Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

[Lantern7]

I'm not clicking that. "Prison rape origin story"?!? Did DC Comics ever think of vetting movie-runners before giving out their priceless toys?

[nobodyyoucare]

Well its Warner Bros not DC comics that runs the movie side of things. Marvel at least decided to make Marvel Studios in order to make proper Marvel Movies.

[Lantern7]

Found this on YouTube. Spoilers, naturally . . .

[Kromm]

So much better than the real thing...

[JessePinkman]

From the link nobodyyoucare posted:

Quote

 

You could call it "high-brow" comics, but to me, that comic book was just pretty sexy! I had a buddy who tried getting me into "normal" comic books, but I was all like, "No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn’t really doing it for me." I was a little broken, that way. So when Watchmen came along, I was, "This is more my scene."

 

He's an actual parody of himself.

[Bruinsfan]

Ugh. Though it does make me wonder if sending him a copy of Philip José Farmer's A Feast Unknown would prove sufficiently enticing that he'd drop out of the DC movies in favor of making a Tarzan vs. Doc Savage murder-orgy movie.

[Kromm]

21 hours ago, nobodyyoucare said:

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

I know the answer to a man like him, who's dick apparently gets hard at seeing (and making movies with) violence, isn't to want to be violent in return... but man if there isn't a part of me that, if he were standing in front me, would want to punch him in the face.  Unfortunately I'd have to dodge his ejaculation (because of course punching him probably makes him do that).

Edited May 5, 2016 by Kromm

[nobodyyoucare]

5 hours ago, Bruinsfan said:

Ugh. Though it does make me wonder if sending him a copy of Philip José Farmer's A Feast Unknown would prove sufficiently enticing that he'd drop out of the DC movies in favor of making a Tarzan vs. Doc Savage murder-orgy movie.

Maybe the sickos who made "A Serbian Film" could recruit Snyder to direct and produce the sequel.

[MarkHB]

I read that article earlier... apparently, Snyder's mother was the one who got him into comics in the first place... starting him with Heavy Metal.  I don't know how many of you remember that magazine, but I could definitely see that if that was your starting point (or Love & Rockets or Cerebus for that matter) that standard Comics Code Approved superhero fare wouldn't measure up.

[nobodyyoucare]

30 minutes ago, MarkHB said:

I read that article earlier... apparently, Snyder's mother was the one who got him into comics in the first place... starting him with Heavy Metal.  I don't know how many of you remember that magazine, but I could definitely see that if that was your starting point (or Love & Rockets or Cerebus for that matter) that standard Comics Code Approved superhero fare wouldn't measure up.

Except there is plenty of people that read both and don't want blood and guts simply for the sake of blood and guts. Snyder and his ilk miss the point of what is mature in nature rather then a label to keep immature minds away lest they get too excited by the content of the material within.

[Perfect Xero]

After I saw 300 my thought was that Snyder had clearly read the source material, loved the source material, and (mostly) got the source material.

After I saw the Watchmen film my thought was always that Snyder had clearly read the source material, loved the source material, and completely failed to understand the source material.

After Man of Steel and BvS it's pretty clear IMO that Snyder has never really read, enjoyed, or understood Superman and that the only Batman story that he'd ever latched on to was probably Dark Knight Returns. Which just reminds me of Kevin Smith's story of working with Jon Peters on a Superman script, and being given the 3 conditions of: "I don't want to see him in that suit. No Flying. He has to fight a giant spider." And being told that Sean Penn would be the perfect choice for Superman because "He has the eyes of a caged animal. A fucking killer!"

[Kromm]

Another detailed "Fuck You" to the movie--this one from the folks at CRACKED.

WARNING: Don't hit the Play button if you don't want to hear spoilers.

[Kromm]

Another Batty V. Soupy humorous video...

 

[millennium]

I finally saw this today (was amazed to find a theater still showing it).    By now anything I have to say has probably been said upthread, so I'll take the "random thoughts" approach to my quibbles:

1) Batman's vengeance streak was poorly paced.   I could almost buy Bruce going into vengeance mode in the days and weeks following the battle of Metropolis; 9/11 left a lot of people hungry for vengeance, even if the targets they chose were the wrong ones.  I say almost because the Bruce Wayne I know is a good man and he would have risen above it.   That aside,  by the time Batman and Superman finally get around to slugging it out, almost two years have passed.   More than enough time for Batman's anger to be replaced by clarity of mind and for him to see the illogic of killing Superman -- especially since BATMAN DOES NOT KILL.  Not only that, Superman doesn't want to fight -- he's desperate for Batman's help.   That leaves Batman in the position of hammering someone who needs him, which only serves to make Batman look stupid and psychotic.   It stripped all the fun out of the spectacle and made it seem rather sad.

