I don't agree with their overall slant on the film, but it genuinely sucks the fanbase can't come together with this universe. Still too early to tell, but miraculously it seems to have garnered an even bigger divide than MOS. Truly a superhuman feat.
I'm dreading my 2nd viewing tomorrow. I don't want to become bitter like half this board is.
There are some fans who, no matter what, would never give a chance to other takes on certain character (I would call them close-minded, but that might be a bit harsh).
I get it - you grew up with a particular iteration and wants to see that on screen. Doesn't make the other iterations any less valid or interesting.
You see this happen with comics too. People arguing about Yang's take on Superman. And of course, Scott Snyder replacing Bruce with Gordon.
Some people are fundamentally against the take on these characters and are using it to justify their judgment that the movie was bad when in fact plenty of higher rated movies are just as flawed in terms of technical filmmaking. The only real difference is the artistic approach and that's really a matter of taste, which many are unwilling to admit. Some of them want pure escapism that depicts a romanticized reality. But the truth is, Snyder's approach of humanizing the characters in a world as flawed as ours is just as valid and does interest people.
DC's characters are more established in pop culture and therefore have more ingrained opinions about their approach. Then you have the genre trend being dominated by escapist takes. Even Nolan's trilogy had a great sense of idealism with statements like anyone can be Batman and make a difference. Many are rejecting Snyder's assertion that the real/flawed world would be no better with superheroes, and furthermore they would unavoidably be a product of the real/flawed world. Therefore, any idealism will be met with controversy and conflict. That is how the way the world is, but some people what pure escapism whereas others appreciate acknowledging how things really are. I want to see Snyder direct X-Men. Snyder does have flaws as a director but so do most superhero directors, which is why TDK is still lauded at the top of the genre. Yet, people are using any opportunity to push their aesthetic bias by conflating anything negative and use any opportunity to assert it's the approach that's the issue.
There are some fans who, no matter what, would never give a chance to other takes on certain character (I would call them close-minded, but that might be a bit harsh).
I get it - you grew up with a particular iteration and wants to see that on screen. Doesn't make the other iterations any less valid or interesting.
You see this happen with comics too. People arguing about Yang's take on Superman. And of course, Scott Snyder replacing Bruce with Gordon.
Some people are fundamentally against the take on these characters and are using it to justify their judgment that the movie was bad when in fact plenty of higher rated movies are just as flawed in terms of technical filmmaking. The only real difference is the artistic approach and that's really a matter of taste, which many are unwilling to admit. Some of them want pure escapism that depicts a romanticized reality. But the truth is, Snyder's approach of humanizing the characters in a world as flawed as ours is just as valid and does interest people.
DC's characters are more established in pop culture and therefore have more ingrained opinions about their approach. Then you have the genre trend being dominated by escapist takes. Even Nolan's trilogy had a great sense of idealism with statements like anyone can be Batman and make a difference. Many are rejecting Snyder's assertion that the real/flawed world would be no better with superheroes, and furthermore they would unavoidably be a product of the real/flawed world. Therefore, any idealism will be met with controversy and conflict. That is how the way the world is, but some people what pure escapism whereas others appreciate acknowledging how things really are. I want to see Snyder direct X-Men. Snyder does have flaws as a director but so do most superhero directors, which is why TDK is still lauded at the top of the genre. Yet, people are using any opportunity to push their aesthetic bias by conflating anything negative and use any opportunity to assert it's the approach that's the issue.
There are some fans who, no matter what, would never give a chance to other takes on certain character (I would call them close-minded, but that might be a bit harsh).
I get it - you grew up with a particular iteration and wants to see that on screen. Doesn't make the other iterations any less valid or interesting.
You see this happen with comics too. People arguing about Yang's take on Superman. And of course, Scott Snyder replacing Bruce with Gordon.
I don't think it's unique to DC, it's just clear to me now Snyder's brand of this universe is so polarizing to the point where a divide of this magnitude is going to be troubling to sustain over a long period of time.
There have been other properties around for decades who've been afforded fanboys and general audiences alike in enjoying the film.
Some people are fundamentally against the take on these characters and are using it to justify their judgment that the movie was bad when in fact plenty of higher rated movies are just as flawed in terms of technical filmmaking. The only real difference is the artistic approach and that's really a matter of taste, which many are unwilling to admit. Some of them want pure escapism that depicts a romanticized reality. But the truth is, Snyder's approach of humanizing the characters in a world as flawed as ours is just as valid and does interest people.
