Walking out of the theater, one of the few good things I can name of “Man of Steel,” the newest Superman movie, is that I love Henry Cavill as Superman. Not much else stands out as making it an enjoyable film.

Most of the responses I’ve gotten about this movie have been that’s it’s absolutely fantastic or that it sucks. It’s been doing well in sales but personally, it disappointed me greatly.

“Man of Steel” opens with a birth scene, the first natural birth on planet Krypton in decades, and then shows the destruction of Superman (birth name: Kal-El)’s home planet soon after he’s sent off to Earth by his parents. Splitting between flashbacks of his home life and the current doings of both Clark Kent (Superman’s earth-given name) and Lois Lane the beginning, to me, was choppy and confusing. Too much information was needed as background knowledge, and the scenes weren’t connected well, so it was hard to follow and disjointed.

Also, I personally felt like the plot lacks some thought. Some questions, like why Clark Kent’s parents don’t come with him to Earth or how Jor-El can touch things and think as a ghost, are poorly, or not at all, explained.

But hey, some viewers probably aren’t there for the plot, right? They’re at the theater for the action, the good ole’superhero-fight scenes. To which I say two things. The first being how repetitive the fight scenes are.  A lot of buildings get crushed, asphalt is ripped up, but in general, the fight scenes are two rams head-butting each other over and over because it’s two virtually invincible beings fighting. Again. And again.

The second thing I have to say about the fight scenes is how poorly Superman defends the people of earth that he loves so much. Maybe I’m being too picky, but Superman often drives the fight right to the heart of towns or crowded buildings. Sure, he pushes people out of the way and stops them from being murdered, but hey, maybe if he didn’t take the bad guys and fly them right into the middle of a gas station there’d be a lot less people in danger.

I already said it, but I’ll keep on defending it: I loved Cavillplaying Superman. But Amy Adams as Lois Lane? Not quite. Not only did she fail to portray the character well, the way her character is written isn’t up to standards. Lois Lane filled too many of the parts that were needed (romantic interest, Superman-finder, heroic sidekick, tactical genius) and therefore each of those roles was weak. The love line between Cavill and Adams is basically non-existent until they share an awkwardkiss, at which point you think back to the movie and ask “When, why and how did these two people fall in love?”

Okay, okay, I haven’t been exactly polite with describing the movie, but it’s still not awful. It’s a decent movie to look at, with pretty people, good effects, and lots of things getting smashed. If you’re not particularly picky about plot-related things you may enjoy it (I’ve had heated arguments with a few people who love it), and if you don’t think too much about any questions you may have it may even make sense.

Another interesting aspect of “Man of Steel” is the references some people picked up to Jesus’s story and the Bible. They weren’t too obvious, but if you look they’re there, and if you’re interested but don’t find it yourself, check out the link below.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/06/14/man-steel-filled-with-jesus-christianity-references