Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

[Notwisconsin]

Affleck was great as Superman (as played by George Reeves) in Hollywoodland. I wonder how they're going to bring Supes back to life?

[Lantern7]

Nowwisconsin . . . I would not be surprised if Superman was just mostly dead, like with Wesley in The Princess Bride. I think that was the case in "The Return Of Superman."

 

Speaking of early-90s stories. . . . I think Doomsday had origins dating back to Krypton. Lex Luthor was not involved. Shit, at the time, he was posing as his own illegitimate son, Lex Luthor II, who was Australian. All people knew during "The Death Of Superman" was that Doomsday was a monster that emerged from the Earth, cutting a wide swath of destruction towards Metropolis, and basically wiping out the Justice League in the process. Sure, the team was made up of second and third-stringers, but it was still brutal. And as the story got closer to Superman #75, the panels per page were reduced by one. By the finale, it was all splash pages.

[Rick Kitchen]

While this movie did well on opening weekend, I'm curious what the following week will be like.

 

Unless Zootopia comes back to number one, I don't see anything upcoming to supplant it till Ghostbusters or Barbershop.

[Demented Daisy]

Loved it.  No surprise there.  I was expecting to love it and I did -- so ignore me if you like.  Confirmation bias and all that.  ;-)

 

This Batman really reminded me of the Arkham games Batman.  Very cool.  I didn't have problems with his characterization at all.  A character who has been around for 75 years will change; this is just a different version from others.  This is one who has been through too much -- and I'm sure the death of Robin contributed greatly to his attitude towards Superman.  It's the whole "looking into an abyss" concept.  Anyway....

 

Loved the "S.T.A.R. Labs" in the corner of the Cyborg video and the Flash and Aquaman cameos.  Huge cheer in the theatre when Wonder Woman showed up for the fight.  Cannot wait for the future DC movies.

 

I saw one review titled, "Batman v Superman is an insult to all comic book movies" -- with hyperbole like that, I knew it couldn't possibly be as bad as some people were making it out to be.  And for me, it wasn't.  Not by a long shot.

[scarynikki12]

Ghostbusters won't be released until summer.  I'm looking over the April releases and I think The Jungle Book would probably be the one to overtake Bats vs Supes.  If nothing else, Civil War will topple it in a month so it won't stay on top for too long.

[revbfc]

So many mixed reviews but a lot of people seem to agree on what they didn't like about the film.

And it sounds like my Superman didn't get to do much to shine.

Superman is my favorite DC character not cause he's oh so interesting but because my grandfather use to watch him and that was his fav so he became mine. I wish more could be done with the character.

I guess I'll wait till the Redbox to see this one.

It really looked amazing in IMAX 3D. Whatever your opinion of the whole package, you can see a great deal of money on the screen.

[Racj82]

Magic, I'm assuming. Same way an Amazonian sword could actually cut through Kryptonian flesh and blood instead of pancaking against Doomsday like it was made of tinfoil when swung with that much force.

 

In most of the comic books and sci-fi media I've seen, decapitation does a good job of putting down anything that's vaguely humanoid and dependent on biology. Something like the titular creature from John Carpenter's The Thing wouldn't be inconvenienced that much, but if it has a central nervous system lopping the head off is pretty effective. (I could maybe see Doomsday's head remaining alive and dangerous for an extended period, but at least it would be pretty easy to immobilize and launch into space at that point.)

I already said why Wonder Woman cutting his head off pre sphere stab. It doesn't matter what happened in other movies. It's a minor point and one of the few things I don't really care about within the movie. The whole fight is a mess so it doesn't matter much anyway.

 

The drop off for this will be huge because a lot more people will not return to see this movie than your average blockbuster. The vocal bashing of this movie is stunning. But, it will stay in number one for while simply because of it's release date.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Racj82

[Raja]

While this movie did well on opening weekend, I'm curious what the following week will be like.

It seems to have the entire month all to itself before Captain America Civil War in May

[Racj82]

It seems to have the entire month all to itself before Captain America Civil War in May

It doesn't really. People often underestimate how many black people will go to a movie with a black cast (barber shop) I should know because I am black and Jungle Book is going to make a ton of money.

[Kromm]

Unless Zootopia comes back to number one, I don't see anything upcoming to supplant it till Ghostbusters or Barbershop.

It might retain a #1 placement, but that isn't the same thing as saying it's going to take in huge bucks. These days most people goto a movie to see specific films. vs. just visiting and choosing once they get there. So if it's a slate of lesser films in theaters I think the numbers are just going to be lower overall.

