BvS *SPOILERS* Attempt to Address 30 Plot Holes

you should say "so called" plot holes.


btw, welcome. hope the forum will not turn you into dark side.

nice write up..

btw, doomsday was purely meant for superman. he didn't need doomsday to kill batman. he had no issue with batman (at least from the movie). batman was just another mercy grave to him.
he strongly believed superman is a fault. superman would kill batman in order to save his mother. and later Lex would order to kill his mom right before superman's eyes. when superman seek for revenge, he would have doomsday to destroy him completely. he thought he could control doomsday with his blood related.

lex luthor the greatest, the most vicious and the smartest villian of all.

 

Not one of those are plot holes. The movie is clear on everything but I appreciate the work.

 

Hi there, thanks for taking the time make this list! Great job, really!

I'd like to add some additions/corrections/refinements to it.

POINT 6. "But Jesse plays a really great crazy/genius/mad scientist which is what Lex was in the film: a different Lex we’ve never seen before."

Actually, I'd say that the older versions of Lex were like that. Pretty much straight up mad scientist. Also, to explain why this Lex is the perfect blend of Lex's from the comics, I give you this: http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=33758707&postcount=38

POINTS 8 & 9. To add to your points: Batman wasn't killing on a one to one basis, where he personally dealt the death blow to the enemy with the SOLE INTENT of killing that enemy out of spite or malice or even vengeance. He kills solely when he is on a mission and someone is hindering his path or is an obstacle in a mission of extreme importance like:

a. Saving the world from a potential world ending, billions-killing threat, who is good now but could turn bad later.
b. Saving a friends mother called Martha which gives Batman a chance to feel like he saved his own mother, while ALSO ensuring that Martha doesn't die so that Superman doesn't become evil out of grief of seeing his mom burnt to death, which takes us back to point 'a'.

Therefore, the deaths were SOLELY relegated to 'Superman world ending fear' related events and were treated as a few collateral criminal casualties who were of less importance than 7 billion innocent others, whose lives were very potentially on the line. He kills like a soldier who doesn't want to kill but will to protect his country's borders when there is an enemy crossing the line and provoking him or impeding his mission of keeping his country safe.

The 3 or 4 DIRECT kills, which were ALL relegated to people shooting at Batman using gatling guns MOUNTED on vehicles, were impeding his mission and he had to get rid of the gatling guns and so he got rid of the vehicles and there were casualties and that's what happens in war, when you're trying to DEFEND yourself.

Batman has no reason to kill anyone out of malice when on a one to one basis where only his life or the life of a few innocents is concerned since he will be dealing with enemies of HIS or BELOW HIS power levels, unlike with Superman. He doesn't need to use lethal moves when dealing with controllable and predictable enemies. He DOES when it comes to an uncontrollable and unpredictable enemy like Superman.

Rest of the kills are all INDIRECT, like smashing the car that was parked, mowing down the one guy in the truck carrying Kryptonite when the Batmobile comes flying through the wall, the grenade guy, KGBeast who wouldn't have died had he turned OFF his flamethrower like a smart man. And no, no one else died during that chase sequence or fight sequence, the guys who got a car thrown on them clearly didn't die since the car didn't even land on the cab area, just mainly on the engine hood.

To summarise, Batman killed only when:

a. World ending stakes were involved so he had to choose the lives of 7 billion over that of a few criminals.
b. In self defence, only when he was being shot at by high caliber gatling guns.
c. To get rid of the vehicles and weapons of the enemies and if there was collateral, see point 'a'.

This Batman wouldn't kill a person where just his own personal stakes were involved and where the world wasn't at stake. For him personal stakes had always been in play since Gotham and his Bat family counted as personal stakes and so he hadn't and would never kill enemies of the same or lesser power levels.


