Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

[Kromm]

Bad guys shoot at Batman=>Batman shoots at them back.  

Having to use the phrase "Batman shoots" is already problematic (not that it's your fault).

[JessePinkman]

You know, Lego Superheroes did 'Batman Be-Leaguered' which is a 30 minute short about the rest of the Justice League trying to get Batman to join... despite the fact that he's not a joiner (and says so... a LOT) but when Supes and Bats meet, Batman is automatically suspicious. "The alien." And then there's this whole, "I knew the most powerful man in the world would someday find his way to Gotham. And since power corrupts and you're all powerful..."

 

And Superman laughs jovially and goes 'No! I just wanted to introduce myself and invite you to join our Justice League. A bunch of us superheroes have gotten together, you know, Flash, Wonder Woman..."

 

This comment made me check this out and it's great (and on Netflix, folks) and I'm far from a DC fan. Why do the people who make the DC cartoons and TV shows seem to understand the characters better than those who run the comics and film divisions?

[Captain Carrot]

Why do the people who make the DC cartoons and TV shows seem to understand the characters better than those who run the comics and film divisions?

 

 

Here's a DC Movie timeline. (I only included movies that featured possible JL members. No Constantine or Jonah Hex).

 

2004: Catwoman

2005: Batman Begins

2006: Superman Returns

2008: The Dark Knight

2011: Green Lantern

2012: The Dark Knight Rises

 

So out of six movies three did well, and three... did not. Some people might look at this list and determine that people like good movies. But Hollywood always learns the wrong lesson. Obviously the Batman movies did well because they were "Dark" and "Gritty". Watchmen came out in 2009, and did pretty well for an R rated movie. The WB executives probably blamed the drop in attendance on the rating, and thought Snyder was the man to make a successful (PG-13) movie in the 'correct' tone.

[Raja]

 

 

You know, Lego Superheroes did 'Batman Be-Leaguered' which is a 30 minute short about the rest of the Justice League trying to get Batman to join... despite the fact that he's not a joiner (and says so... a LOT) but when Supes and Bats meet, Batman is automatically suspicious. "The alien." And then there's this whole, "I knew the most powerful man in the world would someday find his way to Gotham. And since power corrupts and you're all powerful..."

 

 

And now we know finding his way means crossing one bridge. If Gotham is as bad as all the recent depictions it seems bad to be in sunny Metropolis and saving astronauts while ignoring the great unwashed next door.

[jellysalmon]

This comment made me check this out and it's great (and on Netflix, folks) and I'm far from a DC fan. Why do the people who make the DC cartoons and TV shows seem to understand the characters better than those who run the comics and film divisions?

I knowww. I was thinking this same thing the other day. If someone were to pitch a DCAU episode to the canon what would it be?

 

Nominees:

Justice League "For the Man who Has Everything"

Batman The Animated Series "Feat of Clay" (2-parter would give more to talk about)

Superman the Animated Series "Ghost in the Machine"

[Bruinsfan]

If Gotham is as bad as all the recent depictions it seems bad to be in sunny Metropolis and saving astronauts while ignoring the great unwashed next door.

I think part of it might be the nature of Gotham's problems - rampant crime, drugs, etc. that involve people making bad choices. Most of the intervention Superman does seem to be saving people from accidents and natural disasters, not swooping in to protect them from other people. He may feel it's not his place to do the job of the police, and only gets involved in a directly antagonistic manner when people he cares about are threatened or when the person responsible for the violence is beyond conventional lawkeeping authorities' ability to deal with.

[Lugal]

 

So out of six movies three did well, and three... did not. Some people might look at this list and determine that people like good movies. But Hollywood always learns the wrong lesson. Obviously the Batman movies did well because they were "Dark" and "Gritty". Watchmen came out in 2009, and did pretty well for an R rated movie. The WB executives probably blamed the drop in attendance on the rating, and thought Snyder was the man to make a successful (PG-13) movie in the 'correct' tone.

That highlights another problem for DC; that they've given Snyder too much influence in the creation of their cinematic universe.  Marvel had directors like Jon Favreau, Kenneth Brannagh and Joss Whedon who all have their own style and made different movies, but they all fit together in the larger universe.

[Kromm]

That highlights another problem for DC; that they've given Snyder too much influence in the creation of their cinematic universe.  Marvel had directors like Jon Favreau, Kenneth Brannagh and Joss Whedon who all have their own style and made different movies, but they all fit together in the larger universe.

Who actually runs the DC films overall? I mean I thought that maybe some of the same folks who used to have oversight for the animated stuff took it on... then I realized I was confusing the situation with (probably both in parts) Disney/Pixar and Disney/Marvel. 

 

I think the problem is that unlike Pixar and Marvel, DC didn't keep any kind of control. Oh, they kind of did with the animated, but since the non-Animated stuff from them was successful long before Marvel's stuff, they were already plugged into a model where an existing movie studio stuck their fingers into everything. Then their attempt at a fix was to bring in a figurehead, Snyder, who talked all the right buzzwords for them.

