🎦 Man of Steel full movie HD download (Zack Snyder) - Action, Adventure, Fantasy, Sci-Fi. 🎬
Man of Steel
USA, UK, Canada
Action, Adventure, Fantasy, Sci-Fi
IMDB rating:
Zack Snyder
Ayelet Zurer as Lara Lor-Van
Christopher Meloni as Colonel Hardy
Michael Kelly as Steve Lombard
Jadin Gould as Lana Lang
Tahmoh Penikett as Henry Ackerdson
Richard Cetrone as Tor-An
Dylan Sprayberry as Clark Kent at 13
Antje Traue as Faora
Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent
Michael Shannon as General Zod
Laurence Fishburne as Perry White
Russell Crowe as Jor-El
Henry Cavill as Clark Kent / Superman
Amy Adams as Lois Lane
Diane Lane as Martha Kent
Richard Schiff as Dr. Emil Hamilton
Harry Lennix as General Swanwick
David Paetkau as Threat Analyst
Storyline: A young boy learns that he has extraordinary powers and is not of this Earth. As a young man, he journeys to discover where he came from and what he was sent here to do. But the hero in him must emerge if he is to save the world from annihilation and become the symbol of hope for all mankind.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 10066 Mb h264 9838 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 1389 Mb mpeg4 1357 Kbps avi Download
Wow, what a super-mess.
The biggest question going into "Man of Steel," is whether or not Christopher Nolan can bring the same down-to-Earth psychology to Superman that he did to Batman. The quick answer: not entirely. Yes, he and director Zack Snyder have created a well-mounted action picture – they get the fight scenes just right – but in trying to deal with the deep scars of Superman's origins, they have put together a movie that sometimes feels choppy and more than a bit hurried.

The movie opens beautifully on the Planet Krypton wherein Superman's father Jor-El (Russell Crowe) is dealing with two problems at the same time. First, his planet is dying and no one will listen. Second, Krypton's military leader General Zod (Michael Shannon) has organized a coup against the planet's elders and intends to overthrow them. As you already know, Jor-El's plan is to send his son, named Kal-El, to Earth where he will be safe. Zod, who learns of his plan, vows revenge. These scenes work well. Krypton looks appropriately apocalyptic and the movie establishes some information (unspoiled here) about little Kal-El that we haven't seen before.

Then for the next hour, or so, the movie becomes a chaotic mess. Scenes of Superman's origins as a child are intercut with scenes of Superman as an adult so that we never have a clear story to sink our teeth into. One minute he's an adult working as a crab fisherman, and the next minute he's a little boy saving kids on a school bus. We never get the great homages to Americana. We don't get scenes of Clark's Kansas upbringing where he discovers his powers. Scenes are so hurried that you feel as if you are just watchng highlights, rather than completed scenes. The movie is in such a hurry to move things along that we never feel that we're getting to know the man of steel. Diane Lane and Kevin Costner play his Earth parents who dispatch home-spun advice, but they pop up almost as cameos.

The third act of the movie, when Superman and Zod square off is where the movie picks up. Zod, now a Kryptonian prisoner, wants to turn the Earth into a new version of Krypton at the expense of the population already residing there. That idea comes to life mostly due in part to the performance of Michael Shannon. Shannon is one of our best and most intense actors – check him out sometime in the great "Take Shelter." Here he brings General Zod down to Earth, so to speak. He wants a planet to rule but there's nothing flashy or erudite about his personality. Shannon plays the role pretty close to the bone and that's appropriate.

British actor Henry Cavill in the title role has a great screen presence, but as you watch him, you sense that he will grow into the role if given another chance. He's not given a lot to say.

And his relationship with Lois Lane? What relationship? Her role (played by Amy Adams) is to be a nosy journalist, follow her leads and smoke out the identity of Superman, but there is nothing resembling a romance here. Except for one chaste kiss, they almost seem like just good buddies. There is a suggestion that their love affair is being held over for the sequel, but why not deal with it here? Of course, the standard for the man of steel lies is Richard Donner's 1978 classic with Christopher Reeve. That film was a beautiful four act play, laying out Superman's origins from Krypton to Smallville to Metropolis and to his adventure in California. Some of that energy is here, but in trying to give the movie the same tone as Nolan's Batman pictures, it's often wobby. It's a good movie at its best moments but, in truth, it needed some work.
Man Of Steel Is Enough For Any Man (or Woman)
(My first review on IMDb EVER. I don't know why I feel so strongly about defending this movie.)

