Jump to content

#ED

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice (2016)  

138 members have voted

  1. 1. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)



Recommended Posts



One gets the feeling that its heart is in the right place, but in the end the most noteworthy aspect of this film is how little of an impact it makes.  It's not only inconsequential in nature, but extraordinarily so.

 

Love him or hate him, Zack Snyder's impact on the world of cinema (for better or worse) cannot be discounted.  This may in fact be his biggest undertaking yet as he takes on superhero behemoths Batman and Superman, and in the same damn film to boot.  As a viewer, one would hope each character would receive ample attention, and the end product would result in something entirely novel in the superhero genre.  Unfortunately for the viewer, such is not the case here. 

 

It's important to note what is attempted here.  Specifically, this is a fairly serious interpretation, and as a result, viewer investment is not only preferable, but more importantly essential for full maximization of the film's potential.  

 

Unfortunately, I'm not sure that was allowed to happen here.  The story isn't necessarily mechanical in its execution, but rather it feels far too disjointed.  In a way it is simultaneously over and under-plotted.  There's a lot going on and character dynamics aplenty are thrown at the screen, but there's not near enough focus for any of them to have anything outside of a brief fleeting impact.  A little bit of nuance to the story would have been a welcome sight 
here.

 

Perhaps the best way to signify the film's failure is the lack of impact felt in the last ten minutes.  Clearly meant to be the emotional core, it simply didn't do near enough to earn the effect that it so clearly desires.  As a result, one is left wondering why we're supposed to give a rat's ass.  As stated prior, that's the crux of the problem with this film.  It's big, it's loud, and it's assertive, but in the end I'm not sure what the hell it's being assertive about.  In many ways it merely exists.

 

Bloated and detached viewing, plain and simple.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites



38 minutes ago, mattmav45 said:

Perhaps the best way to signify the film's failure is the lack of impact felt in the last ten minutes.  Clearly meant to be the emotional core, it simply didn't do near enough to earn the effect that it so clearly desires.  As a result, one is left wondering why we're supposed to give a rat's ass.  As stated prior, that's the crux of the problem with this film.  It's big, it's loud, and it's assertive, but in the end I'm not sure what the hell it's being assertive about.  In many ways it merely exists.

 

This hits the nail on the head as to my whole problem with the movie. When something that should be heavily profound occurs close to the end and the only reaction I can muster up is "I'm ready for this endurance contest to be over already," that's when you know everyone involved has failed in what they've set out to do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, lilmac said:

C

 

I inwardly chuckled at the nods to the criticisms of city leveling that occurred during MOS

 

"Why did you draw him back to the city?"  

- Wonder Woman to Batman

 

"The island is inhabited."

- Soldier stating this after Doomsday crashed back to Earth 

 

Here are a couple more allusions:

"There are no civilians here"

The entire beginning of the movie showing the 'human side' of the Zod vs Supes fight

Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 hours ago, filmlover said:

This hits the nail on the head as to my whole problem with the movie. When something that should be heavily profound occurs close to the end and the only reaction I can muster up is "I'm ready for this endurance contest to be over already," that's when you know everyone involved has failed in what they've set out to do.

 

Very true, if the only reaction you can get out of me from an emotional death of an iconic character is a shrug, something's wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They make a great point. So...Lex Luthor wanted to draw out Batman by sending back his checks over the past two years...checks that Bruce Wayne only discovered at the end when the plot said he needed to. 

 

Maybe I need to see the movie again but it remains a solid C. 

 

 

Outside of Batman and Superman, DC has alot of lame heroes. Give DC to Marvel. haha.

Edited by lilmac
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



7 hours ago, filmlover said:

This hits the nail on the head as to my whole problem with the movie. When something that should be heavily profound occurs close to the end and the only reaction I can muster up is "I'm ready for this endurance contest to be over already," that's when you know everyone involved has failed in what they've set out to do.

 

No one believed he was really dead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lilmac said:

 

No one believed he was really dead. 

Even so, just the devastation that his "loss" has on those around him within the film (who believe that both Superman/Clark Kent is really dead) should really have a profound impact, especially when we see that he was going to propose to Lois and that the people of Metropolis hold a vigil for him. I felt completely unmoved, and that's when you know the filmmakers have failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



6 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Even so, just the devastation that his "loss" has on those around him within the film (who believe that both Superman/Clark Kent is really dead) should really have a profound impact, especially when we see that he was going to propose to Lois and that the people of Metropolis hold a vigil for him. I felt completely unmoved, and that's when you know the filmmakers have failed.