POINT 18. Just to clarify, Zack didn't say that Superman can hear only within city limits, he said that when Superman uses his super hearing to try to locate his mother in that scene, his senses get overwhelmed by the screams and noises of all the crimes and victims of those crimes taking place RIGHT NOW and coming from all directions making him realise that he can't save everyone, which is also another reason why Supes look so distraught in that next scene where he tells Lois that now he will be forced to consider a thing too horrible for him and wasn't thinking straight. Zack said that the scene was too dark so they cut it from the Theatrical Cut.



POINT 22. To add: He also realises that he had become the very evil that made him lose his entire life in the first place - the murderer who took away a boy from his mother. He was about to become that with that final blow and sees his younger self in Superman, who was just a good man who was helpless to save his mother.

Also, that's when Bruce realises that he had personal stakes in this fight all along since he equated all Kryptonians to his parents' killer and to the Joker since the Kryptonians also killed his Wayne Financials "family" for "no reason at all" and he was powerless to save them, just like his parents from the shooter and just like Jason Todd from the Joker. He realises that he was doing this to settle a personal score too, and not just for saving the world. He was going to kill a man, someone weaker than him, one on one and out of spite and malice and was going to deal the death blow. (see my response to POINT 8 & 9 tie into this.)

I've written about this in-depth in my article "About Martha" available here: http://moviepilot.com/posts/3895267 and here: http://dceufilms.proboards.com/thread/40/martha-masculine-feminine-bvs


POINT 23. Telling a man who hates you, doesn't see you or know you as a man but only as a false god, world ending threat and a killer and who wants you dead at all costs, to save your "mom", would do two things:

a. He wouldn't realise you're talking about a human adoptive mother and would only have an alien mother of the same caliber in his mind and so he wouldn't give a crap and would continue to kill you and then go have shawarma while your real mother gets bbq'd at the hands of Lex.

b. Batman didn't know of Superman's real identity as Clark Kent. If Superman would have said "mom", and EVEN IF Batman cared about saving an innocent, for WHOM and WHERE would he have looked first? Who is this "mom", what is her name? Superman's mom had 10 minutes left and in that much time neither Batman nor Alfred would have known where to look and Martha would have been bbq'd at the hands of Lex. (Remember Alfred knows where to look ONLY AFTER Superman tells him that Lex had taken his mother, so they know to track the closest source to Lex, the Russian.)
Even if Batman made the connection between "Lex wants us to.." and "Find HIM", he still wouldn't have know WHO exactly to save and from where.


Superman had ONE last breath and LAST chance to get across to Batman that his mother, who was called Martha Kent was going to die and that Batman was letting that happen. If Batman proceeded to kill him, at the very least he'd have a name to go on and could have been able to put the rest together ("Bruce, I was wrong, you have to listen to me, Lex wants us to.." relating to "FIND HIM, save Martha"), maybe not in time, but atleast there was a chance that he could "save Martha".

Saying "mom" only accomplished getting his mother killed for sure whether Batman cared or didn't.

TLDR;

Saying "Find HIM, save my MOM" was a 50/50.
Saying "Find HIM, save MARTHA" was the ONLY sure shot way of getting Batman to go and look for Lex and save an INNOCENT in case Superman died at that moment.


POINT 28.
It did, like they showed when Batman held it over Superman who was extremely weakened by it and also got his cheek cut by it. Also, more importantly, when he retrieved it from the water, he was almost knocked unconscious by it and floated back up like a corpse. He managed to get over it's weakening effects only through sheer force of willpower, which has been shown in the comics, in Superman Returns, and most recently in MoS when he uses his sheer willpower to overcome the weakening effects of the Kryptonian atmosphere around the World Engine.

POINT 29. Lex's Plan: http://manofsteelanswers.com/lex-luthor-explained/

POINT 30. Actually, Lex didn't design their logos exclusively. Both Aquaman's A and Wonder Woman's WW come directly from their suits's belts which have those logos already and can also be seen in their images and surveillance footage.

Flash's footage shows flashes or lightning shaped electricity bolts or arcs whenever he moves, so making the lightning his symbol isn't that much of a stretch. Also, we don't know if Flash already has a suit and if Lex has captured the logo from that.