2) This movie was enormously successful at disrespecting longtime comics fans and the average moviegoer alike.   Those who grew up reading comic books were probably offended by the offhand way the movie spit in the face of long-established comic books canon, like "Batman never uses guns" and "Batman doesn't drink" and "Metropolis is not within eyeshot of Gotham City."  Meanwhile, the moviegoer who has only a casual acquaintance with the Caped Crusader and the Man of Steel were probably distracted and confused  by the insertion of scenes that served no purpose other than to set up the Justice League movie and were only recognizable as such to comics fans.   I was with friends who were all "WTF?" when The Flash opened a new window in Bruce's dream and started yelling at him -- not to mention the vision of dragonfly men and soldiers attired in uniforms from The DC Store.   The Aquaman, Flash and Cyborg cameos were awkwardly placed as well.  I was like, "Screw Khal Drogo, get back to the movie."

2)  Batman with guns.   Batman killing.    I don't want to get preachy, but we live in an age that needs a hero who doesn't rely on guns to solve his problems.   Batman is that hero and always has been (well, except for that rare early instance when he fought the Mad Monk's monster men with machine guns mounted on the Batplane -- an anomaly, really).    The Batman's no-guns policy is so deeply ingrained in the canon and culture that I'm sure we all felt a sense of grim irony when James Holmes shot up that theater in Aurora at a showing of the Dark Knight.    This movie could have been an opportunity to reaffirm Batman's rejection of guns and gun culture.   Instead, it gleefully made Batman part of it, apparently with DC's blessing.   Now there's a generation of kids who'll grow up believing that the greatest of all superheroes thinks guns are a perfectly acceptable means of disposing of your enemies.   It's a shameful travesty, if you ask me.

3) "Save, Martha."   Okay, you're on the verge of losing consciousness, a merciless iron boot is crushing your larynx, and you're thinking this might be the end so you try to gasp out your last desperate plea -- please save my mother.    Wouldn't you use those exact words, "Save my mother!" rather than "Save [fill in your mother's first name]?"  Who calls or refers to their mother by her first name?   Especially in the company of strangers?  Yes, I know, "save my mother" wouldn't have jarred Batman as emotionally but "Save Martha" was so unnatural and contrived that it took me right out of the moment.   It was an awkward plot device, rivaled only by Lois receiving her engagement ring in the mail. 

4) Which brings me to the next point -- THAT's the diamond Superman gives her?  What did he do, get it on eBay?   This from a guy who can clench his fist and transform a lump of coal into the Hope Diamond?  

5) Speaking of Lois, how did she manage to get around all that rubble in those heels?

6) If I followed the movie correctly, it's the collateral destruction of Metropolis during Superman's battle with Zod that sets Bruce Wayne on his mission to destroy Superman.   So tell me, WHY does Batman risk virtually the same kind of damage in Gotham by deliberately leading the creature "across the bay" to his hometown?   Hypocrite.

7) And if Gotham and Metropolis were really as close as, say, Sarah Palin's kitchen and Russia, and Clark really did have a bug up his ass about Batman (who's only been doing his thing for two fucking decades at this point), wouldn't they have crossed paths LONG before now?  Couldn't Superman have heat-visioned Batman to a crisp from the comfort of his bathtub if he wanted?

8) Did Zack Snyder buy the Doomsday creature at a garage sale at Peter Jackson's house?   It was a cave troll!

9) If Wonder Woman's sword was able to cut Doomsday's arm off, can it presumably do the same to Superman?  

10) I'd blame Jesse Eisenberg for ruining this movie except there were so many other things that helped to ruin it.   Still, he's the proverbial sore thumb.   Did he get confused and imagine he was playing the Joker in that rooftop scene with Superman?   Ben Affleck did a great job as Bruce Wayne (I'd like to see a slightly more upbeat version in the future) and was the best Batman yet.   But even if the entire movie had gone off without a hitch, Eisenberg's painful charade of acting would have ruined it anyway.   It didn't stand a chance with him on board.

11) Is it possible Diane Lane was working in a diner as penance for Clark beating up a trucker outside a diner in Superman II?

12) Why was stately Wayne Manor burned?