 

It took you until the end of the movie to realize they failed? :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



3 hours ago, rukaio101 said:

For those still following my mega-breakdown review, here's Part 4. We're reaching the final stretch...

 

 

Listen and understand. That Rukaio is out there. He can't be bargained with. He can't be reasoned with. He doesn't know pain, or remorse, or fear. And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until no one likes BvS.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites



20 minutes ago, 4815162342 said:

 

Listen and understand. That Rukaio is out there. He can't be bargained with. He can't be reasoned with. He doesn't know pain, or remorse, or fear. And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until no one likes BvS.

terminator-2-t-1000-shake.gif

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I went into this movie half expecting a mess based on the critical review.  However, I had seen mostly positive WOM on twitter so I wasn't sure which way it might go.  There were some people in the audience clapping at the end (Seriously? It's a movie, not a play folks.  They can't hear you.).  While walking out of the theater I finally turned to the person I had seen it with and said, "You know for something that got such bad review, I thought it was pretty good." and he agreed.  From what I could hear of other patrons (people discussing it while waiting in the bathroom, fathers talking to their sons, etc), the reaction seemed to be positive from what I could tell.

 

Was this a great masterpiece of cinema?  No, not by any stretch of the imagination.  But how did this get a 30% on twitter while such clearly mediocre superhero devices like Iron Man 2, the Thor films, Hulk, etc, get in the 60s and 70s?  This was no Avengers, CW:WS or DOFP but what is with all the inconsistency for judging comic book movies these days?

Overall I would give this movie an 8, maybe an 8.5 out of 10 (B to B+).  It was a little long, Luthor's plan seemed highly convoluted and lacking the design and detail that one would expect from an evil genius and the Doomsday character with his enormous power seemed a bit over the top.  If anything a supercharged Doomsday seemed to bring up that old adage of . . . "Hey Batman, why are you here again?  You have no real superpowers.  What are you going to do against an enemy with the ability to destroy the planet . . . hit it with a batarang?".

 

But I had no problem with most of the movie.  The parts that got me the most was the bombing in the capital and Superman's face as he realized his collossal failure.  The fact that Luthor callously sent his trusted assistant in to die to ensure plausible deniability probably showed Lex's singularity of purpose and cemented his insane cruelty for me.  I thought Batman fighting in the warehouse to be an enjoyable action scene with more of the gritty violence and destruction you would expect in real life (compared to some more cartoonish interpretations).  I thought the middle part of the movie that put together Batman's plan and investigation of Lex was presented as well as can be expected and the insertion of Wonder Woman to be an interesting mystery thrown into the mix.  The Knightmares were a bit disjointed but I can see the point of a man haunted by dreams of Superman as a monster would drive even a logical man like Bruce Wayne to become obsessed and desperate.

 

The introduction of the rest of the JL other than Wonder Woman seemed pretty shoe horned in, I think it could have been done better but hey . . . the movie was already dragging along at 2 and a half hours.  The ending/funerals seem to go on for way too long for me but these are secondary nitpicks.  Overall, the acting of the leads was acceptable, Gal Gadot looks great (not sure about her acting though, there wasn't much to draw from), and the story/explanation of why these two heros would be battling each other seemed plausible enough.  It is definitely a movie worth seeing but not one that you are going to hold up as the new standard in superhero films.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 3/26/2016 at 9:43 AM, rukaio101 said:

For those still interesting in my continued ravings about this movie, here's Part 2.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you realize this or not but you pretty much sum up all the problems you really have with this film in your first few paragraphs.  This is not the Superman character you grew up adoring and this more flawed, complex version of the character pains you to the core.  After reading this admission, I think 90% of the free world could predict where the following BvS dissertation would go.  I even felt bad when I saw that you so badly wanted this movie to "fix" the contaminated "Superman" character you saw in Man of Steel.  As if Zach Snyder was going to suddenly revert back to the beloved character you had in your mind.  And with that, I am by no means suprised that 1) You found Batman too violent and out of character and 2) Lex Luthor wasn't played in the same mold that you envisioned him from growing up.  Do you notice a common theme here?

 

Let's face it, this could have been the greatest movie achievement since Shawshank Redemption and you were never going to like it.  Snyder stole your heros from you and made them flawed.  Your shining beacon of hope became hesitant and humanized.  They took your black and white absolutes and made them grey.  You took this personally and there was nothing that could have been done to win you back.  I'm not saying your highly detailed nitpicking is useless but at the very least it is quite predicable.  You might as well dedicate a paragraph to the color of Superman's uniform or the design of the batwing because you don't seem to fully grasp your own motivation.

