#BvS SPOILER THREAD

[zDBZ]

I've been fighting the flu since last Friday; today was the first day I felt well enough to brave venturing outside and going to the movie theatre. I may have been hasty in that, as I feel pretty wiped, but here's what I can manage for a review:

Even before the reviews started to come out, I expected that I would have problems with this movie. I disliked MoS so much, and Snyder's aesthetic tastes are so far from my own, that I just didn't see how this could be my cup of tea. Each new trailer further drove that feeling home, and the fact that the trailers ended giving away so much just further poisoned a sense of enthusiasm.

Now that I've seen it: this is a very, very overstuffed movie with very, very big problems, and it is by and large not my cup of tea. Zack Snyder and Hans Zimmer both fail yet again to make me come around on their tastes, or in Snyder's case, to think that he doesn't have some serious weaknesses at his craft. I'm not really excited for anything on the slate for DC other than Wonder Woman after seeing this movie. But with all that said, I did like it better that MoS (that one was 5 out of 10 for me; I'd give BvS a 6. High praise, I know.)

I may expand on some of this later when I'm not hacking up a lung, but some quick highs/lows:

- Great work in costume design. Honestly. This is the first time I've been truly charmed by a design element in a DC film since...well, since the Burton/Schumacher days, to be honest. The only thing I missed from wardrobe was longer bat-ears (we got the short stubs with Nolan for three films, bring back some proper ears!)

- I liked Gal Gadot. She did not need to be in the movie.

- Lois Lane barely needed to be in this movie. I've seen people crying "huzzah!" at the "I'm not a lady, I'm a journalist" line, but that line is 1. terrible and 2. doesn't excuse the fact that, like in MoS, she's basically just there to get saved, and doesn't accomplish anything for the plot that couldn't have been handled more logically by another character.

- The JL set-up material didn't need to be in this movie. Other than serving as teasers for future films, what does it accomplish? Was the idea of Batman and Superman coming into conflict not enough to occupy the full run time?

- Eisenberg as Lex: you either love it, or you hate it. I hated it. I'll give him props for trying to take it to a threatening place by the end, but it didn't do it for me. The guy was just too silly.

- As a member of the Burton faithful, I've long come to terms with the idea that people will not enjoy certain elements of his work with Batman due to the wild departures he made from the source material. Would some of these people like to tell me how they handled Snyder's work with Jimmy Olsen? 'Cause I thought that was a load of bull, and Snyder's explanation for it just made it worse. (His tapdances to try and defend his controversial choices are getting old IMO.)

- I liked Ben Affleck as Batman. Branding aside, that scene in the sex dungeon could completely work as a standard Batman take-down. And his Bruce Wayne, at certain points, acted more like I imagine him than any film to-date. But Affleck is too young and too good-looking to totally sell the idea of a Batman who's been in operation for two decades. With everything else Snyder cribbed from TDKR, why not go for an older, more grizzled look?

- I'll give Snyder credit: the "Martha" thing took some guts. I'm impressed with how many people it did it for. I thought it sort of worked; my biggest problem with that moment is that Batman had become so psychotic by the time he was about to use the spear, that while the name "Martha" may make him stop, I didn't buy the wholesale turnaround in attitude that gets made so quickly right after.

- Irons killed it as Alfred.

- Nice to see Thomas Wayne finally get his mustache. Wonder why they couldn't give Alfred his.

- I seem to be a minority on this, but I've never been all that intrigued by "does the world need a Superman" type stories or discussions. As something to do once on a TV show, or for a limited comic run, it's a valid story, but two have two movies now where Supes is emotionally conflicted, often brooding and lonely, unsure of his place in the world, and Congress is holding committees on him as talking head Neil DeGrasse Tyson pontificates on CNN?

I take a view on Superman that I've seen best explained by Mark Waid: Superman was designed to literally do the impossible. He was designed to be better than us, not one of us. He isn't built for no-win scenarios. To take such a clearly unrealistic character and to apply this sort of "does the world need it" type conflicts to him, as his main issue for a film adaptation...I won't say that it's as ridiculous as doing that with Bugs Bunny, but the arguments against it are similar to the ones I could give for doing that with Bugs.

- People always talk about comics being modern American mythology. I've read my fair share of mythology and folklore. Most of it isn't all that preoccupied with trying to prove how deep, timely, and important it is. There is way too much dialogue in this film that's obsessed with explaining and discussing themes and implications, its meaning, and its purpose. I've had this problem since Nolan, but until now, I've never known how to articulate it other than just shoving it under the "too much exposition" banner.

- Doomsday: weak design, weak CGI, weak fight. And felt tossed in.

- "Death of Superman" moment: didn't feel earned. A lot like Jonathan Kent's death from MoS, actually. What reason is there that Wonder Woman can't be the one to wield the spear? It'd give her a more concrete reason to be in this flick.

