BvS All Things Batman v Superman: An Open Discussion (TAG SPOILERS) - - Part 303

[Light]

I agree. Same with Jesse Eisenberg. If I had not seen him in other movies I would think he was a terrible actor because of that cartoonish goofy performance he gave as Lex.

I don't think Snyder knows how to touch on emotions or craft emotional scenes well, when it comes to making someone look "badass" without a doubt he is a master there. He has proven himself to be a very limited director and with BVS this was clearly highlighted.

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

If I had never seen Amy Adams in anything else apart from MOS and BVS I would have thought she was a terrible actress save for Cavill as an actor. Thier performances are boarding on wooden especially Cavill in this movie. Some directors can get great performances from ok/terrible actors and can aide the actors elevate their craft.

i agree cavil was a little stiff in bvs. i'm not sure that's on snyder or cavil. where he shined for me was the apartment/bathroom scene. i can't really think of another moment off hand where his acting sold me.*

amy adams has been fine as lois imho, no idea what you're talking about there tho. quite frankly, i'm not crazy about either one of them in their respective roles, but adams has been serviceable as lois. but i'm certainly not going to be let down if her role is reduced in justice league.

*i should rephrase that to, 'where his acting wowed me.' i don't believe he's a bad actor, but i'm not attached to him as clark either. i liked him when he was on screen, but he just wasn't given enough to work with.

 

[Anita18]

I don't think Snyder knows how to touch on emotions or craft emotional scenes well, when it comes to making someone look "badass" without a doubt he is a master there. He has proven himself to be a very limited director and with BVS this was clearly highlighted.

I think he does know how emotional scenes work (as in, scenes with emotion and not a lot of action), but he only knows how to do it dialed up to 11. Everything has to be treated like the greatest tragedy ever, but storytelling is punctuated by contrast. You can't be like "THIS IS SPARTAAAAA" the whole time, otherwise the audience becomes numb to everything.

Amy Adams and Jesse Eisenberg are more understated actors, they're not known for completely taking over and chewing scenery. They did well for what they were given, but Snyder's direction overpowered them.

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

i would say the bathroom scene was pretty reserved and managed to convincingly dip into that emotional gray area, when one of the two are having second thoughts about the relationship's future.

 

[Sleiek]

In my opinion, Snyder knows how to do emotional scenes. Man of Steel and Batman v Superman were full of them. I always enjoy those little character interactions between him and his parents. Just so Pure.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

In my opinion, Snyder knows how to do emotional scenes. Man of Steel and Batman v Superman were full of them. I always enjoy those little character interactions between him and his parents. Just so Pure.

Agreed. MOS had some of my favorite personal/emotional moments in this genre.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Snyder tends to be hit and miss on emotions. When he nails em, he nails em, and when he doesn't, it sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

[Zur-en-Arrh]

Snyder tends to be hit and miss on emotions. When he nails em, he nails em, and when he doesn't, it sticks out like a sore thumb.

generally speaking, that's where i am with both mos and bvs. if i wanted to rant, i could rant, but i feel that's covered, so i try and look for the positive, which i feel there is plenty of in both films. if i had my druthers, i'd pick a different director for justice league, but at the same time, i'm enthused by his visual eye and his understanding of the hero's quest. i have faith justice league is going to be a great super hero movie. my biggest worry is too many cooks in the kitchen, but that's another discussion for another sub-board

 

[matt47]

You know what I was just thinking would've been pretty cool? Have the party scene at the start of the movie, right after the 18 months caption it goes to Bruce starring at the Batsuit in the cave, going to the part and the whole scene plays out like it does. It introduces nearly everyone in one scene. And there is the added mystery as to what info Bruce was trying to get from Lex.

 

[Jaxon]

i would say the bathroom scene was pretty reserved and managed to convincingly dip into that emotional gray area, when one of the two are having second thoughts about the relationship's future.