Don't know about Cyborg, maybe he has the logo on his suit too or maybe that's the only one that Lex made himself.

 

25) Why would Wonder Woman come out of hiding for a photograph if she’s trying to keep her identity a secret?
She knows Lex could release the photograph (with other evidence like the ATM footage) and reveal her existence; hence it was imperative she got the photo back from him. No one alive really knew who she was except Lex so she wasn't really at risk of outing herself.

This one makes no sense to me.

1 - How would a photo from WW1 and a random ATM video prove Wonder Woman's existence? A video of someone who resembles someone from a photo taken a 100 years ago is all we need as proof? Where's the link to prove they're the same person? Why would Wonder Woman even be concerned about Lex exposing the photo when it basically proves nothing. Also she had no idea about the ATM footage as she seemed shocked when she first saw it so she only came out of hiding for the photo. She even states that in the movie.

2 - Your last line basically confirms why it makes no sense for her to even be worried about this photo.

3 - How did Lex get this photo? How does Lex even know about her being a Meta-Human? Cause he saw an ATM video of a woman who resembles the photo from WW1 and that's it?

4 - How does WW know that Lex has this photo? This I might have missed but I don't recall how or why WW knew that Lex had the photo.

 

We'll know how her past connects to the present when the WW movie is out. Everything should not and doesn't need to be explained in one movie when they're building a universe.

Even so an explanation for things isn't that hard to fathom based on what we saw in BvS/know about the universe:

1. So having one single but still incriminating piece of historic evidence that Amazonians exist, is good for the Amazonians who want to remain hidden from the world? And what's to stop Lex from selling it to someone else, lets say Amanda Waller, or even better, teaming up with her to track down Diana or the Amazonians directly, all based off that piece of evidence. They could start by tracking down the guys or the descendants of the guys in the photos and questioning them. Not a stretch to assume that could be the way they uncover the location of Themiscyra, right?

2. Refer point 1.

3. How do we know that's ALL the info he had on her. That's the footage they chose to SHOW to us in the movie. You could clearly see he had tons of files, videos and photos in those folders. Maybe there's more incriminating and clear stuff in there.

Also, FACIAL RECOGNITION. You can fool the human eye but you can't fool a computer, well not unless you wanted to. And Wondy doesn't use any face altering tech so she looks the same and so the tech already captured her face and identified her as the woman who was in the 100 year old photo.

4. Everything need not be explained and it will be later on in the prequel movie.

 

She left man's world behind, why does it even matter that Lex Luthor has a photo of her?

 

copyright issue i guess.

it doesn't matter at all if she doesn't know about it...
but somehow... she was informed that Lex has a photo of her..., don't you think she will be curious to find it out?

and it's a photo of her lover too... (wait till WW movie)

 

Because deep down she hasn't really left it and this is evidenced by her return to combat against Doomsday.

 

I explained it in the post right above yours.

Cheers mate!

 

OK and? It's a digital copy. That means it's easy to back up. Taking a copy of his hard drive isn't going to magically erase the photo. He could have all that data backed up in his cloud or a private server or an e-mail server even.

 

One photo doesn't really prove or do anything. You can find photos of big foot or the Loch Ness monster if you want. That doesn't make them real.

It's a digital copy. What they did isn't necessarily going to stop Lex Luthor from doing any of those things.

Technically Lexcorp still has all the files. It's not like that thumb drive destroyed them. So if there's more incriminating stuff, they didn't really do much to scrub it.

In this movie, Diana clearly said she left Man's World behind, so why does she even have to worry about facial recognition at all? Had she stuck with that, she'd have had no need for facial recognition.

 

She's the Loch Ness monster in that picture, sure, but there are real recognizable and traceable human beings in that picture, are there not? That's what I was talking about. The truth coming out through her connections or their descendants.

We don't know that for sure. Batman used something called a "Leech", the name of that device he attached to Lex's servers. We can see than name when he gets it back and decrypts it on his Batcomputer. That device could have very well "sucked" that info right out of Lex's server by way of copying it and then deleting it from the servers. Like a leech draws blood.