 

Look, most people love Star Wars.  However if for some reason you couldn't get over the fact that the Empire couldn't construct a baffle over their exhaust port, or design some retractable sheilding or even place a few spaceships in the one area that's a weakness in your enormous death star when you notice it is the exact place the rebels are attacking . . . it could literally ruin the WHOLE movie for you!!!  That's really all it takes, a person being unable to accept some premise of a story to such a degree it ruins everything else good in the movie.  For you, the exhaust port was Superman's portrayal.  After you reached that point . . . everything else was simply a lesser degree of resentment.

 

I can sympathize that you desire to become a writer and it is only natural that you will dissect every story you come across and wonder what you would have done and how you could have improved upon it.  However, in this case, have you ever bothered to step back and wonder where all this vitriol and contempt comes from?  I mean you aren't just complaining about the script, you are delving deeper and inserting your personal interpretation of plot points that go BEYOND the presented story and then bashing those assumptions.  And you are so emotionally vested, so outraged at the blasphemous portrayal of your childhood heroes that you can't even recognize that you have gone off the deep end my friend.  Your review has gone from impartial critique of cinematic technique to full blown outraged fanboy rant.  And it veered off so early in the process that the point where those two points of view blur together is unrecognizable.

 

I cannot relate to disliking a movie so much that it becomes an obsession but if putting your outrage and sorrow to words helps to serve a therapeutic purpose for you, then by all means continue.  Hopefully after the emotional pain starts to subside you can even revisit your lengthy dissertation and do a little self-discovery about yourself.  Perhaps recognizing your own tendencies and what you are uncomfortable with will help you move beyond these limitations in your future writing endeavors.  Good luck.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



21 minutes ago, KGator said:

 

I'm not sure if you realize this or not but you pretty much sum up all the problems you really have with this film in your first few paragraphs.  This is not the Superman character you grew up adoring and this more flawed, complex version of the character pains you to the core.  After reading this admission, I think 90% of the free world could predict where the following BvS dissertation would go.  I even felt bad when I saw that you so badly wanted this movie to "fix" the contaminated "Superman" character you saw in Man of Steel.  As if Zach Snyder was going to suddenly revert back to the beloved character you had in your mind.  And with that, I am by no means suprised that 1) You found Batman too violent and out of character and 2) Lex Luthor wasn't played in the same mold that you envisioned him from growing up.  Do you notice a common theme here?

 

Let's face it, this could have been the greatest movie achievement since Shawshank Redemption and you were never going to like it.  Snyder stole your heros from you and made them flawed.  Your shining beacon of hope became hesitant and humanized.  They took your black and white absolutes and made them grey.  You took this personally and there was nothing that could have been done to win you back.  I'm not saying your highly detailed nitpicking is useless but at the very least it is quite predicable.  You might as well dedicate a paragraph to the color of Superman's uniform or the design of the batwing because you don't seem to fully grasp your own motivation.

 

Look, most people love Star Wars.  However if for some reason you couldn't get over the fact that the Empire couldn't construct a baffle over their exhaust port, or design some retractable sheilding or even place a few spaceships in the one area that's a weakness in your enormous death star when you notice it is the exact place the rebels are attacking . . . it could literally ruin the WHOLE movie for you!!!  That's really all it takes, a person being unable to accept some premise of a story to such a degree it ruins everything else good in the movie.  For you, the exhaust port was Superman's portrayal.  After you reached that point . . . everything else was simply a lesser degree of resentment.

 

I can sympathize that you desire to become a writer and it is only natural that you will dissect every story you come across and wonder what you would have done and how you could have improved upon it.  However, in this case, have you ever bothered to step back and wonder where all this vitriol and contempt comes from?  I mean you aren't just complaining about the script, you are delving deeper and inserting your personal interpretation of plot points that go BEYOND the presented story and then bashing those assumptions.  And you are so emotionally vested, so outraged at the blasphemous portrayal of your childhood heroes that you can't even recognize that you have gone off the deep end my friend.  Your review has gone from impartial critique of cinematic technique to full blown outraged fanboy rant.  And it veered off so early in the process that the point where those two points of view blur together is unrecognizable.

 

I cannot relate to disliking a movie so much that it becomes an obsession but if putting your outrage and sorrow to words helps to serve a therapeutic purpose for you, then by all means continue.  Hopefully after the emotional pain starts to subside you can even revisit your lengthy dissertation and do a little self-discovery about yourself.  Perhaps recognizing your own tendencies and what you are uncomfortable with will help you move beyond these limitations in your future writing endeavors.  Good luck.