As a summer tentpole, Man of Steel delivers. It's sprawling, feels epic, and is loaded with enough booms and bangs to keep the popcorn going. But don't let that distract you from the story: the origin is properly managed, and although it does look back to Donner's take on Superman II, it's been given a fresh spin.

Let's face it, he's called SUPERman. They've made him out to be a god on earth, and the action is adequately OTT to address it. This isn't a movie that's meant to be taken seriously; if you can believe a man can fly, you should be able to appreciate the outrageous action.

This is clearly not The Dark Knight, but you'll at least leave the cinema with a hint of a smile on your face, and feeling that the money spent was actually worth it.

High spot: Seeing Russel Crowe as Jor-el. What a fella. Low spot: The last 20 minutes fell a bit flat - but they weren't dull. Feels like: Big, loaded with thrills and spills.
Fast paced action and visually appealing
I have been a fan of Zack Snyder's work and when I heard he would be filling the director's shoes for Superman, I was excited. Man of Steel works at many levels. A solid story that starts from Krypton and ends at our world. One is made to feel like a Kryptonian more than a Earthling and the screenplay is very natural. I felt that the pacing was quite good and there was never a dull moment. The action is thick and realistic and you can expect a lot of destruction and havoc, but still befitting for a Superman movie. The casting was apt and Henry Cavill and Russel Crowe are the standouts but I will credit Zack for this movie's success and I hope WB persist with him for the sequel.
One of the stupidest movies ever made.
This review is going to be full of spoilers because I am going to mention various gaping plot inconsistencies and outright idiocies in this dog of a film.

Sure, it looks great and the special effects are generally well done. But some people need their movies to at least make some sense.

Let's start with a really basic one: the planet Krypton is going to be destroyed, and no one can be saved except one baby, presumably because they don't have any spacecraft.

Oh but wait, they do have spacecraft. In fact, they have so much spare technology they use it to send criminals into space... so that they will survive and provide enemies for Superman later in the movie.

Jor-El steals the Codex, which apparently contains the DNA of the Kryptonian race. Somehow, there are no backup copies. Oh but what about the actual Kryptonians who are running around destroying things... surely they each have their own DNA? Apparently not, somehow. And how about that baby-making machine in the scout ship: what was it supposed to use if there's only one Codex?

Clark just happens to hear about some top secret ice digging, and somehow knows to go there. How? And Lois Lane is somehow given a tour of the dig and a free place to stay even though she had to sue to be allowed there at all.

Clark discovers the spacecraft and somehow knows how to pilot it and land it somewhere. But then it never gets used again, for example to help fight the invaders later on. Doesn't it have the same kind of engine that's needed to destroy them? And it actually can fly rather than needing to be dropped via an airplane, as Clark's baby spacecraft is at the end of the film. But somehow no one thinks of this.

When Clark is taken to General Zod's ship, he loses his powers because he supposedly needs the gasses in earth's atmosphere to gain and retain his powers. Yet he's shown repeatedly operating in the vacuum of space. If he needed Earth's atmosphere to retain his powers, he should lose them in space.

In numerous fight scenes, massive damage is caused to probably inhabited buildings, which must have resulted in massive loss of life. Why wouldn't Clark/Superman immediately lure his enemies far away from the city, fight over the ocean, in the mountains, etc? In one scene he deliberately throws an enemy through a bunch of buildings, apparently not caring who gets hurt.

At the end, when the world engine is working, Superman flies into its gravity beam where his powers shouldn't exist because the conditions it's creating are like those of Krypton. But after being unable to do anything, he somehow just decides he's going to do it, and then instantly destroys the machine. Because if you really really decide, then you can do anything.

General Zod's ship will be flipped back into the Phantom Zone if its drive field comes in contact with another drive field of the same type, as found in Clark's baby spacecraft. But wait, don't all their small spacecraft use the same engine? Why don't they cause the same problem?

At the end, Superman and General Zod have an extended fight and appear to be equally matched, but when Zod threatens a prototypical family of Father, Mother and Child with his heat vision (and which he somehow doesn't manage to hurt although all he'd have to do is move his eyes slightly), Superman easily kills him, although he was completely unable to damage him until then. Again, just deciding to do something makes it happen.

These are just some of the really obvious major problems, how about some minor but equally stupid ones?

- Perry White, Jenny and Steve are walking away from General Zor's ship when Perry says "where's Jenny?" Oh, she's suddenly stuck under rubble that apparently no one noticed falling, and she hasn't bothered to scream or make any sound at all. They struggle to free her, when suddenly the beam stops and they say "He saved us!", even though they didn't know anything about Superman trying to save them, nor that the destruction wouldn't resume, or in fact anything about what was going on.