- Speaking of Jonathan Kent: "Superman was nothing but the dream of a father in Kansas." A father from Krypton, more like. Did you just blank out the fact that Kansas-Dad thought you might be better off letting a busload of kids drown?

That's all I got for now.

[The Laughing Fish]

- I liked Ben Affleck as Batman. Branding aside, that scene in the sex dungeon could completely work as a standard Batman take-down. And his Bruce Wayne, at certain points, acted more like I imagine him than any film to-date. But Affleck is too young and too good-looking to totally sell the idea of a Batman who's been in operation for two decades. With everything else Snyder cribbed from TDKR, why not go for an older, more grizzled look?

I thought Affleck looked old enough for the part. Plus, I get the feeling that Hollywood doesn't want to have a leading man or woman looking too old for superhero movies anyway. They probably think it wouldn't be marketable enough.

- Lois Lane barely needed to be in this movie. I've seen people crying "huzzah!" at the "I'm not a lady, I'm a journalist" line, but that line is 1. terrible and 2. doesn't excuse the fact that, like in MoS, she's basically just there to get saved, and doesn't accomplish anything for the plot that couldn't have been handled more logically by another character.

I thought she served more of a purpose in MOS with her investigation into Clark's trails and how she was the first stranger who trusted him. But I do agree that a lot of her screen-time could've been drastically cut in this movie.

- I'll give Snyder credit: the "Martha" thing took some guts. I'm impressed with how many people it did it for. I thought it sort of worked; my biggest problem with that moment is that Batman had become so psychotic by the time he was about to use the spear, that while the name "Martha" may make him stop, I didn't buy the wholesale turnaround in attitude that gets made so quickly right after.

I have to disagree. Up until this point, Batman was consumed with paranoia over Superman that he was too blinded to realize that Lex Luthor was manipulating both him and Superman. This was the turning point to understand what was going on.

- The JL set-up material didn't need to be in this movie. Other than serving as teasers for future films, what does it accomplish? Was the idea of Batman and Superman coming into conflict not enough to occupy the full run time?

Given that the next film is going to be the Justice League, I thought this film did the best it could introduce other characters in this universe. Not ideal perhaps, but I'll take it.

- "Death of Superman" moment: didn't feel earned. A lot like Jonathan Kent's death from MoS, actually. What reason is there that Wonder Woman can't be the one to wield the spear? It'd give her a more concrete reason to be in this flick.

I had problems with plot points that involved Superman in this movie i.e. leaving myself to wonder why did he take so long to arrive in North Africa, how come he couldn't pay attention when a bomb was about to detonate in the Senate hearing, why he didn't take Batman into custody instead of merely threatening him if he was so disapproving of Batman's methods at the end of the chase scene. Those are my reasons why I thought the movie didn't quite live up to my personal expectations.

But despite all of that, I thought he redeemed all of those issues with paying a sacrifice to stop Doomsday in the end. He still saved the world despite how it kept scrutinizing him and condemning him, and his death inspired Batman and Wonder Woman to carry on his legacy and protect the world from constant danger.

- Speaking of Jonathan Kent: "Superman was nothing but the dream of a father in Kansas." A father from Krypton, more like. Did you just blank out the fact that Kansas-Dad thought you might be better off letting a busload of kids drown?

This is off-topic, but I never thought Jonathan Kent was actually encouraging Clark to let those kids drown. He was simply scared of the possibility that Clark could expose himself to a world that he's not prepared to cope with, and wanted to protect him from that level of persecution and pressure. Then again, Snyder brought that criticism upon himself by having Pa Kent say the word "maybe". I wouldn't have used it if I was a director.

[The Dark Knight]

Pa Kent has a point though. Superman saves people over and over and it's still not appreciated. When you do something for a while, it becomes expected. And soon, criticised. Even the simple act of saving a cat out of a tree would be criticised. To the point you wonder if it's really worth it. The act of letting people die in a bus keeps the status quo, in a sad way. A Superman gives the public someone to rely on, and then blame for 'not doing enough', or whatever gripe they have.

Superman becomes the public whipping boy.

As for Africa, the whole narrative point is that he was late onto the scene. It's about the perception and not the reality. Much like the congress scene, wherever Superman goes, dead bodies follow. He becomes a figure of controversy and people fill in their own gaps. People who don't dig into the ins and out of stories, much like click bait headlines, just see that Superman has attended another crime scene, and 'fled the scene' afterwards.

[Catwoman]

I've been fighting the flu since last Friday; today was the first day I felt well enough to brave venturing outside and going to the movie theatre. I may have been hasty in that, as I feel pretty wiped, but here's what I can manage for a review:

Hope you feel better soon. I've been dealing with the same sh*t, haven't left my apartment since Saturday morning. Have hardly left my bed. That's why I've been on here so much, I keep looking for stuff to do or talk about while I'm bedridden lol.

