BvS The Unabashed SPOILER Thread. ENTER AT OWN RISK. - Part 5

[Baggie_Saiyan]

Preconceived notions are inevitable when a character has existed for 75 years. I wish people would stop throwing that term out there like it's a bad thing. These aren't brand new literary characters we're dealing with.

I never said it was a bad thing though. I just said nothing Batman does contradicts anything he says in the film. Unlike the Nolan movies.

 

[misslane38]

The man you are talking about is the man with the blowtorch to Martha whom batman murdered. And all the incriminating evidence Bruce gathered on Lex was illegally obtained which makes in inadmissible in court and subjects anyone who handled it to very serious Criminal charges.

I could be wrong, but I didn't see Batman murder that guy. I thought he hurt him but not with a fatal wound.

Yes, there may be sand from the desert on lois' notebook. It's well known Lois was in the desert, it's natural there would be sand on her notebook, none of that proves anything. The prosecution has no murder weapon, they have no suspect, and they have no access to the crime scene, and they have no jurisdiction to get access to any of those things.

Yet, the movie tells us that it was proven. How plausible would it be to a jury that Lois' notebook could have been taken from her and shot at by someone using rare bullets that few could have gotten their hands on? I believe General Swanwick further strengthened Lois' case. Ultimately, though, the movie still establishes that the investigation bore fruit. It was proven. So Lois was successful, according to the script, and, consequently, she was not useless. Especially in the court of public opinion, in which it can be argued Superman needed to be vindicated most, linking Lex (who was already taken in for his other crimes) with the incident in Africa exonerates Superman for that particular event in the eyes of the people. She helped Superman in that respect, just like she helped him in the final conflicts with Batman and Doomsday.

And the General states his knowledge of the situation was classified and there was nothing presented in the film to imply any of that was changing.

There was nothing in the film to imply that it hadn't changed either. What we do know, though, is that Lois said she had proved her suspicions. We can only conclude, then, that she had gathered enough evidence to make a compelling case, if not to a jury but to the public who needed to have their faith in Superman restored.

If the film featured a story arc for Lois where she legitimately and thoroughly investigates the conflict and gathers enough admissible and irrefutable evidence against Lex, yes that would of been an awesome character arc which would of been way better than her falling off things and drowning and playing Superman's constant damsel in distress.

Legitimately? What was illegitimate about her investigation? As for the rest, the film tells us that she did get that kind of evidence against Lex. I'm all for show more than tell, so that would have been better, but just because we didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lois was more than a damsel in this movie. She saved Superman as much as he saved her. First, according to the film, she saved him in the court of public opinion by exculpating him from his alleged involvement in the incident in Africa. She also helped prevent Batman from going in for the kill. Finally, she helped Superman out of the water from which he had retrieved the kryptonite spear (which she alone knew the location). Don't get me wrong, I would have liked fewer rescues, but they don't negate Lois' other contributions and her other strengths.

 

[Abudefduf]

From what I'm reading, tt seems like Superman kills again in this movie (I haven't seen it personally... and I probably won't. I'm poor, I'd rather eat than waste my time on something so badly reviewed). I thought he was supposed to learn something from that infamous neck-snap? At least, that's how many people all over the internet swore it was going to be.

I didn't even mind the neck-snap btw, it made sense. But killing an ordinary human? That's kinda going to far, isn't it?

 

[Baggie_Saiyan]

It seems Superman kills again in this movie (I haven't seen it personally... and I probably won't. I'm poor, I'd rather eat than waste my time on something so badly reviewed). I thought he was supposed to learn something from that infamous neck-snap? At least, that's how many people all over the internet swore it was going to be.

I didn't even mind the neck-snap btw, it made sense. But killing an ordinary human? That's kinda going to far, isn't it?

It is rather unclear what happened. Like most of the films problems, things just happened and that is it no resolution no set up. But it is not as blatant as Zod. it is 50/50 on whether he does. One could make argue it was weak wall structure or Superman somehow turned his back and took the brunt of the pain.

 

[SiegePerilous]

From what I'm reading, it seems like Superman kills again in this movie. I thought he was supposed to learn something from that infamous neck-snap? At least, that's how many people all over the internet swore it was going to be.

I didn't even mind the neck-snap btw, it made sense. But killing an ordinary human? That's going a bit too far, isn't it?

He only kills Doomsday, which should surprise nobody.

Whether he kills the warlord in the beginning is a source of contention. Somebody said he flew through the walls and grabbed the guy along with him, but it happened so fast that I'm going to have to pay closer attention tomorrow when I see it again. If not, it's possible he slammed the guy through the walls and still REALLY messed him up, which is not something Superman is above doing, according to the people who actually created him.

