land of Death and then destroy.  Taran, the assistant pig-keeper, is asked to play a vital role, as are all his friends: the pigkeeper Coll, Princess Eilowny, Gurgi, and Fflewddur Fflam.  Also along is Prince Ellidyr, someone just as headstrong as Taran, making them immediate rivals.

Of course, things don’t go exactly as planned, forcing Taran and his friends to improvise, go into greater danger, and face many betrayals.  But the journey creates a great change in Taran, who noticeable moves from headstrong youth to more temperate leader.

It is this change, wrought naturally through experience, that give the book its greatest strength.  While the plot is excellent, with few asides from the journey, and the characters are entertaining, it is the emotional core that raises the quality of the story.  Because of this, the reader is able to empathize more with the characters and leads to a much more cathartic climax.  This book is a prime example of how to tell a story well.