BvS Batman v Superman - Reviews Thread [TAG SPOILERS] - Part 1

[Jumpman]

This film is haunting. It's a horror film masquerading as a comic book film and it brings you to a place that most people feel is uncomfortable. The nuances in Ben Affleck's performance as Bruce Wayne captivated me. I loved the fog on the lake around his home as he wakes up and finishes off last night's wine. It captured the solitude he lives in perfectly. The scene introducing The Batman was perfect - more horror film vibe here as well. The editing was fine. People are thrown off because of a lack of "establishing shots" which give you a second or two to hit the reset button. I loved everything about Batman, from the weight of age to the moral code that's long been abandoned. I'll write a proper review sometimes this week. I loved it.

Well done, short review.

 

[Doctor Jones]

This film is haunting. It's a horror film masquerading as a comic book film and it brings you to a place that most people feel is uncomfortable. The nuances in Ben Affleck's performance as Bruce Wayne captivated me. I loved the fog on the lake around his home as he wakes up and finishes off last night's wine. It captured the solitude he lives in perfectly. The scene introducing The Batman was perfect - more horror film vibe here as well. The editing was fine. People are thrown off because of a lack of "establishing shots" which give you a second or two to hit the reset button. I loved everything about Batman, from the weight of age to the moral code that's long been abandoned. I'll write a proper review sometimes this week. I loved it.

You do realize you're talking about a movie with Superman in it? None of these are good things.

 

[Flint Marko]

You do realize you're talking about a movie with Superman in it? None of these are good things.

Hush, you must have teh Donner bias.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

It was bizarre.

The actual Batman vs Superman fight was based on Bruce Wayne being an idiotic rage monster and Clark Kent being manipulated by Lex.

There was no real exploration or clash of their ideologies.

I mean seriously... Batman and Superman were actually willing to straight up murder each other!

And what stops it all? The fact that their mothers have the same name.

Plus why does Superman call his mom "Martha"? Is it some way to still hide his identity from Batman? But then, being that desperate to save "Martha" should clue the "worlds greatest detective" in.

Then all of a sudden they are best buddies. It was the most unearned team up i've ever seen.

Okay, the movie had issues but seriously... that's not what I saw. Superman tried right from the start to talk to Batman, because he obviously WASN'T willing to murder Batman. But he also wasn't willing to sacrifice his mom in order to remain the righteous hero. He was unwilling to trade one life for the other, in either direction. So he tried to talk to Batman but Batman was too angry to listen to him.

So let's talk about Batman. The movie's take on Batman is that Bruce became Batman in order to squash the feeling of powerlessness that he experienced when his parents were murdered in front of him. Over time he came to feel powerless again and people he cared about were taken from him -- like Jason, and no doubt Harvey, and maybe Babs got shot in the spine too. Then the Black Zero Event leaves Bruce feeling that the whole world is powerless in the face of Superman, and if he can kill Superman he can redeem himself. "This may be the most important thing I ever do."

So Batman's desire to destroy Superman is ENTIRELY psychologically motivated. Superman doesn't want to fight Batman at all, but Batman keeps trying to take his head off instead of listening to him when he tries to talk.

The reason that

Spoiler

saying "Martha" works is because started Bruce on this path was that he couldn't save Martha. Superman's line "you're letting them kill Martha" is clever because it isn't just the name, man. It's the fact that Batman gets to save Martha. He's able to get one right. It's a healing thing, again, it makes the psychological sense.

What's missing in the film something to tie this together better; also fight sequences should normally tell a story and advance the plot, and in this case it doesn't, it's just two big guys clobbering hell out of each other. So that failing is Zack's and not the script's. I feel certain that the same script in the hands of another director might have made a GREAT movie. Instead of a merely pretty okay one.

 

[The Guard]

Since when do fight sequences have to tell a story? The fight most certainly advances the plot. It's the focal point of it and results in the story moving forward in a new dirextion.

 

[moviefreak]

Reposting from the lounge trend.

I'm back, after going dark on net since last Monday. Once I read Krypton Inc.,'s brief non-spoiler thoughts, alarm bell began to rang in my head. Firstly it was his description of the film being not what he/fan will thought of, and that he thought that it wasn't a mindless action, with a lot to take in. Secondly, I knew that spoilers will leak. So I was fortunate that I left Hype on Monday without any knowledge about the film's story and ending.

Needless to say, I enjoyed it very much this weekend.

Some Hype posters (and a lot of critics) need to keep their perspective, unfortunately many didn't as this film

-- is not an attempt to mimic TDK, or any variations of noir crime thriller.
-- is a WB/DC production.
-- is at a minimum a Zack Snyder film, i.e., it will not reach the level of Hitchcock, Lean, Scorsese and Spielberg.
-- is made for the general audience's enjoyment, i.e., it is a pure comic book genre film and is not a conventional drama.