13) Sorely absent from this movie was Commissioner Gordon and the Gotham Police Department.  In the one scene featuring Gotham Police, an officer tried to gun down Batman despite that Batman had been saving Gotham City's ass for twenty years.   Superman's support system -- the Daily Planet -- was adequately represented in this film.    But Batman's was non-existent.   I guess Snyder thought it necessary to divorce Batman from the trappings of law and order to underscore the "we've always been criminals, Alfred" sentiment.   But for me it left a great big hole in the film.

13) After finally seeing this movie I think the only thing I am grateful for is that Bruce Wayne didn't use emoji's in his email to Wonder Woman.

Edited May 23, 2016 by millennium

[Kromm]

20 hours ago, millennium said:

Those who grew up reading comic books were probably offended by the offhand way the movie spit in the face of long-established comic books canon, like "Batman never uses guns" and "Batman doesn't drink" and "Metropolis is not within eyeshot of Gotham City."  

Quote

Batman with guns.   Batman killing.    I don't want to get preachy, but we live in an age that needs a hero who doesn't rely on guns to solve his problems.   Batman is that hero and always has been (well, except for that rare early instance when he fought the Mad Monk's monster men with machine guns mounted on the Batplane -- an anomaly, really).    The Batman's no-guns policy is so deeply ingrained in the canon and culture that I'm sure we all felt a sense of grim irony when James Holmes shot up that theater in Aurora at a showing of the Dark Knight.    This movie could have been an opportunity to reaffirm Batman's rejection of guns and gun culture.   Instead, it gleefully made Batman part of it, apparently with DC's blessing.   Now there's a generation of kids who'll grow up believing that the greatest of all superheroes thinks guns are a perfectly acceptable means of disposing of your enemies.   It's a shameful travesty, if you ask me.

I assumed that's how everyone who knew the character from the comics would feel. Then I started watching some YouTubers and listening to some comics podcasts and got the shock of my life. The big excuse from a lot of these folks appears to be Frank Miller and The Dark Knight Returns.

It's disturbing because firstly, a lot of these reactions act like The Dark Knight Returns is better and more universally loved than it really is. You know... like everyone thinks that it's nihilistic and yes, sexist aspects (for example, Catwoman retires so she can run an Escort service), are high art. Okay, lets concede a lot of people do think that about Frank Miller. If so... then film The Dark Knight Returns.  Not this half-assed version, which includes Batman getting old, and Batman strapping on a suit to fight Superman, and Batman just shooting people because... of... reasons.  And you know.. in a Superman film.

Also I don't think these people (and by that I mean the people making excuses for the film, but also Synder and Goyer) really GET that The Dark Knight Returns, as massively flawed as it is, isn't supposed to be anyone's main take on Batman and Superman. At the very least, Miller does seem to realize it's a perverse, twisted take. It's these characters where both have betrayed what they really stand for. And THAT'S what you want to make your tentpole for an entire series of films to follow? An acknowledged perverse alternate take?

The main thing about The Dark Knight Returns is that it's in a very literal way credited as being the impetus for most of the Dark N' Gritty comics that followed over the next few years. They've even nicknamed the period "The Dark Age of Comics" and DKR is supposedly the launchpad. But that was literally 30 years ago. It shows how clueless Synder is that he thinks that's some fresh new take on the characters. But again, at least if it was done faithfully to Miller's book, you could use the excuse you were going with something you knew had never been put to live action but that was beloved by people. But that's not what they did. How people can see the tiniest shittiest bits of that story in BvS and claim it's an excuse for the mess that film wound up as is beyond me. 

[millennium]

19 minutes ago, Kromm said:

 

Also I don't think these people (and by that I mean the people making excuses for the film, but also Synder and Goyer) really GET that The Dark Knight Returns, as massively flawed as it is, isn't supposed to be anyone's main take on Batman and Superman. At the very least, Miller does seem to realize it's a perverse, twisted take. It's these characters where both have betrayed what they really stand for. And THAT'S what you want to make your tentpole for an entire series of films to follow? An acknowledged perverse alternate take?

 

I bought my copies of TDKR off the rack when they first came out.   At the time, there was a clear understanding that it was an "otherworlds"-type story -- a "what if" take on the Batman legend.   Even now, if you check Wikipedia, it says this about the Miller Dark Knight Universe:

 The Dark Knight Universe (DKU) was formerly designated as "Earth-31", but it is not included amongst the current New 52 DC Multiverse and another alternate Earth has taken its place. It is unclear whether the Dark Knight Universe still occurs within the canonical New 52 DC multiverse, although the profiles of seven DC alternate Earths are still currently unknown.

Earth Thirty-Fucking-One!