That scene tells you a lot about the story point and it is perfectly played. Lois is concerned that Superman is going to get a lot of heat for the Africa incident. Lois hides the bullet because she knows how Clark will react, and he reacts exactly how she thinks, completely dismissive about it. This tells us that in Clark's eyes the world has generally been OK with Superman's existence, hence he can just dismiss this. And it also tells us that he is also on a tender edge trying to be Clark and Superman. Lois knows this so she hides the bullet. And that also tells us that Lois is going to find out what's going on because she doesn't want the delicate balance changed. But that also tells us that she knows that Clark being Superman is more a priority than Clark being Clark. If she wanted Clark more than Superman she'd show him the bullet and tell him to stop being Superman for a while.
The tension in their relationship hits in every interaction they have any actually drive Clark to go to Martha and Pa Kent instead of Lois at key moments for him.

 

[kguillou]

You know what I was just thinking would've been pretty cool? Have the party scene at the start of the movie, right after the 18 months caption it goes to Bruce starring at the Batsuit in the cave, going to the part and the whole scene plays out like it does. It introduces nearly everyone in one scene. And there is the added mystery as to what info Bruce was trying to get from Lex.

I really like that!

Also, our first proper introduction to this new Batman should NOT have been the Knightmare sequemce.

 

[Charlatan]

I really like that!

Also, our first proper introduction to this new Batman should NOT have been the Knightmare sequemce.

it wasn't, it was the house where he branded that guy. then in the cave as he went over the link to KGBeast then tracked it back to Luthor.

 

[Jaxon]

I agree. Same with Jesse Eisenberg. If I had not seen him in other movies I would think he was a terrible actor because of that cartoonish goofy performance he gave as Lex.

I don't get this "goofy" performance people refer to. His scene with Senator Finch is anything but, and it's presented right up front to let us know he has a plan, he's in control, he knows what he's doing, he's a step ahead of everyone.

Once he gets inside the scout ship, everything changes for him because he is winning at that point - the world is starting to see the "lie of innocent power that is Superman", and his performance shows that.

 

[The Guard]

Apparently "manic" equals "goofy".

I think the complaints about Luthor being over the top are pretty overblown. It's really only found in a few key sequences. He's energetic in his first scene, but not exactly over the top all the time during the film. I thought his performance had a nice balance to it, and his sort of repressed mania was built nicely through the climax.

 

[BatLobster]

Jesse definitely didn't phone in the performance, he really went "all in" in that direction.

Unfortunately that direction wasn't really the Lex that many wanted to see. The performance was more hit and miss for me. It had its moments, but also some cringeworthy moments.

 

[The Joker]

I don't get this "goofy" performance people refer to. His scene with Senator Finch is anything but, and it's presented right up front to let us know he has a plan, he's in control, he knows what he's doing, he's a step ahead of everyone.

Once he gets inside the scout ship, everything changes for him because he is winning at that point - the world is starting to see the "lie of innocent power that is Superman", and his performance shows that.

Jaxon, you never get any of the criticisms this movie gets. All his Senator Finch scenes were goofy. Saying his performance was serious just because he was "winning" is like saying Arnie's Mr. Freeze got serious just because he managed to freeze Gotham.

 

[NateHevens]

There is still something really suspicious about the Rotten Tomato score BvS got. Movies like Ant-man, Iron 2 and 3 have scores of 80%,72% and 79% and BvS got a 27% score. I'd say the critics are swayed.

I just don't undertand how avg boring Marvel movies can get such high scores. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time during BvS.

You are obviously in a minority in your opinion about Marvel movies.

The issue with BvS is simple. It was risky and ambitious. It didn't use the "satisfaction guaranteed" formulaic storytelling.

It wasn't a feel good story - we weren't supposed to feel good. We were supposed to feel agony at the fact that these two heroes had to come to blows and that Batman failed himself, his standards and us. And it was supposed to make us feel pain for all the price of heroism that Superman had to pay. there are great life lessons that are to be learned from BvS. It's just a different form of storytelling that people were not ready for.

They could have just used the formula and everyone will be happy ... I give it credit for ambition. It's a tough thing for artists to contend with.

Synder & the DCEU wont get credit but they have heavily influenced all of comicbook movies. MoS (collateral damage and the heavy consequence of super powered beings on Earth), BvS (hero vs hero fights). Autuers and artists might never get their due because they dont make sugar coated things that everyone likes, but at the end of the day they are the thankless agents of change in industry. They just take the brunt of hurt from being the vanguard.

So, to sum you up... people who didn't like BvS are stupid?