[Kromm]

This Batman really reminded me of the Arkham games Batman.  Very cool.  I didn't have problems with his characterization at all.  A character who has been around for 75 years will change; this is just a different version from others.  This is one who has been through too much -- and I'm sure the death of Robin contributed greatly to his attitude towards Superman.  It's the whole "looking into an abyss" concept.  Anyway....

There have been times in the comics where Batman has gone totally off the reservation, but usually when they've done that it's caused readership spikes, followed by huge outrage.... but then also DC soon rebooting the character because a crazy Batman isn't sustainable. Even a Batman who crosses the line to killing isn't really, which is why even that's been kind of "soft undone"/mitigated after the fact a few times in the comics. The problem here, the truly shitty idea, is not having a Batman who's certifiable, it's having one who's certifiable at what's supposed to be the entry point for a new series of films.

[Demented Daisy]

There have been times in the comics where Batman has gone totally off the reservation, but usually when they've done that it's caused readership spikes, followed by huge outrage.... but then also DC soon rebooting the character because a crazy Batman isn't sustainable. Even a Batman who crosses the line to killing isn't really, which is why even that's been kind of "soft undone"/mitigated after the fact a few times in the comics. The problem here, the truly shitty idea, is not having a Batman who's certifiable, it's having one who's certifiable at what's supposed to be the entry point for a new series of films.

 

 

The assumption being that Affleck will play Batman in all future films?  I'm not convinced.  It's too early.

[Sake614]

Yeah I agree the movie may retain the number 1 spot but the drop off will be significant. I expected opening weekend to be huge, if only out of curiosity. Now that the reviews and word of mouth set in, I just don't think there will be a lot of repeat viewing. And those who were on the fence may think twice about going to see it.

[Kromm]

The assumption being that Affleck will play Batman in all future films?  I'm not convinced.  It's too early.

It's not about an actor. What's been established is that the Justice League films will be the same Snyder continuity as Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman. Another actor playing the role of Batman won't erase the fact that it's the same history, with Batman first introduced in it as a total nutter.

Basically its the SAME problem as we have with Man of Steel being the first film for this Superman--the fact that the root of both characters is rotten. Even if future films are better written and made, the starting point of both heroes is antithetical to what they represent in the comics. The light in the darkness for humanity starting out helping to knock down a whole city, and our first view of the Dark Knight as a paranoid, utterly extreme madman. Both places it might have been interesting to explore in stand-alone projects or late-in-franchise endcaps, but utterly destructive if the point is to base at least a 2 part Justice League set of movies, and perhaps guest appearances in related movies for Aquaman and Flash, with the same versions of these characters (even if different actors wind up playing them, the link will be other actors remaining the same). 

Edited March 28, 2016 by Kromm

[lovemytvshows]

I have to agree with the most negative reviews because GOD WHAT A WASTED OPPORTUNITY! I won't dismiss the notion of a Batman vs Superman storyline to be shit because it has lots of potential IF it was done well and you see shreds of it at the start of this film but somewhere along the way it's like Terrio and Goyer lost the plot. BvS is clearly DC trying to squeeze 3 separate movies into one: 1) Their new take on a solo Batman film, 2) Batman vs Superman, 3) Setting up the JLA

 

Whilst Marvel had 8 or so years to pace themselves and set up The Avengers carefully and deliberately, DC took a bunch of LSDs and went nuts in one movie. There was so much FILLER material that could've been left out of the movie. Was Batman's multiple dream-sequences absolutely necessary? Why did Lex Luthor have to have such a convoluted plot to push the Batman vs Superman showdown? Was Scoot McNairy's character absolutely required? Could we have done without Lois' stint in Africa? If some of those could be trimmed and the others all summed up nicely in one solitary sub-plot, this movie wouldn't feel half as convoluted.

 

At a 2.5hr running time, this movie was at least 45mins too long. Also what was up with the last hour or so? It was as if the writers realized how much they effed up the plot and it was too late to salvage anything, took a bunch of drugs and just went nuts in the final hour. It was pure cacophony and explosions everywhere! What really bugged me was they would cut midway through the frenetic fight scene between Wonder Woman/Batman & Doomsday, go to Lois and Superman's terribly painful drama where the pace would sloooow right down. That said, the editing for this movie was all over the shop as well.

 

I agree with all the reviews who say that Wonder Woman is one of the best things about the movie because she really is and Gal Gadot owned the role and really looked like she was having fun, it's just a pity that she had such little screentime. I was glad that Ben Affleck actually fared pretty well as Batman, I didn't hate his Bruce Wayne/Batman. Perhaps it's the poor writing (most likely) or his portrayal but Henry Cavill has turned my ambivalence of Superman into sheer dislike. I was none too upset that Doomsday "killed" him. Good riddance.