As a speculative story, it was interesting but by no means so earth-shattering that it should have become a template for everything that followed.   Sure enough though, in the aftermath, Batman stories started looking more and more like TDKR (the copycat device that annoyed me most was the ubiquitous panels of media talking heads peppered throughout Batman stories after that).   And the underlying theme became this: Batman is a barely restrained psychopath.

GONE was Batman's reputation as "the world's greatest detective," a characterization that invoked reason, logic and intelligence.   

Once that happened, once Miller's Batman became the default character, I drifted away after more than a decade of collecting every issue of every Batman title. 

Miller's Batman is boxy and ugly and fueled by hatred and bitterness.   Why was that considered better than its predecessor -- the agile, acrobatic, martial arts master with a mind like Sherlock Holmes?   The sleek Denny O'Neil/Neal Adams Batman with the gothic edge who combatted the Joker and other classic foes, but also took on new foes like Ra's Al Ghul? (even Ra's always addressed Batman respectfully as "Detective")   I'll never understand it.   The cynic in me writes it off to there being more brutish, hateful people in the world and the market is simply pandering to them.

[BatmanBeatles]

Quote

5) Speaking of Lois, how did she manage to get around all that rubble in those heels?

The same way Bryce Dallas Howard did in Jurassic World.

[millennium]

3 hours ago, BatmanBeatles said:

The same way Bryce Dallas Howard did in Jurassic World.

Ha!  I have yet to see Jurassic World.   But many years ago, 1989, maybe 1990, at a McDonald's in Connecticut, I saw a small girl struggling with the heavy glass door so I got up from my table and opened it for her.   She ran right by me, but her father, who came up behind her, thanked me.   It was Ron Howard.   The little girl had to have been Bryce. 

Edited May 24, 2016 by millennium

[MarkHB]

On 5/24/2016 at 0:28 AM, millennium said:

As a speculative story, it was interesting but by no means so earth-shattering that it should have become a template for everything that followed.   Sure enough though, in the aftermath, Batman stories started looking more and more like TDKR (the copycat device that annoyed me most was the ubiquitous panels of media talking heads peppered throughout Batman stories after that).   And the underlying theme became this: Batman is a barely restrained psychopath.

I remember reading a criticism some years later about people misunderstanding TDKR.  If it had any intended relevance to canon when written, it was as the end of the story for the Silver/Bronze Age Batman, in the same manner that "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow" would be for Superman.  But when Miller came on to write Batman: Year One, the post-Crisis restart of the Batman mythos, a lot of fans and writers alike thought that TDKR was the endpoint for the new incarnation of Batman instead, so the writing headed that way from the beginning.

I did notice that, even if they didn't specifically adapt TDKR in the movie, that they did give two comics writers a larger-type acknowledgement towards the end of the credits: Frank Miller and Dan Jurgens, who wrote Death of Superman.  (They followed those two with a huge list of other comics writers & artists.)

[Kromm]

4 minutes ago, MarkHB said:

I did notice that, even if they didn't specifically adapt TDKR in the movie, that they did give two comics writers a larger-type acknowledgement towards the end of the credits: Frank Miller and Dan Jurgens, who wrote Death of Superman.  (They followed those two with a huge list of other comics writers & artists.)

There were specifics adapted too. Really the whole aspect of Batman hauling guns around and shooting people indiscriminately because he's old and grumpy came straight out of it. But also the whole Batman in a powered suit so he can bash on Superman was straight out of it too. 

I mentioned this before, but the other day I listened to a whole long podcast where one uber-TDKR fan whined for about an hour about how he was upset that people hated BvS so much and that they were harping on the stuff with guns, because he felt the Batman HE grew up with was the Dark Knight one, and it was refreshing to him to see that, and he felt people just should suck it up and accept that. I rolled my eyes extra hard, because this guy (and many like him) really think the idea of TDKR was to change people's perceptions of what Batman was. That's not how I read that book. But you know what? If I was wrong and it was, I don't give a fig. Batman gains nothing by being a gun toting wacko. It makes him generic. The non-gun thing had a point beyond any moral stance about gun violence. It was key in defining Batman as more than a vigilante. Making him the biggest baddest vigilante via the biggest gun just makes him into another walking talking phallic symbol rather than the complex character he really is.

[Kromm]

On 5/24/2016 at 5:16 AM, millennium said:

Ha!  I have yet to see Jurassic World.   But many years ago, 1989, maybe 1990, at a McDonald's in Connecticut, I saw a small girl struggling with the heavy glass door so I got up from my table and opened it for her.   She ran right by me, but her father, who came up behind her, thanked me.   It was Ron Howard.   The little girl had to have been Bryce. 