If I had never seen Amy Adams in anything else apart from MOS and BVS I would have thought she was a terrible actress save for Cavill as an actor. Thier performances are boarding on wooden especially Cavill in this movie. Some directors can get great performances from ok/terrible actors and can aide the actors elevate their craft.

True. This is why I don't blame a single one of the actors for BvS. I'm a broken record at this point, but Ben Affleck was the only actor I am not a fan of, and I was very impressed with his acting. I'm a pretty big fan of everyone else who acted in BvS; I consider all of them to be great actors.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

One of my favorite scenes in BVS is actually the one with Lex and Superman on the rooftop. I loved the way Jesse delivered these lines:

"What we call god depends upon our tribe, Clark Jo, Co's god is tribal, god takes sides"

"I learned a long time ago, that if god is all good, he can not be all powerful and if he is all powerful, then he can not be all good, and neither can you be. They need to see the fraud you are, with their eye's"

I thought that that whole scene was acted well by Jesse and was the first time when I bought him as Lex Luthor. He was still a tiny bit goofy but most of that scene was Jesse as confident, arrogant, assured and cocky, which is Lex Luthor to me.

 

[AnneFan]

I fully believe BvS is the starting point for Batman and Lex. Batman as the jaded, criminal killer who changes his ways to become his old self. Rescuing villains like Harley in Suicide Squad and taking the front cannons off the Batmobile. And with Lex, hardening in jail and becoming less of an eccentric and more stone cold. We'll see what happens along the way.

 

[NateHevens]

There is still something really suspicious about the Rotten Tomato score BvS got. Movies like Ant-man, Iron 2 and 3 have scores of 80%,72% and 79% and BvS got a 27% score. I'd say the critics are swayed.

I just don't undertand how avg boring Marvel movies can get such high scores. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time during BvS.

You are obviously in a minority in your opinion about Marvel movies.

The issue with BvS is simple. It was risky and ambitious. It didn't use the "satisfaction guaranteed" formulaic storytelling.

It wasn't a feel good story - we weren't supposed to feel good. We were supposed to feel agony at the fact that these two heroes had to come to blows and that Batman failed himself, his standards and us. And it was supposed to make us feel pain for all the price of heroism that Superman had to pay. there are great life lessons that are to be learned from BvS. It's just a different form of storytelling that people were not ready for.

They could have just used the formula and everyone will be happy ... I give it credit for ambition. It's a tough thing for artists to contend with.

Synder & the DCEU wont get credit but they have heavily influenced all of comicbook movies. MoS (collateral damage and the heavy consequence of super powered beings on Earth), BvS (hero vs hero fights). Autuers and artists might never get their due because they dont make sugar coated things that everyone likes, but at the end of the day they are the thankless agents of change in industry. They just take the brunt of hurt from being the vanguard.

So, to sum you up... people who didn't like BvS are stupid?

If I had never seen Amy Adams in anything else apart from MOS and BVS I would have thought she was a terrible actress save for Cavill as an actor. Thier performances are boarding on wooden especially Cavill in this movie. Some directors can get great performances from ok/terrible actors and can aide the actors elevate their craft.

True. This is why I don't blame a single one of the actors for BvS. I'm a broken record at this point, but Ben Affleck was the only actor I am not a fan of, and I was very impressed with his acting. I'm a pretty big fan of everyone else who acted in BvS; I consider all of them to be great actors.

 

[AndrewOz]

The issue with BvS is simple. It was risky and ambitious. It didn't use the "satisfaction guaranteed" formulaic storytelling.

It wasn't a feel good story - we weren't supposed to feel good. We were supposed to feel agony at the fact that these two heroes had to come to blows and that Batman failed himself, his standards and us. And it was supposed to make us feel pain for all the price of heroism that Superman had to pay. there are great life lessons that are to be learned from BvS. It's just a different form of storytelling that people were not ready for.

They could have just used the formula and everyone will be happy ... I give it credit for ambition. It's a tough thing for artists to contend with.

Synder & the DCEU wont get credit but they have heavily influenced all of comicbook movies. MoS (collateral damage and the heavy consequence of super powered beings on Earth), BvS (hero vs hero fights). Autuers and artists might never get their due because they dont make sugar coated things that everyone likes, but at the end of the day they are the thankless agents of change in industry. They just take the brunt of hurt from being the vanguard.