 

Here's a good think piece about why Snyder is going so wrong. Unlike a lot of others it tries to stay away from simply bagging on how badly made these movies are and talk about the seemingly strange ideas Snyder wants to promote about Superman. It's highly speculative but interesting reading (especially since we all know Darkseid is coming, and this tosses around ideas about how Superman and Batman being such shits already buys right into that:  http://www.blastr.com/2016-4-6/breaking-super-bad-how-zack-snyder-will-send-superman-darkseid

 

Oh.... some real dueling stories coming out about the future...

 

Zack Snyder and Henry Cavill Address the Possibility of a Solo Superman Movie (which boils down to "maybe" but also assumes Snyder would be in charge of that)

 

ZACK SNYDER RUMORED TO LOSE JUSTICE LEAGUE CONTROL; ADJUSTMENTS MADE FOLLOWING BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN (this could just be wishful thinking by this writer though since none of this is substantiated).  This also feeds back to my "who's in overall charge" question, because it mentions that two people who were around in the Nolan days Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov, are both gone from WB now.

A name you always hear thrown around is Geoff Johns, of course, but I think the rampage of Synder all over everything that makes DC comics good shows that either Johns has no part of this, or he himself is also confused, because of the success of things like Injustice: Gods Among Us (which might suggest that the idea that the heroes could be the villains might be marketable everywhere). 

[Crs97]

B v S has surpassed $700 million despite the reviews:

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/yup-critics-nailed-batman-v-superman-passes-700m-203620321.html

[nobodyyoucare]

Yet its had drop offs that would without them make the movie a billion dollars in revenue already. 700 million is actually considered a disapointment considering the budget, advertising, hype and the upcoming movies that tie into it.

[Bruinsfan]

Yeah, I think WB executives will be looking at the fact the movie had almost Jurassic World- or Avengers-level opening weekend numbers due to consumer interest in the iconic showdown, but horrible critical reception, and steep drop-off indicating there's not much repeat business or good word of mouth from all the people who did see it. What should have translated into a billion-and-a-half movie based on preliminary interest might not end up earning much more than half that. Also, if they read reviews at all everyone is pointing the finger of blame directly at Snyder.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Bruinsfan

[Traveller519]

Went to see it last night and didn't think it was completely terrible, but it's certainly laborious. 

 

Lawrence Fishburne I just wanted to smack around. Jesse Eisenberg put forth an effort in his style but I felt like the character missed the mark. Wonder Woman was done fantastically well, and I liked Affleck's take on old, affected, jaded Bruce Wayne. the returning MoS characters were gasping for air in a movie where too many things.

 

Batman saving Martha Kent was well done as far as Baman scenes go.

 

I think the franchise could have benefited from a second MoS film to flush out the characters post Superman's reveal to the world and introducing Luthor, and a Batman movie set post death of Robin, questioning his legacy, and in both films they become aware of the goings on of the other. You can then shorten this film to 1:45 and really put something out there. But I think the grail was hanging too fruitfully, and I think DC was scared of its properties going cold, like Green Lantern did.

[Rick Kitchen]

Snyder commented on why Superman couldn't find his mother.  Apparently the scene was even too dark for him.

 

http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/batman-v-superman-too-dark-zack-snyder/2/

[JessePinkman]

That's...stupid. So is he sounding everyone else out when he flies to save Lois half way around the world everytime she takes a shart? It's like no one put any THOUGHT into this movie. I really cannot recall a recent movie with so many gaping plot holes.

[Sandman]

Yeah, that makes very little sense: "He can't, because he can't, okay?" Whatever you need to tell yourself, Zack.

[Kromm]

Snyder commented on why Superman couldn't find his mother.  Apparently the scene was even too dark for him.

 

http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/batman-v-superman-too-dark-zack-snyder/2/

Here's why this is extra stupid. Synder's explanation doesn't even make sense with his established distorted fucked up movie logic.

 

Never mind the mechanics of why he can hear Lois and not Martha. Look at his explanation of why this was "too dark" (and that writer sounds like an idiot accepting this logic, BTW). He basically says he didn't want to show Superman angry/upset that it was his mother Lex had.  And the article writer eats up this stupidity, like I said. NO. NO, no no. That's the one time a good storyteller DOES show Superman angry. What this fuckhead Snyder (and his shitty screenwriters) do instead is show us a Superman that's almost that dark when he has LESS REASON to be. In other words, he's an even bigger Superdick.

[NoWillToResist]

There is not enough space on the internet to adequately express how much I disliked this film. I fail to understand how it couldn't even meet my lowly expectations. Good grief.

 

Too long, too loud, too boring, too convoluted, too stupid.