Ron had a bunch of little red haired girls, I seem to recall. So it might have been Bryce if the years/ages line up, but it might have been one of her sisters too.

EDIT - Okay, 30 seconds with wikipedia and logic says it probably was Bryce. She would have been around 8 or 9 at the time you cite. Her sisters were apparently twins (because they have the same birth date) and would have been 4 or 5. Aside from it being unlikely Ron would be out with one of them and not the other, I think even your "small girl" qualifier would have been different if you were talking about a 4-5 year old. 

It's funny that we think of celebs as so different than us, but your encounter was in a McDonalds of all places. Heck, I once ate hot dogs with Jamie Farr in a Nathan's on Broadway. The table he was at was the only one with a seat and he nodded me over. We sat there, two perfect strangers, eating hot dogs across from each other, not even discussing who he was, for about ten minutes, until I had to leave. Because it was New York, nobody approached him and bothered him.  That's my celeb fast food story that's comparable to your McDonalds encounter I guess. Probably one of about 6 or 7 times over my life I've had totally random celeb encounters like that.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Kromm

[millennium]

10 hours ago, Kromm said:

It's funny that we think of celebs as so different than us, but your encounter was in a McDonalds of all places. Heck, I once ate hot dogs with Jamie Farr in a Nathan's on Broadway. The table he was at was the only one with a seat and he nodded me over. We sat there, two perfect strangers, eating hot dogs across from each other, not even discussing who he was, for about ten minutes, until I had to leave. Because it was New York, nobody approached him and bothered him.  That's my celeb fast food story that's comparable to your McDonalds encounter I guess. Probably one of about 6 or 7 times over my life I've had totally random celeb encounters like that.

All of my celebrity encounters have been in the most mundane places -- the hardware store, the supermarket, the post office.    I never know what to say to them (usually I say nothing) and kick myself afterwards for being so tongue-tied.   I keep wondering, is it because I'm star-struck or because their sudden appearance in everyday life is so far out of context that it throws me.

I have to say, though, Jamie Farr and Nathan's seems like a perfect fit.   Maybe because Klinger was always talking about the Toledo Mudhens and I associate hot dogs with baseball.

[Lantern7]

I have to share this.

[Kromm]

2 hours ago, millennium said:

I have to say, though, Jamie Farr and Nathan's seems like a perfect fit.   Maybe because Klinger was always talking about the Toledo Mudhens and I associate hot dogs with baseball.

It was in the mid 90s. I didn't realize it until later, but Farr was appearing in a Broadway revival of Guys and Dolls at the time. I don't know which theater, but it was likely literally around the corner from that Nathans (which was around Broadway and 45th street, as I recall). 

My typical encounter with celebrities seems to be not wanting to pester them. I've never asked for an actor's autograph in my life (I have with sports stars, but that's because you run into them in circumstances like signings where they're specifically there to sign those). 

Probably the funniest encounter I had was getting a table in a restaurant next to Sam Donaldson, Diane Sawyer and Jeff Greenfield, back when they all still worked for ABC. Donaldson was as bombastic as you'd expect, with a voice that broadcast across to my table (and likely well beyond) without us trying to listen. He was going on self-importantly to Greenfield with career advice about what he had to do to get his own show. I had to listen to about 40 minutes of that shit. But Greenfield and Sawyer had to listen to that dick all of the time, so they had it much worse.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Kromm

[Lantern7]

And one more thing to share with the class . . . at least until the inevitable Honest Trailer covering the clusterfuck . . .

 

[Morrigan2575]

^^^ hahahah ?

[BetterButter]

Edited June 2, 2016 by BetterButter
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition Trailer

[JessePinkman]

So...I'm not sure I understand why Warner Bros. allowed the production team to A) write a 3+ hour long movie B) film it C) excise parts of that very long movie that would have strengthened the nearly 3 hour movie we ended up getting, D) KEEP scenes that were utterly unnecessary to a coherent plot.

I fully expect a documentary in 10 years about the disaster that was the making of this movie.

[MarkHB]

From what I read in the interview with the editor (linked somewhere above), the initial cut came in around 4 hours.  They knew they'd trim from there, of course, but they had at least an extra hour of material even if some of it was just scene-setting / pacing stuff.

[C76]

I'm finally watching this movie. I found a copy online and I'm almost done. 

Thus far I've managed to make my way through most of BvS, and have swallowed my sense of disbelief...I'm sure I didn't catch at all of the (in)correct details most of the devout fans have noticed. However the tone and pacing of this film turns me off. 

