By Caitlin Walsh

News Staff

Is it a bird? Is it a plane?

No, it’s just the latest Superman film adaptation, and a disappointment at that.

The much-anticipated “Man of Steel” premiered Friday to eager theaters filled with comic book die-hards and super hero bandwagon fans alike. Produced by Christopher Nolan of the famously successful “Dark Knight” series and directed by Zack Snyder of 2009’s “Watchmen,” “Man of Steel” seemed to have a team of parents to get the job done right. The stars included veterans Amy Adams as Lois Lane, Russell Crowe as Superman’s father Jor-El, Diane Lane and Kevin Costner as his human adoptive parents and Laurence Fishburne as Lois’ editor Perry White, while also introducing hunky newcomer Henry Cavill, formerly of the Showtime series “The Tudors,” as Clark Kent himself. The ingredients were all right, the formula correct.

It’s not to say that the movie flopped, by any means. Visually, it was a stunning piece of work, and Hans Zimmer provided a beautifully epic score to the movie that was completely fresh of previous Superman scores. There was a clear cut desire for “Man of Steel” to make Superman a little darker, a little more serious and a little more human in the ethical sense. For all of that, the movie was a hit. Fight scene after fight scene reached intensity levels higher than the last, and every detail, down to the very material used for the infamous spandex costume, was paid great attention.

But all those success factors couldn’t save any movie from a bad script. It was the script — the dialogue and plot line included — that was the downfall of the movie. From the very beginning, every line is dripping with over dramatization. In Clark’s first of many flashbacks that we see, little Clark is hiding in a closet at school, his superhuman powers out of control and new to him. His mother comes to the school to lure him out of the closet, and when she asks what’s wrong, an elementary school aged Clark replies through tears, that the world is too big.

The flashbacks themselves start to jump around too often, as well. Some scenes seem unnecessary, some unbelievable — like when Costner, playing Clark’s adoptive father, tells young Clark that he should not have saved a bus load of kids from drowning because it put him at risk of exposing himself. Though the message seems reasonable — he doesn’t want his son ousted — the dialogue is off point, seeming morally wrong, even. Where did Clark develop such a heart of gold if he was being told to let other kids die?

The relationship between Clark and Lois was another upset for longtime and new fans, alike. Though Adams played an independent, driven Lois Lane who would not give up her work in the face of any danger, and though Cavill played the devilishly handsome, yet mysterious Clark that no woman would be able to resist, the chemistry between the two was extremely forced and rushed. After one quick scene together in which Lois ends up passing out from pain, the two are destined for love — every other brief scene between the two of them shows their passion, though the audience has no clue where it came from.

Plot holes and overly dramatic dialogue aside, the movie did end with a setup for more films — which is no surprise, of course — and there is hope yet for improvement. Now that the audience knows Clark and Lois a little better, perhaps the plot and dialogue of the next films will give some more substance, and dare I say it, humor.

All in all, “Man of Steel” may have fallen short — but we haven’t seen the end of Superman, and there may be hope yet.