 

I was lost almost from the get-go here. Lois is in Africa or something and one of the guys turns on them all, shoots them all and she's taken hostage. Supes saves her and somehow he's blamed for all the deaths? Um, what? I think it was mentioned that Lex was behind the special bullets and was trying to frame Superman or something, but I still don't understand the plan. Did the bullets dissolve or something, so there were just dead bodies and everyone assumed Superman was the culprit? Just...what???

 

Batman witnesses Metropolis getting fucked over in the battle between Zod and Superman from MoS. Even though he should have been aware that Zod was going to literally kill every living person on the planet, Superman needs to be put down because, in stopping Zod, a couple thousand people died? Fucking seriously? No really, fucking seriously??

 

Batman is going to steal Lex's illegally imported kyptonite. Ok, fine. Why put a tracker on it if you're just going to follow in the Batmobile thingie and blow the everloving fuck out of the convoy? You use subtle spy shit or you attack. Both is, IMO, stupid. I found myself wishing that he'd blown up his tracker.

 

I wanted to punch Lex Luthor. And not because he was the villain but because holy God was he ever annoying.

 

Lex steals Martha Kent and blackmails Superman into fighting Batman. Superman goes to persuade Batman to help him but instead of immediately laying out the issue, he blathers on and on, continually advancing on Batman and having to deactivate his ambush attacks.

 

Batman stops his imminent murder of Superman because their mothers have the same name? Jesus Christ.

 

What was the deal with the dude in the wheelchair? I got the distinct impression from his notes on his returned cheques to Wayne Enterprises that he somehow blamed Bruce? Even though Bruce was the one who helped him in the rubble?

 

How did Lex get that cider taunt into the Senate hearings? Frankly I was glad Holly Hunter got blown up. So fucking annoying.

 

The final battle was exhausting. I felt battered by the time I left the theatre. I didn't give a shit who won; I just wanted it to stop. As I feared, there was no need for this to be 2 1/2 hours long.

The only thing that I didn't hate was Gal Godot as Wonder Woman.  And, was that Negan and Maggie from The Walking Dead as Batman's parents? Didn't see a listing for Mr Wayne in the credits alongside Lauren Cohan...perhaps JDM got a sneak peek at the movie and said "fuck, take my name off it!" ;)

Edited April 11, 2016 by NoWillToResist

[shrewd.buddha]

Finally got around to seeing this on its third weekend, and honestly, it felt like completing a homework assignment. It's one thing to disappoint a few critics but you don't get less than 30% on RottenTomatoes without some legitimate problems. And there were a lot of problems. 

 

There was some really nice cinematography now and then - -  but the story, editing and believable character behavior were a big flaming mess. 

Here are just a few things that I had a really hard time wrapping my head around : 

 

• Martha Kent, beloved mother of the planet's god-in-residence has to make ends meet by wearing what looks like thrift store clothing and working at a gritty looking diner. She's schlepping  out garbage bags to the back-alley dumpster late into the night. Really, Superman? Really?
• Superman drops into Africa to save Lois and gets blamed for a massacre - - of people who were clearly shot with bullets. If only some credible reporter were available to tell Congress what really happened... Did Lois forget that she was an eye witness to the events? 
• Lois who has been established as being able to handle herself pretty well ... allows herself to be physically intimidated by the 90-pound weakling Lex Luthor. 
• We see that Superman can move faster than the eye can follow ... and yet he always stands there when people shoot things at him, whether it be a kryptonite teargas canister or a nuclear missile. It's as if Superman has to be super dumb to counterbalance being super strong, fast and invulnerable. 

 

I believe the movie's biggest failure is how unsatisfying it is as a stand-alone movie. All the visions, dreamscapes and references to Darkseid would be completely baffling without a lot of prior comic book knowledge. 

Edited April 11, 2016 by shrewd.buddha

[Sandman]

Lois is in Africa or something and one of the guys turns on them all, shoots them all and she's taken hostage. Supes saves her and somehow he's blamed for all the deaths? Um, what?

...

Batman witnesses Metropolis getting fucked over in the battle between Zod and Superman from MoS. Even though he should have been aware that Zod was going to literally kill every living person on the planet, Superman needs to be put down because, in stopping Zod, a couple thousand people died? Fucking seriously? No really, fucking seriously??

...

 

I wanted to punch Lex Luthor. And not because he was the villain but because holy God was he ever annoying.

...

Batman stops his imminent murder of Superman because their mothers have the same name? Jesus Christ.

 

This. All of this -- but most especially that last one there. That's a corker, that one!

 

I actually didn't mind Holly Hunter as the Senator, and usually she annoys the snot out of me. But I thought she conveyed the Senator's principles, and her misgivings about Superman, very effectively, and her scenes with Luthor were riveting, and one of the very few times in the movie where Lex was shown to be genuinely menacing. I have to think that stemmed from Hunter's performance, rather than Eisenberg's. 