 

Looking forward to the solo Wonder Woman movie. Her score by Hans Zimmer/Junkie XL is also the other great part of the film.

[Demented Daisy]

It's not about an actor. What's been established is that the Justice League films will be the same Snyder continuity as Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman. Another actor playing the role of Batman won't erase the fact that it's the same history, with Batman first introduced in it as a total nutter.

 

I'm referring to the possibility that Batman will not always be Bruce Wayne.  We know that a Robin is dead, but which one?  Is Nightwing in this universe?  The pilot of Batman Beyond was set in 2019.  After the Justice League movie, Bruce could train a new Batman.  They could go in a lot of different directions.

[Raja]

I'm referring to the possibility that Batman will not always be Bruce Wayne.  We know that a Robin is dead, but which one?  Is Nightwing in this universe?  The pilot of Batman Beyond was set in 2019.  After the Justice League movie, Bruce could train a new Batman.  They could go in a lot of different directions.

You see the same thing over in the MCU with the talk of a Miles Morales, sure people going to Comic Con will know but can you sell that to the millions in China? Way back when, when Michael Keaton was cast it may have been Siskel and Ebert but I still hold the memory of someone saying you don't cast Batman you cast Bruce Wayne

[GHScorpiosRule]

I seem to recall a Batsy/Soupy Animated movie from a few years ago too, that wasn't nearly as good as the DCAU one, but was still at least okay.

 

EDIT - Ah, there were two apparently. 2009's Superman/Batman: Public Enemies and 2010's Superman/Batman: Apocalypse.  Don't think I saw the second one.  And actually... Tim Daly, who did the DCAU voice of Superman was still doing the voice, even though these weren't DCAU movies.

I count those movies, hell, any movies that are produced by Timm, Burnett, Dini, etc., as part of the DCAU universe. So yeah, Batman/Superman: Public Enemies, Apocalypse, JL: Doom--DCAU universe.

 

I'm referring to the possibility that Batman will not always be Bruce Wayne.  We know that a Robin is dead, but which one?  Is Nightwing in this universe?  The pilot of Batman Beyond was set in 2019.  After the Justice League movie, Bruce could train a new Batman.  They could go in a lot of different directions.

 

The only Robin that "died" was Jason Todd; and that was due to a vote from the comic readers, because he was so hated. Which resulted in the story of A Death in the Family.  But he was resurrected years later, and he's the Red Hood now. Or whatever he goes by. 

 

And maybe I'm wrong, but I could have sworn I had read that Affleck was contracted to play Batman in Snyder's universe.

Edited March 28, 2016 by GHScorpiosRule

[Demented Daisy]

I count those movies, hell, any movies that are produced by Timm, Burnett, Dini, etc., as part of the DCAU universe. So yeah, Batman/Superman: Public Enemies, Apocalypse, JL: Doom--DCAU universe.

 

 

The only Robin that "died" was Jason Todd; and that was due to a vote from the comic readers, because he was so hated. Which resulted in the story of A Death in the Family.  But he was resurrected years later, and he's the Red Hood now. Or whatever he goes by. 

 

And maybe I'm wrong, but I could have sworn I had read that Affleck was contracted to play Batman in Snyder's universe.

 

I'm talking about the BvS Robin that died.  The suit that Bruce keeps in the Batcave -- which Robin was that?  They haven't told us yet, though the "joke's on you" painted on the suit implies the Joker killed him, which implies Jason Todd.  Where's Dick Grayson?  Will they include 

Damian Wayne

at some point?

 

Was Affleck contracted to play Bruce Wayne/Batman?  He still could, while someone else portrays a younger Batman.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I'm talking about the BvS Robin that died.  The suit that Bruce keeps in the Batcave -- which Robin was that?  They haven't told us yet, though the "joke's on you" painted on the suit implies the Joker killed him, which implies Jason Todd.  Where's Dick Grayson?  Will they include 

Damian Wayne

at some point?

 

Was Affleck contracted to play Bruce Wayne/Batman?  He still could, while someone else portrays a younger Batman.

 

 

I haven't seen this movie, but yeah, if that's what it said, then it was Jason Todd, since Joker was the one who killed him. Who knows if they'll use Nightwing in this universe. And I don't really give a shit, because I won't be watching.

 

But if, as I've read, Affleck's Batman is supposed to be "older" than Jason is still alive...somewhere. And waiting to get back at Bruce for letting Joker kill him.