It's just a different form of storytelling that people were not ready for.

Do you honestly believe that?
That the source material is light and cheery by comparison?
That the story is even remotely original?

The only original ideas here are that Batman is psychotic and brain damaged, that Superman is borderline ******ed and depressed and Lex Luthor escaped from a Looney Tunes cartoon.

Other than that, every aspect of the themes and plot is lifted from existing comic book story lines, just bungled and poorly executed.

There are many, many stories in the source material that are far darker than anything Zack has done, even in the Timmverse, just far more subtle and nuanced than Zack seems capable of.
Although admittedly Zack is the only person I've ever heard claim that his Batman origin would include the prison rape of Bruce Wayne.

There is nothing I actually disagree with in what you stated we were supposed to feel when watching this movie, but the fact that the execution made the intent obvious, yet completely failed to sell it and in many places, completely undermined that intent, is what makes BvS such a poor film, let alone a terrible BvS film and a complete disappointment to the vast majority.

I cannot think of a single scene in the entire movie where there isn't either a failure of logic or failure of characterisation - using the movie's own established internal rules, not preconceived ideas of who the characters should be - so massive that it completely ruins the scene for myself and obviously a great many others.
I could go into detail, but I've done it many, many times already.

The failure of this movie isn't even due to ambition.
It's due to a lack of basic reading and comprehension skills.
Zack was not trying to go darker or be different from the source material.
According to his own statements in interviews, he's giving us a toned down version of Frank Miller's Batman, who he moronically believes "killed all the time" in TDKR.

He's also referred to his Superman as an "amazingly benevolent and kind individual, who grew up in Kansas, which is known for it's niceness", who therefore logically has a problem with Batman's methodology as inherently unlawful.
There's nothing wrong with that idea. It's actually straight out of John Byrne's post crisis reboot MoS in '86.
It's markedly different in execution in BvS.
Many of Snyder's interviews reveal he simply presented what he's found in comics. It's just that what he "read" isn't actually there.
No wonder he's reportedly confused by the critical and general reception to BvS.

He's not being punished for pursuing an alternative vision out of artistic integrity, or a desire to "modernise" or "deconstruct" these icons, but he's merely tried to transpose the characterisations he's misread from the source material.
As he did with 300. And partially with Watchmen, but it's also apparent by the end of that, that he either completely failed to grasp the point of that work, or completely failed to illustrate it.
Of course he's baffled when he doesn't comprehend the difference between his characterisation and his favourite source material.
It's actually quite sad when you examine it.

These characters simply are not believable in any context (outside of mental illness), despite their "burdens".
They are caricatures of human beings, with emotions and thought processes so far from the norm that their behaviours make them pitiable, not relatable.

Certainly not heroic.

I never had the sense once of the terrible burden of heroism, just a sense of how morally and mentally weak all 3 of the main characters were and how little practical intellect the creative team actually must suffer from, to not see the massive flaws they put into the scenes that contain their "cool" ideas.
Superman's grand sacrifice, even ignoring its technical impossibly (within the movies own immediately preceding internal logic), was not a consequence of heroism, but his own stupidity and incompetence.
It was pathetic, not inspirational.
It was analogous to a beach goer who can't swim seeing a struggling swimmer in rough surf, alerting two professional lifeguards, then jumping on a jet-ski to race over and "help", crashing into the drowning victim, killing them and throwing themselves off and also drowning before the professionals could get there.

Tragic, but hardly heroic.

Definitely idiotic.

Great life lesson there.

Trying to prove your bravery by interfering in something you're fundamentally unsuited for, resulting in your own easily preventable death is not brave or relatable but pathetic.
Tragic, not inspirational.

Here's one of the most telling interviews with Snyder I've read:
https://filmink.com.au/2016/zack-snyder-in-depth-on-batman-v-superman/

Once you get past the embarrassing PR, he seems to have a genuine love of the source material and clearly identifies himself as a comic book guy with an infectious enthusiasm for it.
I can easily imagine him selling WB executives on his vision for the DCEU, even Affleck himself, in those terms.
If I'd read this article before I saw the movie, I would have been pumped, despite the couple of red flags in there about Batman being an anarchist and Superman being one simple realisation away from becoming Dr Manhattan.