 

[Eros]

It is rather unclear what happened. Like most of the films problems, things just happened and that is it no resolution no set up. But it is not as blatant as Zod. it is 50/50 on whether he does. One could make argue it was weak wall structure or Superman somehow turned his back and took the brunt of the pain.

it sure looked like he killed the African terror guy, he slammed him through multiple walls, like that dude is dead lol I'm just not sure why he killed him, it seemed unnecessary and over the top.

 

[Motown Marvel]

I could be wrong, but I didn't see Batman murder that guy. I thought he hurt him but not with a fatal wound.

Batman used a gun to shoot the flamethrower tank which caused an explosion which he had to rush to protect Martha from. He's dead. There was even an interview where Snyder spoke specifically about that kill.

Yet, the movie tells us that it was proven. How plausible would it be to a jury that Lois' notebook could have been taken from her and shot at by someone using rare bullets that few could have gotten their hands on? I believe General Swanwick further strengthened Lois' case. Ultimately, though, the movie still establishes that the investigation bore fruit. It was proven. So Lois was successful, according to the script, and, consequently, she was not useless. Especially in the court of public opinion, in which it can be argued Superman needed to be vindicated most, linking Lex (who was already taken in for his other crimes) with the incident in Africa exonerates Superman for that particular event in the eyes of the people. She helped Superman in that respect, just like she helped him in the final conflicts with Batman and Doomsday.

Just because the end of the script states it was proven does not mean the content of the film supports the logic to substantiate such a conclusion. A court of law requires claims to be substantiated with unquestionable evidence. Nowhere in this film does Lois have such evidence. Nor does anything in her story arc dictate a line of logic that could justifiably lead you to such a conclusion.

There was nothing in the film to imply that it hadn't changed either. What we do know, though, is that Lois said she had proved her suspicions. We can only conclude, then, that she had gathered enough evidence to make a compelling case, if not to a jury but to the public who needed to have their faith in Superman restored.

The General states he is off the record and the information is classified. That stands until the film states otherwise. Even that aside, until said information is officially declassified through proper channels, the evidence is illegal and inadmissible, and makes the General sharing it guilty of numerous crimes for which he would face a military tribunal.

Legitimately? What was illegitimate about her investigation?

Based on what was depicted, it was woefully inaccurate to accomplish her desired goals.

As for the rest, the film tells us that she did get that kind of evidence against Lex.

Except you can't just say it without anything to substantiate it. That's the problem.

I'm all for show more than tell, so that would have been better, but just because we didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lois was more than a damsel in this movie. She saved Superman as much as he saved her. First, according to the film, she saved him in the court of public opinion by exculpating him from his alleged involvement in the incident in Africa. She also helped prevent Batman from going in for the kill. Finally, she helped Superman out of the water from which he had retrieved the kryptonite spear (which she alone knew the location). Don't get me wrong, I would have liked fewer rescues, but they don't negate Lois' other contributions and her other strengths.

I'm not saying she was completely useless. But she was grossly underutilized and her "investigation" story arc was sorely lacking and completely inadequate.

 

[Verick808]

I'd have to watch it again but I'm pretty sure Superman denied killing anyone in Africa.

 

[Web-Head]

I'd have to watch it again but I'm pretty sure Superman denied killing anyone in Africa.

He did. He said he didn't kill them when he was talking to Lois at one point.

 

[Vaibow]

Alfred made it perfectly clear that Bruce, as Batman has over stepped his mark - c'mon people, whys re we arguing this.

Batman kills people, he doesn't go out of his way to kill them, but he doesn't care if his actions do kill them - he doesn't give a ****, he is so full of rage and has forgotten the reason he became Batman, why is this so hard for everyone to see? He only saw what he wanted to see with Superman.

It's not until Bruce saw himself, in Superman, laying there helpless begging for Martha that something clicked. Then, everything made sense.

 

[Eros]

I'd have to watch it again but I'm pretty sure Superman denied killing anyone in Africa.

I assumed he meant the men the Russian guy and his goons killed, the main African warlord was slammed through multiple walls buy superman at super speeds.

 

[jokesonm3]

So Jimmy Olsen was the guy executed in Africa.

http://comicbook.com/2016/03/25/batman-v-superman-zack-snyder-reveals-who-is-playing-jimmy-olsen/

“and we don’t have room for Jimmy Olsen in our big pantheon of characters, but we can have fun with him, right?”

How the hell was Snyder allowed to get away with this...

 

[The Guard]

Question regarding the whole branding thing.

Can anyone explain to me why a bat brand would = prison death sentence? If anything shouldn't that almost give you more street cred? Granted I've never been in prison, but it seems to me like the reaction would be less "you dead now little man" and more "yo...you got taken out by the BAT!?!?"

Aside from the type of people they are, because they likely squealed?

 

[Eros]

Alfred made it perfectly clear that Bruce, as Batman has over stepped his mark - c'mon people, whys re we arguing this.

