All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation

[The Joker]

First of all, it is a complex scene. Second, whether or not the reasons most people dislike the scene or find it silly are common is irrelevant. I am curious about how people arrive at the same conclusions. I am interested in how different fans explain their reasoning. If the scene really does lack complexity and the reasons why it is silly are so transparent and easy to explain, then it should be very simple to provide an explanation to someone who asks for one. The kneejerk defensiveness -- the absolute refusal to explain something -- is something I find very suspect.

No, it's not a complex scene. It's an absurdly simple scene in every sense of the word. The fact you go around with an attitude like you think people are just parroting each other rather than making up their own minds is insulting, and probably why you get knee jerk defensiveness.

Case in point;

Because if you don't like the Martha moment, you must have flimsy reasons for doing so

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I like to see how other people are able to explain it. I know that it's an opinion some have and I know why some people feel that way because they have shared their individual perspective, but each person can have a unique way of looking at it even if the opinion is the same. I am curious if everyone who feels this way does for the same reasons and if they have minds of their own to explain why it's silly rather than just parroting what other people have said.

Because 30 years after his parents getting shot, Batman should come to the conclusion that there are more people with the same name as his dearly departed parents, and not get hyperactively enraged about the mere mention of 'Martha'.

 

[Flint Marko]

That scene might've benefitted from a better, more empassioned performance from Cavill. The guy is not good in this role, and Hollywood seems to agree with me. Not seeing any buzz or many roles thrown his way.

 

[StarWars]

That isn't what happened. It was MORE than that. The name didn't stop Batman. He was still angry and poised to hurt Superman after hearing the name. It was ultimately Lois' presence that stopped him combined with knowing that Martha was in danger. Batman saw that he had become like the man who killed his parents. He relived his childhood trauma with him in the villain's shoes. He learned that he was (a) letting Lex kill a son's mother and an innocent human being (b) he had the power to save this person who was also a son's mother and named Martha, so a chance to do for Clark's mother what he hadn't been able to do for his own mother, (c) was threatening a man who had a woman who loved him -- Lois -- and who was willing to put her life on the line to protect him in a scene that visually reminded him of the night his parents -- a couple who loved each other -- were killed, and (d) Superman was more human and had more human attachments than he had believed.

See, Joker, this is why I like explanations. Because I get to see how flimsy the reasoning is.



Ah, I see. You continue to choose condescension and personal attacks. My job is literally to ask questions to understand and to help: I'm a teacher and a counselor with advanced degrees in both. Suffice it to say, I'm done discussing this with you. I don't talk to people who won't even attempt to be civil.

LOL @ someone trying to bait people into a argument over the silly Martha scene and then accuses people of being uncivil.

 

[Boom]

We can argue around in circles about this all day, but I for one found it particularly jarring that Superman, in an emotional heartfelt plea, refers to his mother by her first name. I'm no expert on human psychology, but that's not the human behavior I'd expect in such a situation.

 

[misslane38]

We can argue around in circles about this all day, but I for one found it particularly jarring that Superman, in an emotional heartfelt plea, refers to his mother by her first name. I'm no expert on human psychology, but that's not the human behavior I'd expect in such a situation.

He believes he may die, so he wants Batman to know that someone needs help and just saying "mother" doesn't really provide sufficient detail. Plus, since Superman starts the sequence by calling Batman, Bruce, it's clear that he knows who Batman is and therefore could also knows who his mother was. Saying the exact name makes logical sense, then, both as a way to provide explicit instructions and to possibly reach Bruce emotionally with a specific, recognizable/relatable, human name, especially given the fact that earlier Batman showed little appreciation for Superman's parents who he characterized as equally alien as their son and instilling in him a dangerous sense of his own destiny and purpose. In other words, Superman was using both his head and his heart when he chose his words with care.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

He believes he may die, so he wants Batman to know that someone needs help and just saying "mother" doesn't really provide sufficient detail. Plus, since Superman starts the sequence by calling Batman, Bruce, it's clear that he knows who Batman is and therefore could also knows who his mother was. Saying the exact name makes logical sense, then, both as a way to provide explicit instructions and to possibly reach Bruce emotionally with a specific, recognizable/relatable, human name, especially given the fact that earlier Batman showed little appreciation for Superman's parents who he characterized as equally alien as their son and instilling in him a dangerous sense of his own destiny and purpose. In other words, Superman was using both his head and his heart when he chose his words with care.