 

I will never not love Diane Lane, it seems, but I wish Ma Kent had been given more to do -- and I don't understand the grimy diner job, either.

 

...perhaps JDM got a sneak peek at the movie and said "fuck, take my name off it!" ;)

 

This hypothesis does have its appeal. ("... And I was in Watchmen... Jesus!")

[NoWillToResist]

I believe the movie's biggest failure is how unsatisfying it is as a stand-alone movie. All the visions, dreamscapes and references to Darkseid would be completely baffling without a lot of prior comic book knowledge. 

 

Not to prove your point or anything but what the fuck is Darkseid? ;)

 

You mentioned something that I hated but forgot amid all my other complaints: all the dream sequences and flashbacks. God, that got annoying.

 

One of Batman's nightmares/visions was particularly jarring until the dragonfly people (or whatever) turned up; that allowed me to say "oh, this isn't actually happening". The number of times I had to say that was fucking appalling, IMO.

 

Wonder Woman "borrowed" Bruce's stolen info from Lex's computer because "there's a picture of me in there" but she couldn't crack it. So, she gave it back to Bruce. Who then promptly decoded it and sent her the pic of herself and she reacted with shock and dismay. Um, why? How did she even know that there was a picture of her in Lex's database?

 

I also love how Kryptonite is deadly...until it isn't. Breathe it in in gaseous form a couple times, you're ok!

 

Can anyone explain to me what the hell was the deal with the thing that Lex created to battle Superman? It seemed like the egg incubation stuff was aboard the Kryptonian ship that was under US Military guard (until Lex got a pass to get in for no good reason). Lex goes in, uses his replicated Zod fingerprints to activate the ship, then puts Zod's dead body into the goo along with his own blood and...created some primordial Kryptonian creature? Or...something like that? And it for some reason has a hatred of Superman? And is vulnerable to Kryptonite? Which I think we were told in MoS would cause a problem for Superman because he grew up on Earth? Did the creature not struggle with Earth's atmosphere because he had Lex's blood in it?

And while we're on the subject of 'fuck off with that', the US gov't had Zod's body? So, when Superman killed him at the end of MoS and was crying on Lois's crotch, they...what? Just walked off, leaving Zod's body behind? Why the fuck didn't he fly that shit into space to avoid the US gov't fucking around with shit it didn't understand? Same with the spaceships. There was nothing stopping Superman from saying "yeah, this shit is dangerous and y'all don't know how to handle this responsibly. This shit is property of Krypton whose citizenry is ME, so Imma take my people's shit and fly it far away from you, mmmkay?"

 

Like, Jesus Christ, people. Superman came off like an idiot, Batman like a deranged stalker (no better than Lex) and Lois was a waste of space. And don't even get me started on Perry letting Lois take their chopper for personal business...

[stealinghome]

It was narrow, but The Boss seems to have edged BvS at the box office this weekend. BvS had another 54% decline this weekend.

[thuganomics85]

Finally saw it and did my best to keep my expectations in check and tried to go in it with an open mind.  But alas, I'm on the side who found the majority of this to be a drag and when it ended, it really did feel less like I saw a film, and more like I just completed a test.  That's really not how I want to feel when I finish a superhero film that features a character that is usually one of my favorites of all time (Batman.)

 

At least I knew what I was getting into right at the jump, because I was almost laughing over how bad the opening was.  It's bad enough since I've seen Batman's parents die time after the time, but Zach Snyder just went full-blown 100% Zach Snyder slo-mo on that puppy, that any drama was just destroyed.  The pearls (not the pearls!), Kid Bruce's "Noooo!", all the close-ups of the gun barrel, etc.  That's not even mentioning the amusing of both Jeffery Dean Morgan and Lauren Cohan as his parents.  The idea of Negan and Maggie from The Walking Dead hooking up is one hell of a picture in my head right now.

 

But the rest?  OK, on one hand, Ben Affleck was actually pretty solid as Bruce/Batman, and I think I like the idea behind some of his motivations and attitude.  But it was just handled in such a stupid matter.  Despite being the "World's Greatest Detective", he comes off kind of dense at times, and I think Alfred was actually right that he seemed to be doing a better job solving things as Bruce instead of Bats.  And while I can understand wanting to give him a darker edge, he really was dropping bodies left and right.  Death by bullets.  Death by knife-stabbing.  Death by dropping cares on other cars.  Damn, Bats!  And then there was that whole branding thing being a death sentence, which made me think they should have just forgot about Batffleck, and hired Michael C. Hall, because that was almost some Dexter Morgan shit going on there.

