The talents of Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder combine to a
deliver a promising but misfiring blockbuster
This
was supposed to be a dream team of sorts, a second chance for a
Superman reboot. Action director Zack Snyder would bring his visual
sensibility to the table while Christopher Nolan and David S Goyer
would deliver a classy, epic, introspective script. As it turns out,
Man of Steel is more a showcase of the key weaknesses of both teams.
For Snyder, it’s his tone deaf approach to direction and dialogue.
For Nolan and Goyer, it’s their over-reliance on exposition,
ponderous pacing, and forced and artificial writing that
systematically, yet arbitrarily, strips a protagonist of choices
while telegraphing the writers’ preferred solution too early in the
film.
Let’s
begin with pacing and editing. I’m not sure if it was necessary or
interesting to tell Superman’s origin story in random order. We
begin with the last days of Krypton, switch to Superman’s first
miracle, a brief encounter with Lois Lane in an Arctic Area 51 (which
inspires her to search for Superman, leading to his unveiling), flit
between episodes in his childhood (again in non-chronological order),
intersperse all that with random accounts of Superman’s wanderings
as a drifter. That’s all in Act 1.
Here’s
how I would have done it: Act 1 begins with the Arctic episode,
leading to Lois pulling her investigations and interviews to trek
Kent’s footsteps from the Arctic to Canada to Kansas. That will
show us almost all flashbacks of the Ministry of Clark Kent in
reverse order. It’s narratively neater and provide a more
convincing foundation for her attraction to the costumed hero. More
importantly, it brings Lois Lane to the centre of the Superman
narrative, as the average Everyman the audience should identify with,
and for whom the origin story is told – by Superman’s childhood
friends, surviving family, beneficiaries in Act 1, and Jor-El and
General Zod in Act 2.
There
is a good story in these two acts; it’s just that Nolan, Goyer, and
Snyder can’t tell it straight.
More
fatal to the Man of Steel project though is a monumental error
initiated by Snyder that was approved by both Goyer and Nolan. No,
it’s not the very long Act 3 consisting of an over-done series of
fight scenes that might suggest Apocalypse Porn. Here’s what I
wrote a month ago before I took a vacation.
Everything
wrong with Man of Steel in just 4 lines of dialogue from 2 scenes.
INT. KRYPTON HIGH COUNCIL
General Zod: We will build a New Krypton without the bloodlines that have failed us!
Jor-El: And who will judge the bloodlines? You, Zod?
INT. GENESIS CHAMBER/SHIP [containing artificial wombs for unborn babies]
General
Zod: Stop! Don't destroy the ship! You're destroying Krypton!
Kal-El: Krypton had its chance!
Kal-El: Krypton had its chance!
In
the universe of Man of Steel, Kal-El is a moral monster who, only for
arbitrary reasons, is identified as the good guy instead of say, Zod.
On Krypton, Jor-El was aghast that Zod would claim the right to judge
entire bloodlines. On Earth, Kal-El decides that Krypton had its
chance, the entire species can suck it. On Krypton, Jor-El bests Zod,
disarms him, and decides not to kill him. On Earth, Kal-El kills Zod.
It
seems all wrong that in a film about Superman, it’s Superman’s
dad who embodies hope, forgiveness, and wisdom – and Superman who
fails to live up to it. The script shoehorns Superman into making a
series of morally horrific acts on the basis of “necessary evil”.
That goes right in the face of Jor-El’s hope that having a
naturally-conceived child will allow the child to “make choices
that no other Kryptonian can”, and should sit very uncomfortably
with anyone who paid attention to Zod’s line about how he was bred
to perform all necessary evils.
Superman,
like Spiderman, is an easy enough superhero to write. That the troika
goofed this up, this badly, is indicative of the weaknesses that
still plague their approach to film.
No comments:
Post a Comment