Edited March 28, 2016 by GHScorpiosRule

[MarkHB]

The weird thing about the suit in the Batcave: the suit was bronzed as a memorial, but the spray paint "HA HA THE JOKE'S ON YOU" is ON TOP OF the bronzing.  That could be part of the "Jason Todd is the Joker" theory that I find ludicrous, or it could just be a failure to think things through, but if it's not a screw-up it's been making me wonder ever since DC All Access mentioned the bronzing.

[JessePinkman]

It's funny that over the course of two movies they'll failed to define why Superman does what he does. It's not because he was raised right (because in this universe Jonathan and Martha are selfish, selfish people apparently), not because he's inherently good (he's inherently a block of wood), not because he has some greater purpose. It seems like he does it just because he can. But Superman is meant to be so much more than his superpowers, he's an ideal. 

 

What's the point of killing him off if he's so poorly defined that the "Death of Superman" loses all gravitas that it should hold?

[benteen]

I saw a sneak peak of Batman vs Superman on Thursday night.  I thought it was so-so.  Some parts are quite good and I think Affleck was the best thing as Batman.  But the movie felt long, tedious and confusing in some parts...like those stupid dreams sequences.  What was up with that?

 

Didn't see much of Wonder Woman but she looked great in the costume and great in action.  Jesse Eisenberg was better than I thought as Lex.  Henry Cavill was an absolute bore as Superman and made me glad we didn't see a Man of Steel too.  Add to it that there was absolutely no difference between Clark and Superman in terms of personality.

 

I wasn't one of the viewers who threw a hissy fit over the destruction in Man of Steel.  Watching Batman vs Superman, it feels like the whole script was written in response to that with a Justice League origin story thrown in to it.  I did find it funny though that the heroes seem even less concerned with the destruction that was caused in the final battle in this movie than they did in Man of Steel.

[Sake614]

the heroes seem even less concerned with the destruction that was caused in the final battle in this movie than they did in Man of Steel.

 

 

And that's the other thing that made no sense. The entire city was destroyed and yet NO ONE CARED!

[JessePinkman]

Batman said it was an abandoned pier. So they easily sidestepped the complaints MoS received because of all the damage.

 

I didn't like that Gotham and Metropolis were across the river from each other. That was weird...

 

Can anyone tell me how Lex figured out that Bruce was Batman? I must have missed it. And now he's in jail so what's preventing him from telling anyone he encounters?

[Sake614]

Batman said it was an abandoned pier. So they easily sidestepped the complaints MoS received because of all the damage.

 

The entire city wasn't an abandoned pier! Multiple office buildings were destroyed or at least badly damaged.

 

 

didn't like that Gotham and Metropolis were across the river from each other. That was weird...

 

 

Yeah it was kind of NY vs. NJ or maybe Brooklyn vs. Manhattan.

[JessePinkman]

The entire city wasn't an abandoned pier! Multiple office buildings were destroyed or at least badly damaged.

 

They weren't fighting in the city, they were on the pier...we didn't even see any people. The only time there was any populated city damage was when Doomsday attacked Superman in Metropolis.

 

I have so many questions about this movie 24 hours later...what WAS Lex's motivation? Why was he so obsessed with Superman other than he's Lex Luthor and he's supposed to be?

 

And ok Batman finds out that Superman has a mom so he's TOTALLY COOL with him being a potentially dangerous alien overlord but these two did not have ONE sensible conversation in 3 fucking hours. It's frustrating because their philosophical differences are so fascinating.

Edited March 28, 2016 by JessePinkman

[Sake614]

The only time there was any populated city damage was when Doomsday attacked Superman in Metropolis.

 

 

Well yeah that's what I was referring to. Bruce and Diana didn't even blink at the end of that battle and yet that's where all the destruction took place. Bruce was all 'okay we need the other meta humans to join us' but neither one seemed to care about the damage to the city.

[JessePinkman]

Well yeah that's what I was referring to. Bruce and Diana didn't even blink at the end of that battle and yet that's where all the destruction took place. Bruce was all 'okay we need the other meta humans to join us' but neither one seemed to care about the damage to the city.

 

But the damage to Metropolis was very minimal because Superman flew Doomsday into space. The majority of the damage happened in Gotham, at the abandoned pier.

[Bruinsfan]

I didn't like that Gotham and Metropolis were across the river from each other. That was weird...

Not a river, a harbor. That actually lines up with DC universe maps I've seen that place Metropolis on the Delaware coast and Gotham City in southern New Jersey—they'd be across Delaware Bay from each other, albeit maybe with 25 miles or so of water between them.

[Kromm]

It's funny that over the course of two movies they'll failed to define why Superman does what he does. It's not because he was raised right (because in this universe Jonathan and Martha are selfish, selfish people apparently), not because he's inherently good (he's inherently a block of wood), not because he has some greater purpose. It seems like he does it just because he can. But Superman is meant to be so much more than his superpowers, he's an ideal. 