 

tl;dr

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



37 minutes ago, KGator said:

 

I'm not sure if you realize this or not but you pretty much sum up all the problems you really have with this film in your first few paragraphs. This is not the Superman character you grew up adoring and this more flawed, complex version of the character pains you to the core. After reading this admission, I think 90% of the free world could predict where the following BvS dissertation would go.

This is hilarious considering most of what I ended up talking about in those reviews was the movie's piss poor story structure and abundance of pointless scenes. Certainly I touch on character here and there, but most of what I talk about is simply the poor storytelling.

 

FYI, the bolded part is especially hilarious. The main reason I hate MoS is because its interpretation is significantly not more complex. I've nothing against a different or darker take on the character that deviates heavily from the comics. Hell, I really liked the darker alt-universe Superman in that Gods and Monsters animated movie. That guy killed and they did it really well. But if you're going to do a darker take on the character, that take needs to actually be good. MoS Superman is a bland, poorly-written character who is rarely allowed a human moment because that movie, like this one, mistakes talking points and half-baked religious symbolism for depth and characterisation.

 

That said, since it became incredibly obvious from the first paragraph that you've not actually bothered to read any of my reviews past my opening statement, I really don't see any point in reading yours any further either.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



3 minutes ago, rukaio101 said:

This is hilarious considering most of what I ended up talking about in those reviews was the movie's piss poor story structure and abundance of pointless scenes. Certainly I touch on character here and there, but most of what I talk about is simply the poor storytelling.

 

FYI, the bolded part is especially hilarious. The main reason I hate MoS is because its interpretation is significantly not more complex. I've nothing against a different or darker take on the character that deviates heavily from the comics. Hell, I really liked the darker alt-universe Superman in that Gods and Monsters animated movie. That guy killed and they did it really well. But if you're going to do a darker take on the character, that take needs to actually be good. MoS Superman is a bland, poorly-written character who is rarely allowed a human moment because that movie, like this one, mistakes talking points and half-baked religious symbolism for depth and characterisation.

 

That said, since it became incredibly obvious from the first paragraph that you've not actually bothered to read any of my reviews past my opening statement, I really don't see any point in reading yours any further either.

 

Yeah, speaking of piss.  You did dedicate a lot of your review to talking about piss . . . literally droning on and on and on (and on and on) about it.

 

See!!  It proves I did read your diatribe!  In fact, I can honestly say I've never before read a review that spends so many paragraphs obsessed about the symbolism of pee in a cup (and admittedly, I hope I never will again).  Still, Kudos to you for being the first to accomplish this!  Your friends and family must all be very proud.  At least if they can overlook the fact that the first thing that came to your mind in the Senator Barrows/Lex Luthor interaction was some perverse sexual episode.  Seriously man . . . WTF???

 

And FYI the old man's name was Jack, not Chad.  I know you cared about him very deeply (see more review tidbits) so feel free to go back and edit that for future clarification in your pointless rant . . . . errrr . . . . I mean your RANT about POINTLESS scenes (my bad).  I can see how that name confused you, considering how Bruce only called out his name like 10 times in 2 minutes.  Maybe you drank a lot before the movie and had to piss so badly at the time so you couldn't focus.  At least that would explain the emphasis on that topic in your review.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 minutes ago, KGator said:

 

Yeah, speaking of piss.  You did dedicate a lot of your review to talking about piss . . . literally droning on and on and on (and on and on) about it.

 

See!!  It proves I did read your diatribe!  In fact, I can honestly say I've never before read a review that spends so many paragraphs obsessed about the symbolism of pee in a cup (and admittedly, I hope I never will again).  Still, Kudos to you for being the first to accomplish this!  Your friends and family must all be very proud.  At least if they can overlook the fact that the first thing that came to your mind in the Senator Barrows/Lex Luthor interaction was some perverse sexual episode.  Seriously man . . . WTF???

 

And FYI the old man's name was Jack, not Chad.  I know you cared about him very deeply (see more review tidbits) so feel free to go back and edit that for future clarification in your pointless rant . . . . errrr . . . . I mean your RANT about POINTLESS scenes (my bad).  I can see how that name confused you, considering how Bruce only called out his name like 10 times in 2 minutes.  Maybe you drank a lot before the movie and had to piss so badly at the time so you couldn't focus.  At least that would explain the emphasis on that topic in your review.

If by 'droning on' you meant 'mentioned it once in the entirety of Part 1' then yes, I suppose I did. And all you proved is that you quickly skimmed through Part 1 in a desperate attempt to look like you actually read my review.

 

That said, since you've made it obvious you're not interested in any kind of actual objective debate on points made in the review and instead just want to insult me, I'm going to put you on ignore.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.