His description: “In it I argue Man of Steel was about a rebirth of KalEl as Superman, and the Jesus analogy is only told to emphasize the mythological scale of Superman’s story. In fact, he is not meant to be jesus but instead he brings a new testament in comparison to the old testament of the kryptonian way of adhering mindlessly to predetermined moral absolutes.”
Much like MOS itself, this commentary is confronting at first, but worth watching with an open mind for what it is.
The essential thesis is not necessarily new: That Superman is not born until after Zod is defeated.
However, he supports his position by pursuing Birth as an interpretation technique and borrowing from Christianity. Then uses it as a lens to explain and justify many of the scenes in the film, its conclusion, and controversies.
His strongest proposal for Birth as the overarching theme comes from the parallels he draws between Kal-El’s birth on Krypton an Zod’s defeat: http://youtu.be/W3SLLEzkG8c
If this clip speaks to you, definitely check out the full video!
I don’t think this interpretation is definitive, but it is well-constructed (even lovingly so), thought out, and persuasively presented. A must watch for fans but unlikely to convert most critics or skeptics.
I absolutely agree with his concluding assessment of they kind of Superman MOS was seeking to portray and that’s a compelling argument. I’m not sure those not well versed in religion would necessarily pick up what he’s saying, but presenting a Superman with the sophistication to deal with a real and complicated world, as opposed to hollow moral absolutes as parallel to the New Testament’s more principle-based philosophy versus the Old Testament’s legalism is something novel and interesting to me.