 

What's the point of killing him off if he's so poorly defined that the "Death of Superman" loses all gravitas that it should hold?

Bingo.

 

It's the pinnacle of the "Synder and Goyer don't get these heroes" tower. The meat in the "they're clueless and/or doing things just to stir things up" sandwich. Just as the root of Batman we've been given is that individual liberties don't matter to him, the root for Superman is this absurd idea that there's little reason for anyone to trust or even like him. They imply him saving individual people has built fans, but the weight of their narrative is still far more pointed to showing him in a light where we can't even fathom why they'd build monuments to him.

Not a river, a harbor. That actually lines up with DC universe maps I've seen that place Metropolis on the Delaware coast and Gotham City in southern New Jersey—they'd be across Delaware Bay from each other, albeit maybe with 25 miles or so of water between them.

It was a much older version of the DCU that had that though. My recollection is that while the approximate locations of the two cities are still possibly NJ and Delaware (although putting Metropolis in the midwest is far more common since the Smallville TV show), they stuck a "sister" city of Gotham named Bludhaven next to it. Ergo, if Metropolis had also been that close it would literally be a triple city.

[Ruby25]

Zack Snyder admitted in an interview that they killed Superman because he didn't know what to do with him. And that he felt that way during Man of Steel too, that he just doesn't know what to do with this guy.

 

This is why the new Superman movies suck and he sucks as a character. He's being handled by someone who doesn't like him, doesn't understand him, has no idea what to do with him. WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU HAVE THIS ASSHOLE MAKE A SUPERMAN MOVIE?

 

I would think a child would be able to understand the concept that to make a good movie about something, you have to I don't know, LIKE the subject matter. God, I hate Snyder so much. I love Superman, I know what to do with him, let me make the Superman movie! Jesus.

[MarkHB]

Zack Snyder admitted in an interview that they killed Superman because he didn't know what to do with him. And that he felt that way during Man of Steel too, that he just doesn't know what to do with this guy.

 

I'd be interested in seeing / reading that interview if you can provide a link. Thanks!

[Jediknight]

Is it really that hard to get Superman right?  Marvel's done it with Captain America, so you'd think Warner could do it with Superman, but nope.  And must he always look pathetic against Batman?

 

Eisneberg was a fantastic Riddler, too bad he was supposed to be Lex Luthor.  Luthor has to have a commanding presence, you'd have to believe this guy would pretty much own most of Metropolis, be the biggest threat to Superman, and be somebody that would be President of the United States.  That wasn't Eisenberg, no disrespect to him, but he was miscast, like I said the dude would have been a fantastic choice to be Riddler.

 

Gadot is a more than worthy successor to Lynda Carter, she was perfect.

[Kromm]

Right. So you kill Superman and give nobody in Universe any real reason to care if he comes back again.

 

Are we so damn sure he'll really be In Justice League?  I know the actor is contracted, but that's about it.

Okay, I'm mostly kidding. But it almost seems like the only reason they'll "need" Superman back for Justice League is because they'll likely be using Darkseid and need a hammer THAT big to defeat him (in fact the theory I've seen is the only reason Lex was SO over the top in this film was because he was "corrupted" by Darkseid--something I bet even casual fans might remember from how the New Gods were handled in Smallville).

[reggiejax]

Unless Zootopia comes back to number one, I don't see anything upcoming to supplant it till Ghostbusters or Barbershop.

 

I think Batman v Superman will rule the roost for another week. Zootopia is performing very well, and it is possible it could take the top spot again, but I don't think it will. Barbershop opens on the 15th. By then I don't think it should have any trouble supplanting Batman v Superman. But I think the movie to beat by then will be Melissa McCarthy's latest shitbomb, The Boss, which opens on the 8th. Everything I have seen about that movie makes me want to gouge my eyes out, but the fact is, this is the type of Melissa McCarthy movie where they have to drain parts of the ocean in order to put up more screens to fit the demand.

 

I thought Batman vs Superman was OK. I rank it ahead of both of the Avengers movies, but that isn't saying a hell of a whole lot. This will definitely be the first Batman movie since Batman and Robin that I have not seen more than once in the theater. All in all, I only truly enjoyed two things 1) Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and 2) the fact that the Wayne's were shown to have died in 1981, which means the Zorro movie they were leaving was Zorro the Gay Blade.

Edited March 28, 2016 by reggiejax

[Racj82]

Right. So you kill Superman and give nobody in Universe any real reason to care if he comes back again.