- Martha Kent is violently flung 20 feet or more. But apparently she's completely unhurt even though she's elderly and even a simple fall should have been damaging.

- When Superman and Zor are fighting, they fly a great distance and end up falling through the ceiling of something that looks like Grand Central Station. After a few seconds, Lois Lane suddenly appears out of nowhere, because she should be in that scene.

- In a 'heartwarming' scene at the end, Jonathan Kent sees young Clark playing with a cape and gets all misty eyed. Wait, how did he associate a kid playing with a cape with anything at all? Why would a cape signify something to him? It wouldn't.

This is a movie that didn't bother to make any sense, and the fact that people accept all the illogic, plot holes and dumbness of it really depresses me. Special effects shouldn't be enough to make a movie popular. The story and the logic of the story should count for at least as much and more.
This is NOT Superman
Before I even review this movie itself, viewers need to recognize the fact Warner Bros. spent millions on mass marketing of a new Superman movie when it doesn't even have Superman in the title and the actual name of the character is never spoken. That says a lot. While DC comics decided to "reboot" Superman, there is still a very specific mythos to Superman as a character which cannot be changed or it's no longer Superman. Essentially, director Zack Snyder with the studio's blessing decided to make him "cool" by veering off course and violating very basic principles of who Superman is morally and ethically. To change the signature costume of Superman is one thing but Snyder and company go much further. No spoilers here just plain fact that this is NOT Superman and nothing more than an attempt to slap Christopher Nolan's name to a film in order to get people to see it. While it may work in the short term, the problem is how monumentally flawed this "new" and "updated" incarnation is of what is supposed to be Superman which is why it is getting such a poor reception from most critics. The chemistry between Superman and Lois Lane is nonexistent and with a horrible script by David Goyer, the actors cannot be necessarily blamed entirely. As for Henry Cavill, I wouldn't call him a horrible actor but he does not pull off the charisma and most importantly the essential dichotomy between his alter ego as Clark Kent and as Superman. However the producers, director, and writer of this mish mash mess of a "reboot" didn't help. At least, Brandon Routh had the all-American wholesomeness similar to that of Christopher Reeve. Certain liberties are taken with how Clark Kent is presented in this movie which I won't give away. This movie is full of creative choices that make absolutely no sense and defy logic in general not to mention everything about who Clark Kent/Superman is. That's why this should really be referred to as a "reimagining" and a very poor one at that. The race of Perry White and gender of Jimmy Olsen is changed for no plausible reason other than to be "progressive" but Laurence Fishburne is a gifted actor wasted with the bland material he had to work with. Ultimately this is a knockoff of the real Superman character playing off the success of "The Dark Knight" films. The worst part is the CGI overkill which is a page ripped right out of Michael Bay's book on worthless filmmaking. It is becoming painfully clear how much like The Transformers this film is and any subsequent installments will only get worse. Hence we have Christopher Nolan's involvement to thank for this garbage. However I'm sure he is regretting his name being attached to this right now with the kind of reviews it is getting. Fanboys will surely cry when he chooses not to be involved and have his name attached to any sequels. Director Zack Snyder is definitely on his way to becoming the next Michael Bay. This "reimagining" is far from a masterpiece like Richard Donner's 1978 classic, "Superman". John Williams epic theme is sorely missed but fortunately not associated with this disaster. Even "Superman Returns" with it's flaws at least remained true to who Superman is as the character has and always will be. "Man of Steel" is a complete insult to over 70 years of rich history regarding the most iconic superhero character in the world. It's truly sad to see the character portrayed so badly and ruined by this film. I'm sure we'll be seeing "Man of Steel vs. Transformers" coming soon in 2016. No matter how much money or how it appeals to today's junk minded kids it will never be fondly remembered the way Superman always was and should be.
The Greatest Comic Book Story - Evolved, Modernized, and Retold
It is rare that I am able to see a movie on opening night. In fact, I can't remember the last time I did. Anyways, I had this movie marked off the calendar and I will guarantee that this review is the most unbiased and most truthful of any you will ever read for Man of Steel. This is the review of the greatest comic book story ever told by a movie watcher that has no loyalties to either DC or Marvel.

First of all, I will say that if you are a fan of Superman in any way, ignore the negative reviews you have heard or read so far and see the movie for yourself. Trust me, you can do a lot worse, and it is hard to find many movies that are much better.