[The Joker]

This has probably been mentioned before in this thread, or another, but I have to say it really did warm my cold black heart to see the actual credit of "Batman created by Bob Kane & BILL FINGER" during the opening credits for once. Yeah, I know Finger's name wasn't capitalized, but it was a milestone nevertheless. 

Long overdue too.

[The Dark Knight]

Yep. And for all the song and dance outrage about a different type of Lex, on multiple viewings he stacks up. I dig it. He's very much the mad scientist, with all the world views of comic Lex in regards to humanity having ownership of its own destiny, and being a shady manipulator. He does a lot in this movie, perhaps more than any other live action Lex.

[thecolorsblend]

Yep. And for all the song and dance outrage about a different type of Lex, on multiple viewings he stacks up. I dig it. He's very much the mad scientist, with all the world views of comic Lex in regards to humanity having ownership of its own destiny, and being a shady manipulator. He does a lot in this movie, perhaps more than any other live action Lex.

I don't pay incredibly close attention to the Superman fanbase anymore (mostly because a lot of them are so full of you-know-what it's coming out their ears) but the glance or three I've taken at their reaction so far has tellingly glossed over Lex. They may have problems with Superman's depiction in BvS or with Zack Snyder point black or with other things. But Lex? Not really. From what I've seen, it looks like they've rolled with it pretty easily.

The people with the negative reaction to Lex in my observation have mostly been people with the narrowest knowledge of Superman lore. "Needs more Gene Hackman" or "Needs more Clancy Brown" is basically how the criticisms of Lex by non-Superman fans seem to be split up.

If a core Batman fan has problems with Batman's portrayal in BvS... well, I disagree but I won't criticize that guy too much. He's welcome to his opinion. But, all due respect to the members of this forum as you guys mostly aren't the problem, I really don't need to hear what a core Batman fan thinks of Eisenberg's performance. Again, not a slam on anybody here but there are some loudmouth Batman fans out there who need a nice warm glass of STFU.

[The Dark Knight]

It's a shame people are so narrow minded.

EisenLex:

Gets access to what he wants, when he wants - Zod's body and the scout ship.
Manipulates a cripple, using his wheelchair to blow up a hearing, along with his secretary and a hated foe.
Makes Bruce feel guilty by sending fake hate mail.
Has private military kill a bunch of people in an effort to frame Superman.
Has Martha kidnapped and is willing to have her burnt alive.
Pushes Lois off a building to her death, banking on Superman to arrive.
Has a bunch of kryptonite shipped and delivered to his business, to take down Superman.
Sets up the Batman and Superman fight, to kill one of the heroes, or both.
Creates a kryptonian mutation to kill Superman and terrorise the world.
Potentially killed his father and took over the company himself.

Sounds like a worthy representation of the character to me.

[Slash Man]

For all the Dark Knight Returns influence we've been seeing early on, I was surprised by areas where it DIDN'T borrow from the story. The whole basis for the Batman vs. Superman fight was completely different - this time, based on misunderstandings and manipulation. It seemed like they were trying to make Superman more likable, but that turned Batman into a bit of a brute.

Jeremy Irons was great as Alfred (he really had the voice), but it seems weird having an older Bruce paired with a relatively younger Alfred. Either way, it was great to see him have a more hands-on role making gadgets and acting as Bruce's mechanic. Like in TDKR, he questioned a lot of Bruce's choices, but also helped him out every step of the way.

The scenes of the Batmobile and Batwing/plane in action were really slick. Straight out of Burton's films.

The action sequences alone were enough to blow anyone away, it was nonstop thrill. The plot was where it was lacking, but at the same time, the actors really pulled through. In regards to the tone, I think it felt appropriate for a Batman film. Though I can see it being a little too gloomy for a Superman flick. The politics really took a lot of the innocent fun out of it; early Superman comics never really went that deep. Overthinking Superman never really works.

[Dagenspear]

It's a shame people are so narrow minded.

EisenLex:

Gets access to what he wants, when he wants - Zod's body and the scout ship.
Manipulates a cripple, using his wheelchair to blow up a hearing, along with his secretary and a hated foe.
Makes Bruce feel guilty by sending fake hate mail.
Has private military kill a bunch of people in an effort to frame Superman.
Has Martha kidnapped and is willing to have her burnt alive.
Pushes Lois off a building to her death, banking on Superman to arrive.
Has a bunch of kryptonite shipped and delivered to his business, to take down Superman.
Sets up the Batman and Superman fight, to kill one of the heroes, or both.
Creates a kryptonian mutation to kill Superman and terrorise the world.
Potentially killed his father and took over the company himself.

Sounds like a worthy representation of the character to me.

Narrow-mindedness isn't the cause. What his character does or can accomplish doesn't change anything about the character that people didn't like. Some of things people even thought were poorly done and in some cases I don't disagree. Have a very great day!

God bless you! God bless everyone!