Are we so damn sure he'll really be In Justice League? I know the actor is contracted, but that's about it.

Okay, I'm mostly kidding. But it almost seems like the only reason they'll "need" Superman back for Justice League is because they'll likely be using Darkseid and need a hammer THAT big to defeat him (in fact the theory I've seen is the only reason Lex was SO over the top in this film was because he was "corrupted" by Darkseid--something I bet even casual fans might remember from how the New Gods were handled in Smallville).

he will be back because a Justice League movie coming. Doesn't matter why or who would care.

I think Batman v Superman will rule the roost for another week. Zootopia is performing very well, and it is possible it could take the top spot again, but I don't think it will. Barbershop opens on the 15th. By then I don't think it should have any trouble supplanting Batman v Superman. But I think the movie to beat by then will be Melissa McCarthy's latest shitbomb, The Boss, which opens on the 8th. Everything I have seen about that movie makes me want to gouge my eyes out, but the fact is, this is the type of Melissa McCarthy movie where they have to drain parts of the ocean in order to put up more screens to fit the demand.

I thought Batman vs Superman was OK. I rank it ahead of both of the Avengers movies, but that isn't saying a hell of a whole lot. This will definitely be the first Batman movie since Batman and Robin that I have not seen more than once in the theater. All in all, I only truly enjoyed two things 1) Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and 2) the fact that the Wayne's were shown to have died in 1981, which means the Zorro movie they were leaving was Zorro the Gay Blade.

above both avengers movies? Man, I get most peoples problems with Ultron even if they don't bother me much but avengers is one of the most fun movie experiences of my life. Great actions scenes, great cast chemistry, tied together the universe well. I don't know. This hodgepodge of a movie is a middle of the road as it gets for me.

[IOU Payne]

 

Eisneberg was a fantastic Riddler, too bad he was supposed to be Lex Luthor.  Luthor has to have a commanding presence, you'd have to believe this guy would pretty much own most of Metropolis, be the biggest threat to Superman, and be somebody that would be President of the United States.

 

Kevin O'Leary?  The Donald?  One of them is too cartoonish to work in any other DC-verse than the 60's Batman TV show, and I don't mean Mr. Wonderful.

 

I actually liked Eisenberg's twist on Luthor.  I adored Wonder Woman, and was delighted to see an unapologetically ass-kicking woman on screen.  As for Batman, Affleck is much less emotionally constipated than Christian Bale, which is of the good. And Henry Cavill is so, so purty. 

[Sake614]

I loved the Avengers movies and agree, the cast and cast chemistry, was great. I saw none of that in this film. It really felt like at least 3 different movies in one, and none of them were done well.

I also agree that Cavill is nice eye candy, but again, I need more than that from Superman.

[Sandman]

Well I was looking forward to it, because I think Ben Affleck will make a great Batman.

But really, the worst thing is Zack Snyder's direction. All sound and fury, signifying nothing. Lots of loud noises, explosions and CGI, and none of it feels like it services the plot so much as the director thought, 'that'll look awesome!'. And even worse, it doesn't look awesome. None of it looks real. Big spaceships blowing things up and getting blown up, and the characters fighting one another is like something out of a videogame. No visceral punch or impact to anything, just pixels shooting around the screen. The Green Lantern movie was better than this shit!

So I have no faith whatsoever in Zack Snyder's ability to craft a worthwhile movie. And no faith in DC's ability to produce one, given their track record and their determination to hire hacks like this guy.

I didn't hate Cavill's Superman -- in my humble opinion, Routh is far, far worse -- I honestly don't know how he keeps getting hired; he's utterly charmless and a true charisma-void, I think -- and I love Amy Adams unreservedly. But everything else about about Zack Snyder's version I pretty much hated. Everything is darkness and destruction. Superman should not be an invading-monsters-from-space movie.

Loved the "S.T.A.R. Labs" in the corner of the Cyborg video and the Flash and Aquaman cameos. Huge cheer in the theatre when Wonder Woman showed up for the fight. Cannot wait for the future DC movies.

I saw one review titled, "Batman v Superman is an insult to all comic book movies" -- with hyperbole like that, I knew it couldn't possibly be as bad as some people were making it out to be. And for me, it wasn't. Not by a long shot.

I was wary going in; more than skeptical, but not enough to stay away, I guess. But I doubted it could be as bad as some made out. I didn't hate it, although I still don't understand the need to make this DC universe so utterly hellish. Gadot was the bright light, surprisingly. I expected to hate this version of Wonder Woman, but I loved her. She's smart enough to be one step ahead of Bruce, and unthreatened enough to have a sense of humour about it. I definitely cheered when Diana showed up to fight, although it wasn't clear exactly what was taking her so long.