 

On the other hand, I actually enjoyed Henry Cavill as Clark/Superman on Man of Steel, but I found him to be kind of stiff this go around, and I really had problems warming up to this Superman.  He just came off cold, distance, and, well, alien, which I guess is what they were aiming for in some ways, but I never really got the sense that Earth was his "home", like he claimed he would be (then again, I wouldn't blame him since everyone except Lois were being judgmental dicks to him.)  And the character himself just felt side-lined.  I didn't count the actual screentime, but it just felt like this was more Bats show, with Superman more supporting.

 

The big brawl was OK, but it felt repetitive at the end (oh, look!  Superman throws themselves threw another wall!), and that ending.  Oh, that ending!  Bats wins (yeah, they didn't even really try to make Supes save face.  As far as I'm concern, Batman won), but then Clark manages to grunt out Martha, and suddenly Bruce is all "What?!!  Your mom is named Martha too!  It's like we're brothers!  Forget about the whole killing you thing, we're BFFs!!!!"  At least that led to a few guys behind me laughing out loud, so I wasn't the only one.

 

I still maintain Amy Adams is the perfect Lois Lane.  She just needs to do something besides getting captured and giving Clarke pep talks..  Although that bathtub scene was impressive in out they went out of their way to pull it off, without showing any actual nudity.

 

Laurence Fishburne did his best at just hanging out and barking orders, but with respect to him and Perry, no one can master that like J.K. Simmons and J. Jonah Jameson can!

 

I actually did like Jeremy Irons take on Alfred.  I wish he had more to do.

 

Jesse Eisenberg lived down to my expectations.  He was as bad as I thought he would be.  He just basically played him like Mark Zuckerberg, if the real Mark was evil and a cokehead.

 

Don't get me even started on the stupid "Superman dies" ending.  Oh, sure.  You are totally going to kill off Superman for good.  Try again.

 

Despite all this, there was Wonder Woman.  Now, she?  Really was awesome.  Gal Gadot didn't get much to do yet, so I'm curious to see how she will do with a full-length film, but she certainly looked the part, and I thought there was a spark on the screen whenever she showed up: both as Diana and then Wonder Woman at the end.  At least this film is making me look forward to her film.

 

I honestly the moment when we see the future Justice League moments didn't work, due to the timing.  I like the idea of them on film and under suspicion, but having it be show right when Bats and Superman are getting ready for their showdown, kind of takes away any build-up.  Still, I'm kind of curious to see if Jason Moma can make Aquaman work.  On the other hand, I thought The Flash looked like Adam Driver, so I was wondering why did Kylo Ren grow a beard and gain the ability to run fast.

 

Is this is a sign of things to come in future films, I'm am not optimistic.  Might need to rewatch Justice League again on Netflix, and remember that characters like Batman, Superman, Lex Luthor, etc., can be fun to watch and compelling.

Edited April 12, 2016 by thuganomics85

[Bruinsfan]

I will never not love Diane Lane, it seems, but I wish Ma Kent had been given more to do -- and I don't understand the grimy diner job, either.

Yeah, I realize small farming is often a hardscrabble life, but most farm owners can't put a yoke on their kid and have him plow the whole property in an afternoon at zero cost. Even if he's not helping support her with his check from the Planet (and I wasn't clear, does he live with Lois or rent his own separate place?), he could still drop by to occasionally help out with the farm and keep it profitable.

[Kromm]

A Jar of Piss is a plot point in a Superman movie?

 

If the above quote sounds like one of your reactions to Batman V. Superman, then I recommend the Podcast it was said in:

 

We Hate Movies Podcast: Ep 243 - Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

 

http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/b/1/7/b17d9279b01a8a26/Batman_v_Superman.mp3?c_id=11336082&expiration=1460457454&hwt=95e13567506ff844b06bdde5a866b390

 

These guys really tear the movie a new one.  For like... 2 whole hours. Warning: they don't hold back on talking about ANYTHING, so having seen the movie first is definitely a prerequisite... unless you plan to never see the movie at all.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Kromm

[JessePinkman]

I've listened to that podcast twice since it came out. It is so cathartic.

 

I didn't mind Martha Kent working at a diner, sometimes older people work just to work, it doesn't necessarily mean that she's destitute or that Clark isn't taking care of her. Sure, he can't spare an hour to search the city for her but he's not gonna let his mother starve.

[Bruinsfan]

It's just kind of weird for her to have an outside job unless it's for extra cash, because in my experience if you own a farm you're generally not at a loss for things to keep you occupied.

[nobodyyoucare]

unless the writer forgot to say she sold the farm

[MarkHB]

Or they trimmed that part... I read an interview with the editor today and he said the first cut was 4 hours long!

[Bruinsfan]

The editor of that hot mess is willing to admit he or she is responsible for it? In public?

[Kromm]

The editor of that hot mess is willing to admit he or she is responsible for it? In public?

Well lets make an analogy. Say you have a pet elephant who drops about 10 tons of elephant shit on your lawn. If you manage to scoop out about half of that shit and leave 5 tons of elephant shit behind, should you be proud, or ashamed of the job you've done?