That said, BvS was a solid film. Overall is a bit better story-wise than MOS, however MOS was executed better. It is not a summer blockbuster in the truest sense. While the pace was fine with me, I felt that the 30 mins cut probably made it suffered a bit. This film is bit dark in tone in the similar way as TDK. I just don't see any Watchmen similarity at all.

- All of the cast performed well. A little problem for me were the motivations for Bruce/Batman to stop Superman - not well thought out and Diana/Wonder Woman added very little to the overall story apart from serving as an introduction to her character. Batman's visuals were all excellent -- I love the one at the beginning when the Bat was seen to hung up in the corner of room like a real bat out of a horror film. Superman/Clark's arc was excellent and I really like it a lot. In fact, the whole film felt more like a Superman film. Lois being prominent throughout was a nice surprise to me. Lex Luthor wasn't what you would expect --he's more like a maniacal, hyperactive chap and a throwback to the old genius white lab coated based Luthor.

- All of the Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman actions were superb. I especially like Wonder Woman's battle with Doomsday.

- The cinematography is lovely, much better than MOS. Doomsday was a lovely old chap I enjoyed a heck lot this Doomsday. Seems to me the creature wasn't a fully form classical Doomsday though.

- The audience at my showing responded positively and they thoroughly enjoyed the film. Speaking of humours/reactions, they laughed at some aspects like when Martha Kent made the cape comment to Batman, very audible reaction when Wonder Woman showed up in the Doomsday fight, some audible reaction before, during and after the Senate hearing segment.

I gave it 3.5/5 stars in all film listing and 4/5 stars in all cmb film genre listing. The audience score I would go for: A-.

 

[Clark-Kent]

Since when do fight sequences have to tell a story? The fight most certainly advances the plot. It's the focal point of it and results in the story moving forward in a new dirextion.

The lead up to the fight, and the resolve should make a lot of sense though to be a really good fight scene for movie context.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Since when do fight sequences have to tell a story?

The best ones do. Otherwise it's not that interesting. I mean, people whine about the prequels but the lightsaber duels were amazingly choreographed and the action reflected the characters and made for tense viewing. Somehow the Batman v Superman fight is... like the Burly Brawl in the Matrix Regurgitated or whatever it was called, you know how it's going to come out so it's hard to get emotionally invested, it becomes two big muscle guys slugging at each other. Batman stomping the thugs is more fun. Not that the fight was all bad, I enjoyed how Batman had traps laid out and had clearly Batmanned the whole thing perfectly. The movie got a lot right. I feel, as a storyteller, that as that is the climax of the whole buildup, it's Batman fighting Superman, and it's about Bruce trying to give power back to the people (in his view) and Clark trying to actually ask him for help, and the whole thing is Lex trying to make Superman choose between

Spoiler

saving his mom and killing a hero, or sparing a hero and losing his mom

that the fight somehow wasn't a clear of a conflict as it should have been to draw all of those things into focus.

And don't get me wrong, brother, I liked it, but it's less than masterfully handled is all.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

The lead up to the fight, and the resolve should make a lot of sense though to be a really good fight scene for movie context.

This.

 

[The Guard]

The lead up to the fight, and the resolve should make a lot of sense though to be a really good fight scene for movie context.

I get that. But the words used were "fight sequence". Not "the movie around it".

 

[Drifting]

You do realize you're talking about a movie with Superman in it? None of these are good things.

You do realize that starting a question with "You do realize" is both condescending and rude? And what does Superman's presence have to do with that being a bad thing? Just your opinion, obviously.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

But the words used were "fight sequence". Not "the movie around it".

Well I don't mean that the fight should tell a complete story, but it must SERVE the story. Everything in a film should serve the story in one way or another. That's why the JLA teases don't fit, because they don't add much of anything to the story. Action sequences in a film still need to advance the story and reflect the characters involved and their motivations.

 

[The Guard]

The JLA elements are part of the story. They inform both Batman and Diana's arcs. The emergence and discovery of metahumans is part of the story.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

The JLA elements are part of the story. They inform both Batman and Diana's arcs. The emergence and discovery of metahumans is part of the story.

Yes, but watching Diana browse through files on her laptop is some dull-ass stuff. The film has to come to a dead halt to make that happen. In that sense it doesn't serve the film, and if we just saw the icons on the files it would tell us fans what we need, and for non-fans... well its seems like non-fans are fairly flummoxed by that bit anyway, which is sort of a failure of storytelling. If it was integrated in a more dynamic way it would be much stronger.