And, really? Bruce only cares when he realizes that his mom and Kal-El's have the same name? Ucch.

I want to like the DC movies, but I've decided I just don't like Zack Snyder's movies. This one was much too long, and much too heavy on explosions and casual destruction -- but that much I knew would be true going in. I hate the idea that Snyder admittedly doesn't know what to do with Superman. That makes you the wrong guy for this job, nitwit!

And I'll just go ahead and say it: I thought Jesse Eisenberg's Luthor was stupid. He was going for quirky genius sociopath (one presumes) and instead landed on annoying douchenozzle. (Does he have any range at all?) Ucch squared.

Affleck was fine; this Batman's clearly a delusional freakshow only marginally less psychopathic than the bad guys, but, hey, it's that kind of universe. He was fine. Jeremy Irons was kind of a dull Alfred, I have to say, but with so much else going on, who has time to spare giving Alfred an actual personality? (One note, DC movie-universe movers: "Master Wayne" is not a thing. "Master" is a courtesy title for minor male children, used with a first name; i.e.: "Master Bruce." It's never used with the surname; never ever. I could see Alfred maintaining out of affection the honorific he used for Bruce when Bruce was a boy; but calling him "Master Wayne" makes no sense at all. Nolan's movies started this, and Goyer and Terrio picked it up. I wanted to kick Irons in the shins every time he said it. Just stop.)

Edited April 2, 2016 by Sandman

[Bruinsfan]

I didn't hate Cavill's Superman -- in my humble opinion, Routh is far, far worse -- I honestly don't know how he keeps getting hired; he's utterly charmless and a true charisma-void, I think -- and I love Amy Adams unreservedly. But everything else about about Zack Snyder's version I pretty much hated. Everything is darkness and destruction. Superman should not be an invading-monsters-from-space movie.

Right there with you on all this. About the only thing I can say nice about Routh's turn in the role is that he clearly respected Christopher Reeve's work; so much so that he was doing an impression rather than his own interpretation (sadly with a tiny fraction of Reeve's charisma). Cavill is playing a more stoic Superman/Clark, but I think he does give the character depth and gravitas rather than being paper thin. And since I grew up with George Reeves' smart, confident Clark Kent I much prefer that approach to the pretense of being a bumbling milquetoast that the Donner movies featured. I also happen to think Cavill and Amy Adams had scorching hot chemistry in the first movie, though since most of their interaction this time around was in hostage scenes there really wasn't a chance to revisit it.

[Sandman]

About the only thing I can say nice about Routh's turn in the role is that he clearly respected Christopher Reeve's work; so much so that he was doing an impression rather than his own interpretation (sadly with a tiny fraction of Reeve's charisma).

That was my impression, as well.

One thing I did like about the Lois Lane of Snyder's movies is that Lois was never in doubt about Superman's identity. It goes against canon, sure; but speaks to Lane's intelligence and perception.

[Ruby25]

To me, the idea that Clark Kent was a bumbling, nerdy act like in the Reeve movies makes sense, because then why would people think he was Superman? It was more than just the glasses, it was the whole persona.

 

But I guess because Christopher Reeve was so iconic in that dual role, no one can ever do that interpretation again without instantly being compared to him.

 

And one of the most famous things in the Superman history is Lois being in love with Superman/oblivious to Clark, so I don't mind when they want to do that either, at least at first. It's comedy, it's screwball, it's a unique love triangle. And I never think oh, she's so stupid. It's not like she's the only person who doesn't know who he is, he's hiding from everyone else too.

 

But whatever. Snyder obviously hates everything that I love about Superman, so he did his best to stomp all over the things that I think are great about him.

[Kromm]

But I guess because Christopher Reeve was so iconic in that dual role, no one can ever do that interpretation again without instantly being compared to him.

So the 40 years that interpretation of Clark existed BEFORE Reeve doesn't count?

But whatever. Snyder obviously hates everything that I love about Superman, so he did his best to stomp all over the things that I think are great about him.

Is it hate, or just complete disregard/willful ignorance? Hard to say. But its certainly true that Snyder's Superman isn't just some "new interpretation", he's basically a waddle of spit in the face of the existing fans of the character (and the interpretation of Batman is even worse--more like a Turd tossed in their faces). 

[Demented Daisy]

I hate the idea that Snyder admittedly doesn't know what to do with Superman. That makes you the wrong guy for this job, nitwit!

 

 

Still waiting on the link to that interview.  I've done some searches and read a handful of articles and this is the closest I've gotten to finding what Ruby25 described.