He had so many chances to say it instead of wasting time pounding on him.
And then Batman wasted more time by changing suits.

 

[misslane38]

Because 30 years after his parents getting shot, Batman should come to the conclusion that there are more people with the same name as his dearly departed parents, and not get hyperactively enraged about the mere mention of 'Martha'.

It's not just anybody mentioning Martha in any ordinary context, though. It's someone he sees as a huge threat. You're also being dismissive of what PTSD can do to a person as well as the additional context of that scene that shows that, although enraged, he holds off on plunging the spear into Superman and later Lois, and when he absorbs more than just the name, but also the dilemma in front of him -- he can choose to be the hero or the villain by choosing to save Martha, save a son's mother, a mother's son, and someone's beloved -- he is able to step back and regroup.

 

[misslane38]

He had so many chances to say it instead of wasting time pounding on him.
And then Batman wasted more time by changing suits.

Saying it alone would not have worked. We can see that in the end when saying the name and saying that Martha needed help wasn't enough for Batman to stop. Batman needed to see Lois for the whole thing to come into the proper perspective.

Consider this explanation about evaluating behavior after the fact from the movie Sully that came out this year:

I'm not questioning the pilots, they're good pilots. But they've clearly been instructed...they head for the airport immediately after the bird strike. You've allowed no time for analysis or decision making. In these simulations, you're taking all of the humanity out of the cockpit. How much time did the pilots spent planning for this event. For these simulations? You are looking for human error. Then make it human. This wasn't a videogame. It was life and death.

Superman couldn't have known the exact combination of elements -- of which their mother's similar names was just one factor -- that would have gotten through to Batman. He did his best in the situation as it was happening, and he used his last breaths to reach out in hope to Batman and it was ultimately love between lovers, parents, and children that resolved the fight. That's beautiful and optimistic. Not silly.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

It's not just anybody mentioning Martha in any ordinary context, though. It's someone he sees as a huge threat. You're also being dismissive of what PTSD can do to a person as well as the additional context of that scene that shows that, although enraged, he holds off on plunging the spear into Superman and later Lois, and when he absorbs more than just the name, but also the dilemma in front of him -- he can choose to be the hero or the villain by choosing to save Martha, save a son's mother, a mother's son, and someone's beloved -- he is able to step back and regroup.

It will be easier to absorb this motivation if:

1. Batman could tell the difference between an alien that saves lives, and the other aliens that worked specifically to kill Earth's population of humans, but still feeling skeptical about trusting him, and preparing contingency plans.

2. The device in Wally's chair was not a bomb, more like a device shooting laser beams that resembles the kind that destroyed buildings in Metropolis (and perhaps Gotham), instead of Batman being mad at Superman for blowing up the senate building and not being able to tell the difference between the destructive effects of laser and an explosion.

3. Superman did not have enough time to fly Batman away from the range of controlling his remote weapons to target Superman, if Superman was met immediately with Kryptonite gas, and Batman's foot on his throats.

4. If Bruce was younger.

 

[Flint Marko]

Superman's best is apparently saying to Batman "you don't understand" and then punching him through several buildings without trying to explain the situation to him. Given how terrible this iteration of the character is, I actually believe you when you say it's his best.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Superman's best is apparently saying to Batman "you don't understand" and then punching him through several buildings without trying to explain the situation to him. Given how terrible this iteration of the character is, I actually believe you when you say it's his best.

He saved his mother from Zod by punching him all the way to a populated area, leaving some of Zod's followers there to threaten her.

Yeah, this iteration of the character is terrible.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I think I should watch that movie again.
It's one of those times where the adaption is superior to the story.

 

[Timebomb]

Not the infamous Martha scene AGAIN! Sorry but it's a horribly executed scene. Project all you want, we know what the scene was supposed to convey it was just done poorly.

 

[Boy Scout]

Also...just because Batman wouldn't have listened to reason doesn't mean Superman shouldn't have tried harder to reason with him. The issue is that he DID NOT TRY hard enough. His mother's life was at stake. I mean, was he just as aware as the audience of how unhinged Bruce had become? Because from what I understand, he wasn't, and couldn't have been, because they barely interacted with one another. You can't use knowledge that only the audience has to justify a character's behavior.