Still, I've been doing my best.

That is, until IT happened. Batman's "What did you say?" or "Why did you say THAT name...?"

I actually did a double take.

ALL of THAT fury, and you decide not to pound Superman's head in because your mothers have the same name?

I almost quit right then and there.

I think I have 15 mins left. Heaven help me. I know I can make it if I try! ;)

Edited June 16, 2016 by C76

[BetterButter]

The Differences of ‘Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition’

[Rick Kitchen]

"differences of"?

[piequinn35]

Finally seen this, 3 hours long for the ultimate edition, too long, some scenes were just boring,

Superman had to save Lois 3 freaking times! and  B & S have the same mothers name of course! lol 

and with the kryptospear even though he is weaken by it still decided to go use it against that thing

instead of passing it to ww or the bat or tag team whatever, of course for the drama factor, he died (but not dead in the end).

Rating: 5 of 10

[Lantern7]

The latest Epic Rap Battle Of History pitted Bruce Banner against Bruce Jenner. I know Batman went up against Sherlock Holmes in the second season (with Kyle Mooney as Dr. Watson!), but I keep imagining Bruce Wayne dropping by, asking if either of the Bruces' mothers are named "Martha." And then he'd Batarang them both in the head.

Is Ultimate Edition worth looking into, even if I can find it free from the library, or through a small fee via Redbox?

[dwmarch]

I saw the extended edition last night and I didn't hate it but I'm not a DC guy so some of the changes didn't offend me at all. Batman kills people in this movie. I take that at face value because they never tried to say he was against it. But as a Star Trek fan who is also a purist I was offended by certain changes in Star Trek 2009 that I bet few others would care about. The Kelvin has a leading zero in it's registry number. That is just plain wrong! I don't care about J.J. Abrams grandmother's birth date and it is certainly no reason to mess with fifty years of Star Trek tradition. From previous comments in the thread, I feel like this movie is absolutely full of bits like this.

What bothered me the most was how dark the movie was. Not figuratively but literally. Did anyone notice that Amy Adams was wearing a leather skirt? She has it on for about half an hour, from her park bench meeting with Harry Lennix right up until Superman flies away from her on the balcony. And you'd hardly know it because she spends almost that entire time obscured from view. She also had a gorgeous leather trenchcoat that we saw occasional glimpses of the shoulders of (and that she let perish in the destruction at the end) and it made me wonder why they were dressing her up so nicely only to hide her in the shadows. They certainly weren't afraid to show the other ladies off. Wonder Woman's costume is basically a corset and thigh high boots.

I did find it a little dismaying how casually certain characters were bumped off. Jimmy Olsen is just casually shot. I thought at the end of that scene he was going to get up, dig a bullet out of his vest and carry on. Nope, he gets half a moment of awesome followed by death. And Lex Luthor blew up his gorgeous lackey, that gal who only had about one or two lines. The reluctant witness is casually thrown in front of a speeding train and even though there's a bunch of heroes who could conceivably save her from such a situation (isn't damsel in distress about to be hit by a train covered in Superhero 101?) they don't have any real reason to care about her so she gets to have Amtrak for breakfast, lunch and dinner. And none of these deaths had any real impact. Lex doesn't miss his gal, no one knew Jimmy Olsen at all (and my Superman lore is 30 years out of date but what?!?!?) and the witness who could have blown the plot wide open is forgotten about.

I didn't get the pig piss bit until I read it here. I thought Lex was going for a double villain whammy, poisoning the senator in addition to blowing her up. Now that I read about it I think it's hilarious although given how long this movie was I'm glad we weren't treated to a scene of Lex Luthor wrassling a pig and trying to get it to piss into a jar. As for Lex's motivations, I thought they were simple enough. He wanted a god to bow down to him and when that didn't work out he wanted to create a god to fight the one who disrespected him.

There was very little humor in the movie but I thought that actually worked well in this case. One thing that bugged me was how Captain America: Civil War started out as this drama about civilians being caught in the crossfire but by the end of the movie we were now into straight comedy with all the characters cracking wise as they fought each other. That tonal shift was really weird to me and I'm glad they avoided it here. What little humor there was felt appropriately dark.

There were definitely a lot of DC references in this that I didn't get. One of Batman's dreams had some dude popping out of a hole to yell something at him. It meant nothing to me beyond "it's a reference!" There was also the Youtube channel of superheroes in development, some of which I knew and some of which were not obvious to me at all. The dude pinned to the wall who was about to die but then got turned into something... I don't have any idea who that is. I did like some of the references to how today's Superman is not the same as when he first started like when Clark Kent's editor bitches about Smallville and how is isn't the 30's anymore. Did any of the references tie into the TV shows?