Edited April 13, 2016 by Kromm

[Sandman]

That depends: do you tell your neighbours that the overpowering stench of elephant shit is just their imagination?

[Raja]

I don't think Superman was being seen as doing the African atrocities but rather it was an anolog to the US taking out Hussein or Gaddafi and in the power vacuum we see the civil war following as worse than the dictator killing his enemies

[MarkHB]

Here's the interview I spoke of.  Lots of film production inside baseball if you're interested in that sort of thing.

[NoWillToResist]

unless the writer forgot to say she sold the farm

 

Martha nearly bought the farm because her darling boy apparently can hear Lois gasp halfway across the globe, but can't pick up on his mother being kidnapped by goons...  ;)

 

Also, if she did sell the farm, it's a pity that she didn't get enough from its sale to buy a fucking hairbrush. Honestly, in both this and MoS she usually looked homeless (crappy clothes and unkempt) for no reason that I can understand..."mother" does not have to equal "fugly toad in granny clothes". (with apologies to those who rock 'granny clothes') ;)

Edited April 13, 2016 by NoWillToResist

[Sandman]

It's the writer and director, I think, who owe apologies to Lane, who remains one of the loveliest women in Hollywood, as she has been for most of four decades; why hire her to play Martha Kent, Frumptastic Pioneer Lady? It's not her fault the filmmakers conflate "everyday normal person" with "unconcerned with her appearance."

[TobinAlbers]

Late to the party in seeing this, but honestly, I didn't hate it. The editing and story definitely could've used some smoothing over and Eisenberg's Lex grated, but realizing that it may be intentional due to Darkside's influence, I'm in a wait and see mode for Justice League.

 

However stupidly they got there, Bruce laying waste to the goons that was holding Martha was perfection, as was his busting through that wall to grab the final mook and taking out KGBeast. Nice line of his 'I'm a friend of your son's' with her reply 'I could tell. The cape.' It was faulty getting there, but Bruce saved a mother named Martha and it got me for some reason.

 

The other thing I love that Cavill does in both movies is whenever Martha is in danger, he just gets this look of completely infuriated no holds barred snapped RAGE and goes ape on whoever is hurting his mother. Lex nailed it that Lois may bring Superman running, but his mother is how you bend him to your will. Or get ripped limb from limb.

 

In short, you mess with mom, Superman and Batman will beat the everloving S*&^ out of you.

 

The moments that are still with me a few days later are Clark's 'I love you' to Lois which is when you realize he was going for the suicide spear ramming and the final sequence of Superman's and Clark's burial. I was more affected by Clark's funeral more for Martha Kent than for Lois but that shot of Lois hesitating to throw the dirt on his grave and then finally dropping it to walk away was affecting. As was the small tremor and rise of the dirt to let you know there's hope.

 

At least in this movie, Martha got to grieve unlike in Superman Returns when Superman falls from the sky and the vigil is outside the hospital, Ma Kent is stuck outside unable to be with Clark while Lois got to blow past her to see him because everyone knows Lois is Supes' woman.

[Kromm]

Late to the party in seeing this, but honestly, I didn't hate it. The editing and story definitely could've used some smoothing over and Eisenberg's Lex grated, but realizing that it may be intentional due to Darkside's influence, I'm in a wait and see mode for Justice League.

 

However stupidly they got there, Bruce laying waste to the goons that was holding Martha was perfection, as was his busting through that wall to grab the final mook and taking out KGBeast. Nice line of his 'I'm a friend of your son's' with her reply 'I could tell. The cape.' It was faulty getting there, but Bruce saved a mother named Martha and it got me for some reason.

 

The other thing I love that Cavill does in both movies is whenever Martha is in danger, he just gets this look of completely infuriated no holds barred snapped RAGE and goes ape on whoever is hurting his mother. Lex nailed it that Lois may bring Superman running, but his mother is how you bend him to your will. Or get ripped limb from limb.

 

In short, you mess with mom, Superman and Batman will beat the everloving S*&^ out of you.

 

The moments that are still with me a few days later are Clark's 'I love you' to Lois which is when you realize he was going for the suicide spear ramming and the final sequence of Superman's and Clark's burial. I was more affected by Clark's funeral more for Martha Kent than for Lois but that shot of Lois hesitating to throw the dirt on his grave and then finally dropping it to walk away was affecting. As was the small tremor and rise of the dirt to let you know there's hope.

 

At least in this movie, Martha got to grieve unlike in Superman Returns when Superman falls from the sky and the vigil is outside the hospital, Ma Kent is stuck outside unable to be with Clark while Lois got to blow past her to see him because everyone knows Lois is Supes' woman.

It's tough for me with honest, sincere posts like this.

 

I don't want to insult or infringe on people's right to enjoy whatever they naturally do. Taste IS subjective. If it weren't, we'd be robots, or sheep--all accepting the same feed.