 

[StarWars]

Not the infamous Martha scene AGAIN! Sorry but it's a horribly executed scene. Project all you want, we know what the A
scene was supposed to convey it was just done poorly.

Agreed

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Also...just because Batman wouldn't have listened to reason doesn't mean Superman shouldn't have tried harder to reason with him. The issue is that he DID NOT TRY hard enough. His mother's life was at stake. I mean, was he just as aware as the audience of how unhinged Bruce had become? Because from what I understand, he wasn't, and couldn't have been, because they barely interacted with one another. You can't use knowledge that only the audience has to justify a character's behavior.

With all the inconsistent nonsense in that movie, it's easy to forget something.

 

[MbJ]

In general, can we stop this nonsense with claiming anyone who disagrees with a viewpoint you hold about a movie has malevolent or insincere motives for doing so.

 

[The Guard]

Also...just because Batman wouldn't have listened to reason doesn't mean Superman shouldn't have tried harder to reason with him. The issue is that he DID NOT TRY hard enough. His mother's life was at stake. I mean, was he just as aware as the audience of how unhinged Bruce had become? Because from what I understand, he wasn't, and couldn't have been, because they barely interacted with one another. You can't use knowledge that only the audience has to justify a character's behavior.

The knowledge that the audience has is the same knowledge Superman has. The audience has been told and shown that Superman's options are to reason with Batman or kill Batman. Superman has been told and shown the same thing.

Superman and the audience both can see, based on the traps Batman has sprung and the physical attacks he is making that Batman probably won't listen to reason, and is in fact, attacking Superman.

I wish I could get ahold of the mathematical equation that reveals when a character has tried hard enough to reason with someone who is trying to kill them before resorting to other methods. Because quite often, in the real world, when someone refuses to reason, that's when things get ugly and confrontations happen.

Of course I forget that this character is Superman, and must therefore act in a prescribed manner set forth by the comics...

...where he also often only tries to reason once or twice and then does his best to end the physical fight he's part of before trying to reason again.

 

[Greens]

I wish I could get ahold of the mathematical equation that reveals when a character has tried hard enough to reason with someone who is trying to kill them before resorting to other methods. Because quite often, in the real world, when someone refuses to reason, that's when things get ugly and confrontations happen.

There's no equation, but when a big chunk of the audience feels it wasn't enough, it wasn't enough. As a filmmaker you're trying to convince the audience of what is happening and keep them involved in the story. I knew, as I watched the movie for the first time, that it didn't sit right with me.

 

[The Guard]

Ok...is there an equation for how big a chunk of the audience it has to be?

It didn't sit right with me, either.

It's not supposed to sit right with you.

It's essentially a movie where the conflict revolves around two men and their failure to communicate effectively with each other.

 

[Zarex]

It's a classic example of Roger Ebert's Idiot Plot . From Mr. Ebert - "I can forgive and even embrace an Idiot Plot in its proper place (consider Astaire and Rogers in Top Hat). But when the characters have depth and their decisions have consequences, I grow restless when their misunderstandings could be ended by words that the screenplay refuses to allow them to utter."

 

[StarWars]

Because of reading this thread, I really did attempt to watch BvS again, and I failed, I couldn't get through it. I have so many issues...I believe even if you took the Martha scene out, it would still be a dull bleak movie.

 

[Greens]

Ok...is there an equation for how big a chunk of the audience it has to be?

It didn't sit right with me, either.

It's not supposed to sit right with you.

It's essentially a movie where the conflict revolves around two men and their failure to communicate effectively with each other.

It didn't sit right with me because it fell in line with the Hollywood cliche where people try to convey an idea by using the worst phrases imaginable. "You don't understand!" is a line that's often used, and Superman uses it as well. It's a phrase that conveys no meaning and its only use is to make it look like Superman tried, when he really didn't. It doesn't sit right with me because the screenwriter used a lazy trope to justify the fight.

 

[The Guard]

The fight is not justified because Superman tries to reason with Batman.

The fight is justified within the story because Batman, who believes he has justification to hurt Superman, is attempting to hurt Superman. Superman's options are then limited. He can try to use force to make Batman stop attacking him and survive, or he can not use force and die, and Martha will also die.

The fight is going to happen anyway, because Batman believes Superman's existence is a problem.