Then there's this, in defence of a killer Batman;
http://www.heyuguys.com/exclusive-zack-snyder-explains-detail-dark-knight-kills-batman-v-superman/

There's almost nothing he says in there related to the reference material that is even close to being correct.

So no, there is no evidence that Zack has an over-arching alternative take on the DC Universe at all, certainly not a grand one that the world simply wasn't ready for.
All he has is a garbled mess of a story, incompetently adapted from over a dozen classic source material arcs (look at all the Eater eggs), that jaw-droopingly fails any but the most superficial tests for suspension of disbelief.

BvS is not a testament to a vision of the DCEU characterised by an adult themed artistic integrity, but a simple result of and testament to the staggeringly massive reading and comprehension difficulties suffered by Zack Snyder.

As I said above, it's just very, very sad.

 

[The Joker]

Andrew, your posts are always a breath of fresh air. Well said.

 

[Timebomb]

Yes, nice to have you posting around here again. What is sad is the disrespect paid to these beloved characters and the source materials used. So off the mark. It really is like Zack just looked at the pretty pictures and did not read a single panel. Not one single panel.

 

[Filmfan93]

There is still something really suspicious about the Rotten Tomato score BvS got. Movies like Ant-man, Iron 2 and 3 have scores of 80%,72% and 79% and BvS got a 27% score. I'd say the critics are swayed.

I just don't undertand how avg boring Marvel movies can get such high scores. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time during BvS.

While I think 27% on RT is extreme, my opinion on BvS has changed during the last 2 months. I frist liked it, but now I realise that it is higly flawed. It still doesn't deserve more then 50% on RT.

Critics are not swayed. Marvel films are simply better. They may follow the same formula, but it is a formula that works. They don't take unnecessary risks with their stories and characters and their films are simply better structured. Also, going too dark with BvS didn't bring fun to younger audiences. Civil War has shown how you can go serious enough without taking the enjoyment out of audiences.

And most importantly, characters. Iron Man first appeared 8 years ago and Cap - 5 years ago. Each of them had numerous solo films + Avengers films to build their arcs until Civil War. Affleck's Batman (as good as he was) appeared for the first time 2 months ago. And he is suddenly fighting Superman. You simply cannot bring these characters to fight without doing a little build up before that. DC wanted to race Marvel and they rushed their characters.

I still don't understand why BvS got so much hype in the last 3 years. It's like people completely forgot about MoS and got crazy just because Batman and WW were thrown into the mix.

 

[Tyrone Parker]

Disagreed. I think Superman is by far the movie's biggest flaw. Batman was cool, but I don't think there was really much to him either.



I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you haven't been paying attention to the conversation until now.
People have been bringing up the supposed "free pass" Marvel gets in an effort to justify the low ratings of BvS. It's as if CW (or any of their films, really) is on the same level as BvS, and the only reason why people criticize DC so heavily is due to the lack of "fun" and "jokes".
This is an extremely flimsy argument when you consider how many serious superhero movies have gone over very well with both critics and audiences, even since the MCU kicked off in 2008. It's an excuse people have been using to justify the low rating of BvS, and it doesn't hold any weight whatsoever.

While I think 27% on RT is extreme, my opinion on BvS has changed during the last 2 months. I frist liked it, but now I realise that it is higly flawed. It still doesn't deserve more then 50% on RT.

Critics are not swayed. Marvel films are simply better. They may follow the same formula, but it is a formula that works. They don't take unnecessary risks with their stories and characters and their films are simply better structured. Also, going too dark with BvS didn't bring fun to younger audiences. Civil War has shown how you can go serious enough without taking the enjoyment out of audiences.

How do you explain such high rating for mediocre movies like Iron-Man 3 and Ant-man? MoS and BvS are better and yet the critics eat up even the garbage movies Marvel spits out.

A 80% score on Rotten Tomatoes only further proves that the critics are reviewing MARVEL movies on a less critical standard than they do everything else. The Quantum realm was a perfect opportunity to explore an element related to Pym’s wife who got lost there. Nope, Lang just figures out a trick and BAM! He’s back home.

If RT critics reviewed it like they do other films, it would definitely be rotten around the 55-57% mark.