The storytelling of Superman assumes the viewer already knows the story. It doesn't treat the viewer as dumb as what I felt some of the recent movies on Marvel's side have done. There are many flashbacks to his early years and it is up to the viewer to put the pieces together as new scenes are shown. Basically, there is a lot of foreshadowing and flashbacks - probably the most I've seen for a movie - even more than the Dark Knight Trilogy. This isn't bad or good. It is different.

That is what makes this movie fresh. It is far from a remake and if you are looking for someone to take up Christopher Reeves shoes, look elsewhere. This Superman is updated and slightly darker, but more real. It is just a new story told. And that is where I find the fascination with Superman 1 and 2 so confusing. If one looks at why they were successful, they will see that the first had very little competition (1978) and the second was basically mostly shot when the first was made. This is undisputed. And since both movies were the first blockbusters to tell the Superman story, there was nothing to really compare it to.

Man of Steel does has some flaws and I can see where people might complain. Having seen many movies myself, there were set pieces and scenes where I wasn't sure if I was watching War of the Worlds, Independence Day, or Matrix Revolutions. I won't go into details on that but I will say there were some peculiar similarities. Perhaps studios are using the same CGI engines? Overall, this movie is just well written and the cast is nearly perfect. Amy Adams plays a believable Lois Lane and Henry Cavill, IMO, is the most legit looking Superman in any TV show or movie. While Michael Shannon got some laughs by the audience on some overly dramatic scenes, I think he played General Zod as good as anyone could.

The huge plus I have for this movie is what they avoided. One of Superman's character flaws is his only "weakness". You know what it is and it isn't mentioned anywhere in this movie. I think that is great and gives the possibility for sequels. Secondly, the whole identity thing is a thing of the past. It was never a great trait to the story and this movie franchise seems to have fresh ideas on how to portray Superman. However, you can't get away with the fact that Superman is not Batman and doesn't have the story lines or villains that make Batman so outstanding. Batman's mortality is also what makes him able to relate to everyone.

Aside from some minor setbacks, this movie is excellent. My other complaint is that Hans Zimmer's music, while epic, wasn't allowed to be as epic as it could have been. Scenes were cut short and so was the score that played through the movie. I think the editing could have been better to let the music play through scenes.

Man of Steel is better than Avengers, Thor, and Captain America, IMO, but not up to the level of any of the Dark Knight Trilogy. Either way I have a feeling it won't get the respect it deserves. All I'm saying is to watch the movie and decide for yourself. 9/10
Man of Steel is what a Superman movie must be!
Great film-making. Superb cast. Wonderful screenplay. Decent dialogues. Heavy action. Splendid visual spectacle.

Henry Cavill does a wonderful job. So does Russel Crowe and Kevin Costner. Even the smaller, not-so-important-to-the-plot characters are given something useful to do (rather than staring at the fights and giving 'suitable' expressions). Amy Adams is believable and cute.

The Superman that we all wanted to see brought to life through a great effort by everyone.

Man of Steel is to Superman what Batman Begins was to Batman. Need I say more?
Snyder and Nolan have officially both ruined Superman for me
Please bear in mind that I am a fan of both Zack Snyder and Christopher Nolan. I'll spend pretty much every day until my terminal breath defending Sucker Punch and Snyder's Watchmen adaptation. Nolan's work with the Batman movies is nothing short of absolutely amazing and he has one eye for a tragic superhero story. He turned the story of Bruce Wayne into a beautiful tragic story of a man who must choose heroism or sanity. Watchmen is the story of former superheroes who realize that even though they're retired, they have a lot of saving to do- themselves for a starting point. And so when you take Superman and give it a dark spin, it's bound to succeed, right?

Absolutely wrong.

Alright, so maybe the movie isn't bad. If you're a pedestrian viewer wanting an explosion filled action movie, then you'll get that here. But for us Superman fans, it's a disgrace. I don't know who these "fans" are telling us that this is close to the graphic novels, in fact the way they adapted the comics is among some of the most appalling adapting work I've ever seen. There are problems right off the bat when Jor-El is stabbed to death by General Zod. REALLY? If anyone has even read the comic books, you'd realize that Jor-El is much stronger and more defensive than that. But it doesn't stop there

To begin with, the Superman is greatly raped with a stove pipe and executed Tarantino- style throughout. He spends the whole movie angsting and whining. It's as annoying as The Tenth Doctor's final episode of Doctor Who. Alright, that's a little dramatic, sure. But half the exchanges between Clark Kent and people around him consist of:

PERSON X: Clark, can we talk? CLARK: I don't want to. PERSON X: Look Clark, nothing is wrong with you. CLARK: I know. PERSON X: so why don't you send your powers to the world? CLARK: No, you don't understand. People CAN'T know who I am. They'll reject me.