Spoiler

The future-Flash and the Darkseid tease were cool, though.

Honestly there's nothing wrong with this film that a longer cut couldn't potentially fix. But that depends ENTIRELY on what's in that longer cut.

 

[Silvermoon]

Hey Mods; can we keep the poll open at least until the opening weekend is over? Not everyone's schedules allow to be there opening day....

Unfortunately, the way the board works is that when a thread with a poll automatically closes due to reaching it's post limit, the new part of that thread that's started (again, automatically by the "thread manager") automatically has the poll closed. The mods have no control over it. That's why there's a [Poll only/no discussion thread]

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

The JLA elements are part of the story. They inform both Batman and Diana's arcs. The emergence and discovery of metahumans is part of the story.

It's just badly executed, like someone pasted internet featurettes into a movie. "Click the symbol to see Cyborg's origin!"

Also: I'm surprised that the movie got a 12-rating in my country. So much disturbing content in it. I've mentioned the Ma Kent polaroids, but the sex slaves were worse. I just knew Synder was going to include something like that (Watchmen, 300, Sucker Punch). Heck, I saw it coming just from the trailer...scary-looking house, scary-looking guy. Probably somehing to do with rape as usual.

 

[akfj]

Yes, but watching Diana browse through files on her laptop is some dull-ass stuff. The film has to come to a dead halt to make that happen. In that sense it doesn't serve the film, and if we just saw the icons on the files it would tell us fans what we need, and for non-fans... well its seems like non-fans are fairly flummoxed by that bit anyway, which is sort of a failure of storytelling. If it was integrated in a more dynamic way it would be much stronger.

Yeah, that scene just kills the momentum building in the third act. Should have been saved as a post-credits scene.

 

[antoineflemming]

Yes, but

Spoiler

watching Diana browse through files on her laptop...

That's one scene that I thought was completely unnecessary.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

It's just badly executed, like someone pasted internet featurettes into a movie. "Click at the symbol to see Cyborg's origin!"

YES.

Also: I'm surprised that the movie got a 12-rating in my country. So much disturbing content in it. I've mentioned the Ma Kent polaroids, but the sex slaves were worse. I just knew Synder was going to include something like that (Watchmen, 300, Sucker Punch). Heck, I saw it coming just from the trailer...scary-looking house, scary-looking guy. Probably somehing to do with rape as usual.

Eh, but there was basically nothing in Watchmen that didn't come from the Graphic Novel, apart from the deviation in the endgame. 300 was also based on a GN, but I haven't read that one so I don't know how faithful. My only point is that it's unfair to use faithfulness to source material as part of a perv-brush to paint Snyder with.

People who understand Sucker Punch (of which I am not one) consider that a very feminist movie. Or so I am given to understand. I just thought it was incomprehensible.

I don't remember any sex-slave stuff in BvS, but hell, I've only seen it once. Couldn't have been too explicit. Definitely not a kid's movie, though.

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

Kid: "Mom, why is the crazy black guy doing weird experiments with the other guy's torso? Why did the scary mutant beetle kick Batman's ass? Who is the screaming hobo in red armor? Why did the underwater hippie stab the camera?"

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Kid: "Mom, why is the crazy black guy doing weird experiments with the other guy's torso? Why did the scary mutant beetle kick Batman's ass? Who is the screaming hobo in red armor? Why did the underwater hippie stab the camera?"

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

The only time I heard someone laugh during the movie was [BLACKOUT]when the parademon knocked Batman out[/BLACKOUT].

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

You do realize you're talking about a movie with Superman in it? None of these are good things.

yes, because God forbid any film maker should decide to think outside the box a little bit with a character that's been portrayed a certain way for the past 75 years. And the thing is, that even after Synder & company put a certain spin on it, at the end of the day we still got classic Superman. He just took a different route getting us there.

 

[Doctor Jones]

You do realize that starting a question with "You do realize" is both condescending and rude? And what does Superman's presence have to do with that being a bad thing? Just your opinion, obviously.

I don't know how asking a legitimate question about someone using the word "horror" in the same sentence to describe a Superman movie can possibly be rude. It's actually pretty reasonable if one actually thinks back on Superman as a character pre MOS. I'm asking because stuff like this needs perspective.

There we go again, the default, "it's my opinion" defense. It doesn't matter what someone's opinion is if the logic and rationale makes no goddamn sense for a Superman movie.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Unfortunately, the way the board works is that when a thread with a poll automatically closes due to reaching it's post limit, the new part of that thread that's started (again, automatically by the "thread manager") automatically has the poll closed. The mods have no control over it. That's why there's a [Poll only/no discussion thread]

Oh ok. Thanks.