DC's characters are more established in pop culture and therefore have more ingrained opinions about their approach. Then you have the genre trend being dominated by escapist takes. Even Nolan's trilogy had a great sense of idealism with statements like anyone can be Batman and make a difference. Many are rejecting Snyder's assertion that the real/flawed world would be no better with superheroes, and furthermore they would unavoidably be a product of the real/flawed world. Therefore, any idealism will be met with controversy and conflict. That is how the way the world is, but some people what pure escapism whereas others appreciate acknowledging how things really are. I want to see Snyder direct X-Men. Snyder does have flaws as a director but so do most superhero directors, which is why TDK is still lauded at the top of the genre. Yet, people are using any opportunity to push their aesthetic bias by conflating anything negative and use any opportunity to assert it's the approach that's the issue.
There are some fans who, no matter what, would never give a chance to other takes on certain character (I would call them close-minded, but that might be a bit harsh).
I get it - you grew up with a particular iteration and wants to see that on screen. Doesn't make the other iterations any less valid or interesting.
You see this happen with comics too. People arguing about Yang's take on Superman. And of course, Scott Snyder replacing Bruce with Gordon.
Scott Snyder didn't replace Gordon with Bruce alright. Batman was thought to be dead. So Powers (yes the company from Batman Beyond) was going to build a new Batman to take on the mantle. To keep Gotham safe. They asked Jim who while didn't want to, decided to respect his friend and take on the mantle.
The basically point of Superheavy is that not everyone can be Batman. Batman is created by one man who's motivate enough to do what he does and trains long enough to become who he is.
Some people are fundamentally against the take on these characters and are using it to justify their judgment that the movie was bad when in fact plenty of higher rated movies are just as flawed in terms of technical filmmaking. The only real difference is the artistic approach and that's really a matter of taste, which many are unwilling to admit. Some of them want pure escapism that depicts a romanticized reality. But the truth is, Snyder's approach of humanizing the characters in a world as flawed as ours is just as valid and does interest people.
DC's characters are more established in pop culture and therefore have more ingrained opinions about their approach. Then you have the genre trend being dominated by escapist takes. Even Nolan's trilogy had a great sense of idealism with statements like anyone can be Batman and make a difference. Many are rejecting Snyder's assertion that the real/flawed world would be no better with superheroes, and furthermore they would unavoidably be a product of the real/flawed world. Therefore, any idealism will be met with controversy and conflict. That is how the way the world is, but some people what pure escapism whereas others appreciate acknowledging how things really are. I want to see Snyder direct X-Men. Snyder does have flaws as a director but so do most superhero directors, which is why TDK is still lauded at the top of the genre. Yet, people are using any opportunity to push their aesthetic bias by conflating anything negative and use any opportunity to assert it's the approach that's the issue.
Some people are fundamentally against the take on these characters and are using it to justify their judgment that the movie was bad when in fact plenty of higher rated movies are just as flawed in terms of technical filmmaking. The only real difference is the artistic approach and that's really a matter of taste, which many are unwilling to admit. Some of them want pure escapism that depicts a romanticized reality. But the truth is, Snyder's approach of humanizing the characters in a world as flawed as ours is just as valid and does interest people.
DC's characters are more established in pop culture and therefore have more ingrained opinions about their approach. Then you have the genre trend being dominated by escapist takes. Even Nolan's trilogy had a great sense of idealism with statements like anyone can be Batman and make a difference. Many are rejecting Snyder's assertion that the real/flawed world would be no better with superheroes, and furthermore they would unavoidably be a product of the real/flawed world. Therefore, any idealism will be met with controversy and conflict. That is how the way the world is, but some people what pure escapism whereas others appreciate acknowledging how things really are. I want to see Snyder direct X-Men. Snyder does have flaws as a director but so do most superhero directors, which is why TDK is still lauded at the top of the genre. Yet, people are using any opportunity to push their aesthetic bias by conflating anything negative and use any opportunity to assert it's the approach that's the issue.
Scott Snyder didn't replace Gordon with Bruce alright. Batman was thought to be dead. So Powers (yes the company from Batman Beyond) was going to build a new Batman to take on the mantle. To keep Gotham safe. They asked Jim who while didn't want to, decided to respect his friend and take on the mantle.