Every time one of these rubbish soap opera dialogues rung out over the cinema speakers, I groaned. To be fair, it is SLIGHTLY true to the comics, but they take it up to 11 here and it's unnecessary. The cutting of the film is really off here too. One minute, Superman is being interrogated, the next he's in the desert. It comes off as if Snyder dropped the script on the ground one day thus messing up the pages, then decided, "ah, never mind, let's just shoot it like this". Your head will explode trying to make sense of this thing, man.

And then there's the second half, filled with nothing but action, explosions, Superman pushing General Zod through several buildings (I laughed several times). The action itself is bloated, boring and incomprehensible too. Shaky camera and quick cutting combined with 3D, when I wasn't falling asleep, I was wondering what in the hot frak was going on. And then the climax, or lack of was just laughable.

So, are there any positives? Well, the cast do a good job. I did like Henry Cavill a lot and I think given the terrible script that he had to work with, he did a decent job. Diane Lane and Kevin Costner are also great, but the highlight of the film is easily Michael Shannon as General Zod. He really knows how to make a bad guy scary- watch the film "Bug" for proof. But he shines here and he plays the villain in such a way that you both feel bad for him and hate him at the same time, which is proof of a well executed villain.

Otherwise, stay away from this turkey at all costs. Don't believe the positive reviews, the critics are right for once. I figured it was just the unhealthy and unfair hate-on they have for Snyder, but nope. They're right. I'm guessing WB hired plants to write reviews, because a lot of the reviews do seem very much vague. This film will ruin everything you love about Superman, so avoid at all cost.
Even the 3D sucks.
I loved Zack Snyder's debut movie, the thrilling 2004 remake of Dawn of the Dead; it must have been beginner's luck, because everything I have seen by the guy since has been utter garbage, with Man of Steel being no exception. Two and a half hours of superficial, overblown, CGI packed nonsense that fails spectacularly to make an emotional connection with the viewer in the first hour and thereafter settles for mindless action, the film is worse than I expected—and I never expected it to be good.

The special effects employed in 1978's Superman The Movie might have been crude in comparison to the spectacular mayhem presented here, but as an overall experience, the Christopher Reeve film wins hands down, director Richard Donner giving his audience humour, pathos and a genuine sense of awe, helped in no small part by the wonderful John Williams score; Snyder achieves only boredom, his huge explosions and random destruction rapidly becoming extremely tedious.

Tall, muscular and handsome, Henry Cavill makes for an impressive Supes (even in his dingy 21st century version of the iconic costume), Michael Shannon is suitably imposing as General Zod, and although Amy Adams is miscast as feisty reporter Lois Lane, I never complain when she is on-screen. But as hard as the cast might try, the magic is simply not there, David S. Goyer's plot-hole ridden script and Snyder's soul-less direction making this as bad as, if not worse than, Superman Returns (2006).

4.5 out of 10, generously rounded up to 5 for Ms. Adams—who is as lovely as always—and that bad-ass, dark-haired Kryptonian chick, both of whom helped prevent me from dozing off.

***EDIT*** I've changed my mind, this is only worth a 4 at best.
Watch Super Man 2 instead.
Quite possibly the most boring movie I have ever watched. Seems they spent a fortune on special effects but left out all the usual things you would associate with a movie... Generally its just loud noises and ridiculous city crushing fight scenes. The story is pretty poor too. So many things that just done seem like they mix well with a Superman Movie. They should just give up and stop 're-booting' or 're-imagining' all these old movies. Try writing something Original guys. Basically this is a massively hyped movie that is made simply for big profit by big business. Throw in a load of effects to keep the fan-boys happy, as they cannot contemplate suspenseful dialog or story-lines we can relate to. So many superior movies out there made on a fraction of the budget. The star-ships etc are terrible considering the budget when compared to something like District 9. This is more Captain America than Superman.
📹 Man of Steel full movie HD download 2013 - Ayelet Zurer, Christopher Meloni, Michael Kelly, Jadin Gould, Tahmoh Penikett, Richard Cetrone, Dylan Sprayberry, Antje Traue, Kevin Costner, Michael Shannon, Laurence Fishburne, Russell Crowe, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Diane Lane, Richard Schiff, Harry Lennix, David Paetkau, Cooper Timberline - USA, UK, Canada. 📀