 

I think my final position on the film, in essence is this:  that there are people who enjoyed it (or who were even "oh, it wasn't that bad!"), then that's legitimate. Looking at it as a FILM, as a story being told to them, I mean.

 

To me the line is if it's a good Superman (and/or Batman) story specifically. Dividing out that specific experience from the general one of if it was adequate (or even "good" general entertainment). Superman as an Emo Asshole. Batman shooting guns like it's nothing to him. Lex Luthor, even with some lightly implied Darkseid background justification, acting like The Joker. Lois Lane being as interesting as a houseplant. Jimmy Olsen being the most insulting afterthought possible--tossed away like garbage pretty much. The DCU population in general having rather confusing attitudes that often don't even make sense in the context we're getting. And none of this done with any sense of Irony, where these differences might be played as either a charming alternate or as a dark and deliberately scary cautionary tale.  It's all just too bluntly presented to be taken as either of those--this is just supposed to be "the version" with no sense of it being changed to a purpose.

 

I think what we wind up with is something that can be a good movie for the right audience, but a head-scratching betrayal to many others. Now I know the argument has often been presented that these characters are long-standing and thus fluid over their histories... but there's usually a distinct reason for any experiments with the characters... and if we're being honest most of those changes are reset eventually anyway.   And the changes DO usually have to make sense. Batman as a crazy old guy barely hanging onto his sanity by his fingertips has been done a number of times in the comics, for example. But as I said, it's CLEAR it's an alternate, it's clear there's a reason for telling that specific story, and there's typically a tipping point even still where he stops being Batman and has to be taken down if he'd gone anywhere near as far as the Crazy Bat in this movie.  And Superman as too powerful to be trusted?  Again, an old standby in the comics. And one where he's been made to go pretty extreme. But playing out a story like that--or in this case trying to build a story about the mere FEAR of him being like that--requires a lot of craft, and a foundation where we already care about the character. This guy on screen?  Does anyone really have any reason to care about him, other than perhaps thinking Henry Cavill is a hunk or something like that?  The foundations haven't really been laid for it.

 

Enjoy the film I say. I just think it's going to be like... okay, remember the film Never Say Never Again? That alternate James Bond movie starring a then far too old Sean Connery, done by someone else who had some rights to remake Thunderball?  Here's my dirty little secret... I don't mind Never Say Never Again. I know Bond purists see it as a mockery, but I'm kind of in the boat I'm thinking people who like Batman V Superman are in--accepting it against a lot of other naysayers conventional wisdom as an alternative that I liked (not that Batman V Superman is legally or financially an alternative... just that I suspect that years from now that's how people are going to justify the current cycle of films after the fact). 

So I get it. Sort of.  At least if I think of cases where I've liked stuff that didn't toe to traditional lines.

[Sandman]

Nice line of his 'I'm a friend of your son's' with her reply 'I could tell. The cape.' It was faulty getting there, but Bruce saved a mother named Martha and it got me for some reason.

 

I will say that one of the few times I laughed (maybe the only time?) was at Martha's line here. I could imagine that Martha was thinking "My son made a friend, finally! And he's ... also kind of a weirdo."

 

And I thought Cavill and Adams played Superman's "I love you" very movingly.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Sandman

[Zuleikha]

It's all just too bluntly presented to be taken as either of those--this is just supposed to be "the version" with no sense of it being changed to a purpose..

 

 

The way I see it is that since it's established that the DCCU is its own continuity, and we have two completely separate universes going on in TV, the DCCU is established as an alternate. I don't think it is supposed to be The Version at all. 

[Bruinsfan]

I don't think the TV universes are completely separate, unless you're referring to Lucifer not playing well with all the superhero shows.

[Raja]

I don't think the TV universes are completely separate, unless you're referring to Lucifer not playing well with all the superhero shows.

The Flarrowverse has given an alternative universe explanation which links CW to Supergirl thus maybe to the Man of Steel. Gotham so far hasn't had a direct link to the indirect alternative universes seen by Barry Allen of CW.

Edit

Forgot different Jimmy Olson. So Supergirl is in a similar but different universe to Man Of Steel and Batman v Superman

Edited April 19, 2016 by Raja

[Kromm]