I'm just speculating, not saying I know this for a fact, but it's not that much of a stretch considering Batman was going there to "steal" data, which makes it that much more valuable if you wipe the originals once you've stolen the data.

My response about facial recognition was for obredaans point: "3 - How did Lex get this photo? How does Lex even know about her being a Meta-Human? Cause he saw an ATM video of a woman who resembles the photo from WW1 and that's it?"

I explained that facial recognition captured her face and matched it to the WW photo. WW herself didn't seem to know what was in that photo but knew that it would be incriminating and could possibly lead man's world to themiscyra and so she needed to get it before it was used for that purpose.

Diana didn't even know about the facial recognition, she just got captured looking at a device that she had most probably never seen before since her last trip to man's world in 1918, which isn't even weird since many modern people might still glance at a security camera once in a while.

 

all good points.

I'd add that she doesn't really want or need the photo back. Her interest is that Lex has an interest in her and has been watching her.

The image could easily be explained that it was her grandmother or something. No biggie. but you see in all the other surveillance vids, she looks right at the cameras. She "knows" someone is watching her and wants to know why.

 

Thanks! And just to clarify there were just two pieces of surveillance that we saw: One picture where she is seen looking not at the photographer directly but at something or someone else across the street in the vicinity of the photographer, implying she didn't know she was caught on camera but was just looking around for people who could be suspicious of her and secondly the security footage where she goes up to the ATM, looks behind her and then looks at the camera, all of which shows us that she seems to be on tenterhooks and worried that someone could "possibly" be watching her and she keeps trying to look for that person(s) in order to identify and/or avoid them, but she doesn't "know" that someone is watching her for sure, until she finds out somehow that Lex has a photo of her and could possibly have something more on her.

 

i think it's a lady thing... just wanna make sure she looks good in the photo... or what kinda photo is it... haha

so that she could have a copy too...

 

Also lets not forget how amazingly lex orchaestrated the whole thing.Right from the africa sequence,where he frames superman,Luthor hiring the actress for the Naoromi hearings (including her talking about superman burning people with his heat vision). Luthor arranging for the prison murders and baiting Clark into investigating them. Luthor killing the Naoromi lady. Lois finding out the truth about the bullets origin but being unable to get to Clark fast enough to stop him going to the courthouse. Finch actually knowing about the actress and getting ready to dress Luthor down in front of the court. Luthor smiling maniacally as news reports come in of anonymous sources linking Superman to the bombing.Luthor using lead bullets to hide it from Superman.Luthor trying to pin the whole thing on Wally. Lois surmising that Wally might not have even known he was carrying a bomb. Clark and Batman being specifically invited to the Library party.

All this gives us so much more depth into the character Lex is.He was always 3 steps ahead of everyone,using everyone as his puppet.This is why he was the best Lex Luthor on screen,and a very good villain.Cant wait for the Ultimate Cut.

 

Yep. People may not like Eisenberg, but his Lex probably does the most scheming of any live action incarnation.

 

Also in reply to @turbosjc7

From what I interpreted,in the scene where Lex talks to the senator in his house,he tries to win her over at first using his emotions,saying stuff like "I like to keep things the way they were","the magical thinking of orphan boys","maybe he would come back"....saying stuff like this to gather sympathy from the senator to potray himself as this sad orphan boy.The moment June says "Im blocking the import license",his demeanour hardens,he becomes cold.

I cants say how much I loved Eisenberg's potrayal of Lex.It was such a layered performance.

 

lol he one of most worst villains ever. As bad as campy villains in Joel Schumacher Batman.

 

He was manic at times,but also extremely serious and sinister at times.Like a dual persona,one public one private.Then at the end his conversation with Batman in the UC hints that he behaved like an insane person to avoid going to jail.Its all very open to interpretation.It is a huge disservice to his performance to call him a campy villain.Just my 2 cents.

 

The THEATRICAL CUT was a disservice to his performance. Hell, it was a disservice to MOST of their performances.