Some people were wondering why Superman's mom is working in a dingy diner. I have a feeling there's a few reasons for this. First, no one knows she's Superman's mom. Second, she's a widow who lives in the middle of a giant corn field in rural Kansas. Working at the diner would keep her busy and would be about as much of a social life as you could ask for in that area.

Was there anything other than comic book physics to explain why Batman didn't get turned into salsa by getting thrown around in that metal suit? If you picture yourself in a metal suit of any kind (and Batman's looked heavy) just falling over is going to hurt and possibly break things. Getting chucked through a building should be instantly fatal. The Marvel movies do this too (Iron Man getting bounced around like a pinball inside of a giant engine in the first Avengers, etc) and I know it just comes with the territory but I still couldn't help but think Batman's suit would have been a liability rather than an asset.

I don't hate Affleck (Affleck was da bomb in Phantoms, yo!) or Eisenberg but they're the type of actors I like in spite of themselves. I can definitely see how people might see Ben Affleck and want to punch him in his smug face. For what it's worth I think that actually translates well to this interpretation of Batman.

There's been a lot of criticism of the director and I wonder what this movie could have been like in different hands. You know who I think might actually be able to pull something like this off? None other than Kevin Smith. He's a super fan of DC, can wring actual performances out of Ben Affleck, has actually developed the chops for drama (see Red State or the scene in Tusk where the villain is explaining his past, having lost his parents just like Batman lost his) but can also do comedy. And you know what I don't think I've ever seen in a Kevin Smith movie? An explosion! I know Smith was considered years ago for a Superman movie (where Supes would fight a giant spider because one guy at the studio really wanted that to happen and Smith backed away slowly) and I wonder if the DC movie universe might consider bringing him into the fold.

[xaxat]

On 3/27/2016 at 1:52 PM, Sake614 said:

And getting a military funeral complete with burial at Arlington? really?

That really annoyed me. There's a tradition of military service in my family and I have been to multiple funerals with military honors. Only those who have taken an oath to serve the country as a member of the armed services get that honor. 

Superman doesn't rate.

Other than that, I thought it was confusing and it rested on the premise of the World's Greatest Detective not being able to figure out much of anything. (Did he even think about Googling "White Portuguese"?) And add me to the list of people who thought it was too dark.

I liked Wonder Woman (My favorite moment was her "It's going to be like that?" smile she gave after Doomsday blasted her across the block.). And I actually liked the final fight scene except for the Lois Lane/spear parts.

Henry Cavil's go to expression for Superman looks like he just smelled a fart.

Edited July 13, 2016 by xaxat

[Kromm]

On 7/9/2016 at 1:53 AM, dwmarch said:

Some people were wondering why Superman's mom is working in a dingy diner. I have a feeling there's a few reasons for this. First, no one knows she's Superman's mom. Second, she's a widow who lives in the middle of a giant corn field in rural Kansas. Working at the diner would keep her busy and would be about as much of a social life as you could ask for in that area.

I think we have to suppose that the Supermanning business doesn't pay much (anything really) and neither really does The Daily Planet. So he can't exactly contribute. Martha's finances I suppose are limited since she can't run a farm herself.

In the comics Superman could perhaps press a lump of coal in his hands into a diamond. Don't think this version can pull that off. The things he COULD do to earn money simply may be things he's not willing to do, so perhaps Martha really is on her own financially.

[xaxat]

I think Martha Kent was working in a diner primarily because the imagery fits in with the iconography Snyder associates with the Kents of Smallville. Hard working, non-glamorous, salt of the earth, fill in the cliche. It's also on display during Clark's wake/funeral that looks like it is something from a Norman Rockwell painting. 

[Lantern7]

And there's an Ultimate Edition I'll have to check out later.

[PatternRec]

Meh. I like director's cuts from back in the day, but something like this should stand alone as a movie and not have to be explained better by the cut scenes. Just like I shouldn't have to play the Matrix video game to understand the plot of the Matrix sequels. It all smacks of apologies for not getting it right in the movie itself. 