If we have to justify the shitty Snyderverse and it's values that way, and keep assuring each other that it's just Earth-50327 or some such number, it's hilarious still that it's the biggest budget, most widely promoted, and in many parts of the world, only available (at least in terms of current films or TV) version. And in terms of it's marketing, and it's internal storytelling, there's no sign it's supposed to be seen as an alternative--as a version where Superman and Batman aren't really the people we already know but ones where some trick of fate has changed them. In theory not an issue given how many alternatives there are. In practice, when it's the big budget version? I guess it's just me expecting that in that case if you change the very core of the characters... you justify (and explain) it somehow.  Loosely implying something might have happened to Robin doesn't really explain why Batman is all now super-cool with guns and collateral damage and why Alfred hasn't told him to go fuck himself by that point.  You need to be a bit more direct and show something to support that, instead of simply showing us the same damn scene of the Waynes being gunned down TWICE. In super slow motion. In a movie that's sort of supposed to be part of the Superman franchise anyway. And speaking of SuperDick... it almost makes sense he'd be such a dick in a world where instead of starting his relationship with humanity on a good foot it started with him being part of destroying a good part of a city and people resented that. But if you make that deep of a change in his origin, then the followup has a lot more responsibilities than showing some psycho in a Batsuit coming after him. It really has to be made clear why ANYONE (other than Lois Lane) would give a shit about him (and not just freaks who see him as a kind of Space Jesus). Or why he'd give a shit about anyone else.

[Rick Kitchen]

Forgot different Jimmy Olson. So Supergirl is in a similar but different universe to Man Of Steel and Batman v Superman

 

If we're willing to accept that the person in BvS really is Jimmy.  :)

[Bruinsfan]

He wasn't named on screen, there's still time to change it if Snyder gets pink-slipped.

[TobinAlbers]

He wasn't named on screen, there's still time to change it if Snyder gets pink-slipped.

 

Kinda bummed they killed him off because I like the actor -Michael Cassidy (Smallville alum!) - and he could've been a great addition to the universe as a less geeky, hot/CIA liason Jimmy.

[Terrafamilia]

Finally went to see it. Like others I didn't love it but didn't hate it either. However, there were far too many things that just bugged.

Why are people still living in Metropolis? After a second super-powered no holds barred brawl with massive property damage (even if a lot of it occurred in Gotham) I'm sure the exodus will soon begin in earnest.

So Darkseid was supposed to have had a hand in Luthor's cray-cray? I would never have come to that conclusion if I hadn't read it here. In retrospect I suppose you could conclude he had something to do with Batman's cray-cray. During his desert fight dream I was asking myself why would Batman be dreaming of parademons?

Speaking of his dreams, I figured the one with the guy poking out of a portal to warn him about something was actually real due to all the loose paper fluttering around after Bruce Wayne 'woke up' but I had no idea it was supposed to be the Flash until reading it here. The whole sequence seemed so out of place if its purpose was as a teaser for some upcoming movie.

Cavill? meh, he just doesn't do anything for me. Affleck was better than I was expecting (and I kinda liked the Daredevil movie btw so I wasn't predisposed to dislike him). Gadot was good but shouldn't WW have her own plane?

And CGI artists still haven't managed to render realistic human movement to human CGI characters in intense action scenes. 

[Kromm]

On 4/11/2016 at 8:58 AM, NoWillToResist said:

There is not enough space on the internet to adequately express how much I disliked this film. I fail to understand how it couldn't even meet my lowly expectations. Good grief.and said "fuck, take my name off it!" ;)

I wish we could add a poll to this thread (I think only the OP, or a board mod can do it) asking people a few questions. First, of course, how much they liked the movie (just on a ten point scale, but with a zero too, so eleven actual choices -- 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10). But then also a followup question asking where their CORE strongest knowledge/experience of the characters comes from, with choices like "1.) from the comics--classic and modern both in equal amounts 2.) from the classic comics primarily (including comic strips) 3.) from the modern comics, primarily 4.) from live action TV and movies primarily 5.) from animation primarily 6.) indirect only--I've seen some of each of these places but am only a casual fan and have no strong expectations from any of them".

Knowing that might really explain the "it wasn't so bad!" reactions vs. the horror some of us have at seeing Batman with a gun, Superman hardly giving a shit, Jimmy Olsen sort of kind of/maybe as cannon fodder, and Lex Luthor as loony rather than sinister.

[MarkHB]

We don't have any way to set up a multi-question survey so as to correlate the answers, unfortunately.

But I did find this nifty tie-in:

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, MarkHB said:

We don't have any way to set up a multi-question survey so as to correlate the answers, unfortunately.

Huh? Has that changed?  At least on the old board when you add a poll it lets you stack not only as many options as you want, but also as many questions.

I was just noting that only the OP and mods can do it on an existent topic, that's all. Which makes sense of course. But the multiple question thing? I've done it myself on topics I've made. In fact, I think I'm gonna bop on over to the test zone, cause you've got me curious, and it's easy enough to check for myself! 

EDIT - yeah, the interface has changed, but it's similar: Example

This is just an FYI (and for my own curiosity) I don't seriously expect a poll or polls here!

Edited May 2, 2016 by Kromm

[nobodyyoucare]

Don't know if this was posted but the net has dug up an old Zach Snyder interview that explains the ultraviolence in Batman v Superman. Basically Snyder thinks maturity means lots of violence for violence sake and that Batman should have had a prison rape origin stpry.

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/2/11565932/zack-snyder-justice-league