Batman kills people, he doesn't go out of his way to kill them, but he doesn't care if his actions do kill them - he doesn't give a ****, he is so full of rage and has forgotten the reason he became Batman, why is this so hard for everyone to see? He only saw what he wanted to see with Superman.

It's not until Bruce saw himself, in Superman, laying there helpless begging for Martha that something clicked. Then, everything made sense.

oh we got that, he then proceeded to kill after his fight with superman.

 

[Abudefduf]

It is rather unclear what happened. Like most of the films problems, things just happened and that is it no resolution no set up. But it is not as blatant as Zod. it is 50/50 on whether he does. One could make argue it was weak wall structure or Superman somehow turned his back and took the brunt of the pain.

He only kills Doomsday, which should surprise nobody.

Whether he kills the warlord in the beginning is a source of contention. Somebody said he flew through the walls and grabbed the guy along with him, but it happened so fast that I'm going to have to pay closer attention tomorrow when I see it again. If not, it's possible he slammed the guy through the walls and still REALLY messed him up, which is not something Superman is above doing, according to the people who actually created him.

Thanks. I have no problem with him killing Doomsday, I mean, he's freaking Doomsday. How else are you gonna deal with him.

But about the other guy, even if he somehow manages to survive what you just described, it still sounds like Superman recklessly toys with a human life; even though I guess the dude (he's a terrorist, right?) kinda has it coming, lol.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

So Jimmy Olsen was the guy executed in Africa.

http://comicbook.com/2016/03/25/batman-v-superman-zack-snyder-reveals-who-is-playing-jimmy-olsen/



How the hell was Snyder allowed to get away with this...

oh my sweet jesus

Snyder is out of his god damn mind

 

[The Guard]

So Jimmy Olsen was the guy executed in Africa.

http://comicbook.com/2016/03/25/batman-v-superman-zack-snyder-reveals-who-is-playing-jimmy-olsen/
How the hell was Snyder allowed to get away with this...

It's just an Easter egg. He's not named in the film and they left themselves an out if they want to use him for real later.

 

[Andreth]

So Jimmy Olsen was the guy executed in Africa.

http://comicbook.com/2016/03/25/batman-v-superman-zack-snyder-reveals-who-is-playing-jimmy-olsen/



How the hell was Snyder allowed to get away with this...

Did he just say he killed him to upset and annoy us? and that our distressed reactions are his idea of having fun?

I can't...

 

[jokesonm3]

It's just an Easter egg. He's not named in the film and they left themselves an out if they want to use him for real later.

In other words:

Zack: "Here's our Jimmy Olsen, now he's dead, LOL just kidding that wasn't him, here's our true Jimmy Olsen"

 

[Vaibow]

It's just an Easter egg. He's not named in the film and they left themselves an out if they want to use him for real later.

I hope so, this is Clarks best friend....

 

[Vaibow]

In other words:

Zack: "Here's our Jimmy Olsen, now he's dead, LOL just kidding that wasn't him, here's our true Jimmy Olsen"

I think you mean....
'Here's our Jimmy Olsen, it's actually a she... It's Jenny. How funny....'

ohhh, ok.

'Nah, only kidding... here he is really.... BOOM, now he's dead'

But, it's jimmy....

'Gotcha, here he really is...'

Go away

 

[Doctor Jones]

Jimmy Olsen is shot dead by a terrorist.

I just can't. I can't anymore.

 

[dario2739]

It's just an Easter egg. He's not named in the film and they left themselves an out if they want to use him for real later.

Exactly - the guy's undercover CIA, and it's only natural that he'd use the alias of a real Daily Planet photographer for cover.

As for the rest of the bull**** being chatted in here...
The African terrorist - well Superman flew at him and grabbed him round the waist rugby tackle style - meaning his head would have been the first thing to hit the walls anyway, not the terrorist – I just find it funny that every thing in BvS is being discected minutely, whereas other movies of the genre get away scott-free.
Batman for instance - yes you have to say that shooting the flamethrower fuel tank causes the death of Mulvey - but he doesn't directly kill him – the guy with the grenade, the guy manning the gun on the pick-up... Batman didn't kill them, they died as a result of their own actions... and as for the dream sequence – well the world was at war then... rules had changed!

 

[RoughNTumble]

mercy graves was killed too

lex told her to go save his spot in the courtroom

smh @ randomly killing off characters like that

 

[Travesty]

I don't understand the problem here? Yeah, he killed off a character, but some of you are acting like he's the only director to have ever killed off someone in a CBM before. With Burton, he killed off Joker and Penguin. Nolan killed off Ra's, Two-Face, Rachel, Bane and Talia. Sometimes people die in these movies. Or were you expecting to go into BvS, and have Jimmy Olson single-handedly take on Doomsday, and save the world?