[Dancingjaneway]

My dad was watching this tonight and I happened to catch some of it. Good god it was horrible! Jesse Eisenberg was fucking terrible. He was definitely trying to re-capture the comedic/manic tone of Heath Ledger as Joker and failed MISERABLY. Please stop casting him Hollywood! I wanted Batman dead and for Superman to kill him. They should have made a 2nd Superman movie. This was a waste of money and time. Also the Bat suit during the Batman trying to kill Superman scene was hilariously horrible. Not even Wonderwoman could save this movie. Ben Affleck once again blows and I couldn't even enjoy Alfred this time around. Ugh. 

ETA Diane Lane once again knocks it out of the park as Momma Kent.  

Edited July 21, 2016 by Dancingjaneway

[supposebly]

I finally watched it. Well, parts of it, skipping through this boring and tedious snoozefest. Until the end, when I realized:

"They have a cave troll!" (TM Boromir in LOTR)

Only amusing part in the whole movie for me.

Ben Affleck was good. The rest was utter shit.

Why did I pay money for this?

[millennium]

6 hours ago, supposebly said:

I finally watched it. Well, parts of it, skipping through this boring and tedious snoozefest. Until the end, when I realized:

"They have a cave troll!" (TM Boromir in LOTR)

Only amusing part in the whole movie for me.

Ben Affleck was good. The rest was utter shit.

Why did I pay money for this?

 

It doesn't speak well of Zack Snyder that he didn't anticipate or perhaps care that the audience would immediately identify the creature as a cave troll.    It suggests sloppiness or carelessness.    This was the BIG THREAT in the movie, the foe meant to unite the warring heroes and account for the action in the last half hour of the movie ... and everyone immediately dismissed it as just a cave troll.   To me, that's a major failure, one of the biggest in the movie.

Another would be Jesse Eisenberg, the other Big Bad, who turned out to be just a Big Suck. 

[Lantern7]

Honest Trailers takes on Zach Snyder's first DC Comics adaptation, Watchmen. Got a kick out of the "same name" bit. You can probably find information as to how and why Bruce and Clark's mothers were named the way they were, and you still roll your eyes at BvS.

[darkestboy]

Got the DVD this morning. Will be watching it again later tonight.

[MsNewsradio]

Finally rented this through the library since we refused to pay top dollar at our local theater considering the reviews. Wow, was it bad. I mean, I fully admit I was biased going in, but I honestly thought my expectations were so low that they had to at least be met if not exceeded. Instead I was treated to a three hour slog that managed to assassinate the characterizations of both Batman and Superman while stringing together terrible dialogue and a horrible musical score (my sister loves the soundtrack, but never saw the movie - I think if I had gone that route I'd have a radically different opinion on the score, because it's not so much that the music is bad, just that it's like they inserted it from some other film so none of the music matches the scenes it's paired with).

Gal Gadot was good with the little screen time she had. And if I squint and turn my head sideways I can see how Affleck would make a decent Batman if he had a decent script to go by. But that about sums up the positives I have for the movie. 

[Bruinsfan]

Scriptwriting is Affleck's forte, so it's a good thing he's doing the honors on the upcoming Batman movie.

[millennium]

13 hours ago, Bruinsfan said:

Scriptwriting is Affleck's forte, so it's a good thing he's doing the honors on the upcoming Batman movie.

I had no gripes about Affleck's take on Batman, just the material he'd been given.

I want to look forward to the next Batman solo movie, but I dread it will come with Leto's Joker.

[VCRTracking]

Gal Gadot's all too brief scenes as Diana/Wonder Woman are still my favorite parts of the movie. Really hoping they don't screw up her solo film.

I hate Lex Luthor for the wrong reasons.

[scrb]

Caught this on a flight, just watched like the first hour and then sought it out to finish watching.

Yeah it seemed silly that they're all of a sudden best friends because they both had mothers named Martha.  But I see in IMDB there are plans for a lot of Justice League season so of course they were going to bury the hatchet.

Yeah it makes no sense, Bruce blames Superman for getting his father killed, for bringing the superpower alien menaces to earth?  I haven't watched Man of Steel but it seems like they took a lot of license with the Krypton myth.  I know General Zod wanted to conquer the earth but here he's just looking to raze it to the ground?  And he has cool space ship claws with krypton and a computer which can make a monster from Lex Luthor's blood?

Made no more sense that Bruce Wayne held a grudge than that Gordon Clark held a grudge for losing his legs.  

And then at the end, the US military holds a big military funeral in the home town of Clark Kent.  So his cover is blown?  And obviously Lex has figured out the identities of just about everyone in the JL.  So maybe Batman and Superman are no longer going to bother hiding their identities?

Oh and about Lex Luthor:

Gene Hackman >>>>>>>>>> Jesse Eisenberg