The basically point of Superheavy is that not everyone can be Batman. Batman is created by one man who's motivate enough to do what he does and trains long enough to become who he is.
Seriously though, I just found out my mother can't go tomorrow morning now. I am still going with my brother and I do have to take her. She won't miss out on her Cavill.
The thing that offends me most is what they've done to Superman. He's always been my favourite and what we're getting is barely superman. It's even more annoying when you consider they've got a good actor to play him, but all he's being allowed to do is stand and scowl.
My vacation starts Saturday, so I'll be posting a full review within a couple of days. In the mean time I'll share a couple of quick hits.
It's simply not put together well. The editing really is atrocious. I don't agree with many critics that there were too many subplots to follow. Once I've had time to digest everything, it's all pretty straight forward. But Christ, that editing certainly made it seem like this movie was juggling five thousand things.
This characterization of Superman sucks. Point blank. I don't know if Cavill just isn't a very talented actor, or if the material he has to work with is so bland and vapid that it just bleeds over into his performance, but they've got to stop with this nonsense. He's always frowning. He's always questioning what he's doing. You get the feeling that he saves people solely out of appointed obligation and not because he genuinely wants to. He slams a normal human being through several concrete walls at tremendous force, but we're supposed to believe he didn't just straight murder the guy.
And then they kill him. Two ****ing movies into this shared universe. And the people of the world suddenly care for some reason, when these filmmakers have done everything in their power to show as little as possible as to why that might be the case. "Oh, let's show a brief montage of him saving people! But have him frown the entire time! And always frame it so that we constantly remind the audience that this is essentially a god saving a lower being!"
That's the fundamental flaw with this characterization. They are so hellbent on approaching Superman as a god-like being that he comes across as being disconnected from humanity. Does he like these people? Why does he like these people? Does he consider himself one of us? Why is that? Too bad the filmmakers never bother to ask these ****ing questions. He comes across so cold and divorced from the people he's saving, you wonder if he actually does think he's above them. He certainly does nothing to suggest that he's not too different from them.
Eisenberg's Luthor was awful, and that final scene with him and Batman had me rolling my eyes.
"He's coming!"
WHO'S COMING? Did I miss something? Was there some other mention of Darkseid that I missed, besides the omega symbol during the pointless nightmare sequence? What the **** is this line from Eisenberg supposed to mean, and where the hell does it come from?
It was cool and all to see Wonder Woman, but she was pointless. Cool to see Aquaman, but pointless. Cool to see Cyborg, but pointless. Cool to see Flash, but pointless AND confusing as **** to the plot of THIS movie. Seriously. That warning serves NO other purpose than to set up a future film. It's amateur at best.
Snyder and Terrio fell into the trap. Rather than focus squarely on the Superman/Batman/Luthor conflict, they just had to work in all these little nods and winks to things to come. But they don't service this story being told, and frankly the manner in which they're introduced is confusing. This movie tried to tell a Batman/Superman story and build a universe at the same time. They overplayed their hand. It's a mess.
Basically my thoughts for the most part. I was ok with Superman being rather sullen in MOS because he was coming out to the world, and was generally unsure of himself, only to end with him being more confident. In BvS, I can't tolerate it. I was hoping for him to be more proactive, and more sure of what he wanted to do, and not wallow in self doubt the whole time. As for the editing. Yeah, its BAD. We're jumping from one unconnected scene to another. The performances at times were great, namely from Eisenberg and Affleck (I don't really agree that Eisenberg did a bad job, but his character and motivations just don't work). The disjointed feeling from scenes make it hard to feel invested from whatever is happening, that you feel like just getting to the fight that was promised. And it doesn't live up to my expectations.
I really enjoyed the opening sequence. Had a very gothic quality to it and frankly I prefer the more romanticized version of the Wayne murders compared to Nolan's matter-of-fact depiction.
The first scene with Batman was legit. "It's still here!" Coupled with that music? Even I was kinda creeped out for a moment. Can't remember the last time I felt that way during a Batman movie.
Loved Batfleck. Really can't fathom how anyone could say he was terrible in the role and keep a straight face. At worst he was simply fine in a couple of scenes. But when he was on, he was ON.
Oh, and the Batmobile chase was glorious. My favorite one by far.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