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/batman-v-superman-ending-spoilers#.apOdNEomaZ

 

From the very start, director Zack Snyder knew that Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice — the long-anticipated sequel to his 2013 Superman reboot, Man of Steel — was going to end with the death of the most iconic superhero in all of superherodom: Superman.

 

“I felt it was inevitable,” Snyder recently told BuzzFeed News. “Even when we were working on Man of Steel, I was like, Gosh, what are we going to do with this guy? He’s a pretty tough cookie.”

 

 

Which, frankly, does not mean, "I don't know what to do with this guy."  It means, "What is the story we want to tell with this guy?"  The very next paragraph clarifies:

 

After all, Superman is a paragon for truth, justice, and the American way, on top of being a superhero whose powers seem limited only by the movie’s visual-effects budget (which is to say, not limited much at all). Snyder felt that the Man of Steel did not allow much room for standard character development. “He’s so mythic,” the director said with a small sigh. “Superman takes cosmic shifts to get him to move emotionally [and] that reinforces his mythic nature.”

 

 

Ruby25, if you're talking about a different article/interview, please post a link.  I'd very much like to read it.

[Advance35]

I guess I'm showing my age because I actually didn't care for the Christopher Reeves Superman, it all looked so cheesy.   Maybe I would have felt differently if I was around when they first came out.   And Gene Hackman's Lex Luther, lol, and not in a good way.   I agree with those who think Brandon Routh was a HORRIBLE Superman, in fact the entire movie was god-awful for me.   The collateral damage doesn't bother me as much as it clearly does others.  I myself don't get the big deal, super powered beings are going to knock over some things and cause property damage. (shrug).

 

Didn't bother with Smallville so I can't comment on their version of Lex Luthor but I thought Eisenberg was good and I was no fan before this.   I found him believable as a morally bankrupt genius that's amassed billions with a casual disregard for human life and a seething hate for all things that even look superior to him.

 

I will agree with whomever said they wish Mercy Graves had survived, as I've always liked the character in both the comics and the cartoon.   This movie is the strangest reception study I've ever seen, because the Critics have been harsh (unreasonable so IMO) but everyone I talk to in person or know in my day to day, really liked it.   For me it beats out Iron Man 2&3, Thor 2 and Ant-Man.

 

More importantly, it has me intrigued for things to come.  I want to see what's next for Wonder Woman or a look  into her past VIA her own movie.   I can't WAIT until Aquaman.   The Flash???? Well after the awful CW version, I'm willing to see if the big screen can wash the horrid taste out of my mouth.   I'm optimistic about the DCU Movie Universe.

[Sake614]

http://www.comicmix.com/2016/03/29/box-office-democracy-batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice/#comment-266548

[JessePinkman]

What, Exactly, Was Lex Luthor’s Plan in Batman v Superman?

 

I told my friend yesterday that the only way to enjoy this movie is to not think about it too much.

[revbfc]

What, Exactly, Was Lex Luthor’s Plan in Batman v Superman?

I told my friend yesterday that the only way to enjoy this movie is to not think about it too much.

I liked how the article did mention Lex's father and his life in the DDR. It explained some of Lex's position on destroying Superman, but doesn't explain Doomsday. My only stab at understanding Doomsday is conjecture, but does match up with the info the movie gives us. The Doomsday of BvS is a mindless killing machine that can only be killed with kryptonite. Lex had a lot of kryptonite, but it was stolen by Batman to use against Superman. The way I see it, Lex was banking on Superman dying by Doomsday's or Batman's hands and that the kryptonite Batman had could still be used (or reused) to kill Doomsday later. Why even create a mindless killing machine? Because it has no agenda larger than destruction and survival. It does not want to rule the world, it just wants to run free and kill. It's not a god or false god, it just exists and it can be killed with kryptonite.

Anyway, that's my stab trying to figure out this whole mess.

[Bruinsfan]

To me, the idea that Clark Kent was a bumbling, nerdy act like in the Reeve movies makes sense, because then why would people think he was Superman? It was more than just the glasses, it was the whole persona.

The thing is, I favor the interpretation that Clark Kent is who the character is at his core—a smart, noble Kansas farm boy whose primary goal is helping people using whatever skills and tools he has—and Superman is just the suit/persona he puts on for public heroics. I don't like the idea of him having to pretend to be meek and incompetent to all his friends, co-workers, and basically everyone but his mom (if she's still alive). A secret identity doesn't do him much good if he can never relax and be himself.

 

By contrast Batman is who Bruce Wayne really is, and the gregarious playboy billionaire is the act for public consumption. His secret identity lets him relax by NOT being himself (a tormented, obsessed vigilante) 24/7.