BvS What Went Wrong w/ Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (SPOILERS) - Part 2

[FunkMiller]

They nailed it. Fantastic review

Yep. Pretty much covered everything

 

[Loki882]

Which is funny because Angry Joe LIKED MOS and has defended it a lot. And while NC didn't, he at least felt like some parts of it worked (for example, he was actually cool with Superman killing Zod).

 

[The_Manhunter]

Nothing. The movie was great

 

[Batmannerism]

Nothing. The movie was great

Dude, if you are serious I totally respect your opinion, and even envy you because I really really really really wanted to like this film (being a huge Batman and Superman fan) - but came away with a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm glad to think somebody enjoyed the film as much as I wanted to.

 

[Timebomb]

Dude, if you are serious I totally respect your opinion, and even envy you because I really really really really wanted to like this film (being a huge Batman and Superman fan) - but came away with a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm glad to think somebody enjoyed the film as much as I wanted to.

I am right with you. However I do have an issue believing reviews that say the movie is perfect or a 10/10. The movie had soooo many technical issues that even if the character beats were perfect, the movie still would have suffered. But hey, that's why they call them opinions.

 

[shauner111]

Yeah. I'm a person who can love a film and still acknowledge the technical flaws with a script, editing, cinematography, performance, whatever it is. I can also dislike a film and applaud it for how well it was made (if that's the case).

So good for him if he thought it was a 10/10. Doesn't mean i have to pretend that i agree with it. Editing, script, performance issues all over Batman v Superman. So i can't take a 10/10 seriously unless the person is ONLY going by how entertained they were. Then i say fine.

For me it's 4/10...or as i like to rate it 2/5.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

For me, it's 1/10.

Characters make a movie for me and all the main characters of Batman v Superman suck in my opinion. Superman is all sad and silent, Batman is stupid and a tool, Lois Lane has no life outside of Clark, & Lex is godawful. Wonder Woman does nothing. You could take her out of the film and nothing changes. Sure she holds the rope to stop Doomsday but I'd rather have Superman and Doomsday beat each other to death with all of Super's strength like the comic.

The only 2 good characters are Alfred and Perry White. Perry summed this film's reaction perfectly.

 

[Kanye West]

You can't say I really liked a film but think it's bad.

that's just you being afraid to call something good despite enjoying it because other's don't agree.

 

[Visualiza]

You can't say I really liked a film but think it's bad.

Of course you can. Aren't you familiar with the concept of the guilty pleasure? That's similar. People who can't recognize the faults present in the things that they enjoy are far too self-absorbed for their own good. "I like something" /= "Something is of higher quality."

You know those awful selfies and snapshots that people post to Instagram and Facebook? They like those. Many people like those. Doesn't make them good photographs.

 

[Kanye West]

Of course you can. Aren't you familiar with the concept of the guilty pleasure? That's similar. People who can't recognize the faults present in the things that they enjoy are far too self-absorbed for their own good. "I like something" /= "Something is of higher quality."

You know those awful selfies and snapshots that people post to Instagram and Facebook? They like those. Many people like those. Doesn't make them good photographs.

Not saying you can't recognize faults. But you can't say I like this film, but then say "I think it's an overall bad film".

That's dumb. Especially with film/music.

 

[shauner111]

Yes you can. You can enjoy a bad movie. People do it all the time. The Room? People love that movie and recognize how terrible it is across the board. It's not a good, well-made film just because you were entertained by it. And it's not a piece of garbage just because you were bored by it, or didn't like this character, or the story, or the genre. In that case it can be still be very well-made.

What's dumb is going around saying I LOVE THIS MOVIE SO MUCH, IT'S A MASTERPIECE BECAUSE I WAS ENTERTAINED THE ENTIRE TIME! You can enjoy Batman v Superman and recognize it's not really well-written or put together.

 

[Visualiza]

Not saying you can't recognize faults. But you can't say I like this film, but then say "I think it's an overall bad film".

That's dumb. Especially with film/music.

I disagree. There's more to evaluating art (which is what you're doing when you say something is good or bad, vice whether you enjoy it or not) than one's personal preference. There's a difference between taste and merit, and the failure (or refusal; take your pick) to acknowledge this shows a staggering lack of self-awareness. Like I said, the idea of guilty pleasures kinda flies in the face of exactly what you're saying. I'm glad you brought up music, because I've got another example for you. If someone tells you that they like Ice JJ Fish (I'm gonna assume you know who that is, based on your handle), but acknowledges that he's a bad singer, is that BS, or are they simply exercising their better judgment and not putting him into the same category as a Frank Ocean or a Lionel Richie? Let's take this a step further; let's say that this individual tells you that Ice JJ Fish is their favorite singer. For the sake of being congruent, should they then declare him to be the very best singer in the world?

Porky's is one of my favorite comedies, but I don't think it's one of the best comedies, or even a particularly good or original one. If you can't reconcile that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

 

[Kanye West]

I disagree. There's more to evaluating art (which is what you're doing when you say something is good or bad, vice whether you enjoy it or not) than one's personal preference. There's a difference between taste and merit, and the failure (or refusal; take your pick) to acknowledge this shows a staggering lack of self-awareness. Like I said, the idea of guilty pleasures kinda flies in the face of exactly what you're saying. I'm glad you brought up music, because I've got another example for you. If someone tells you that they like Ice JJ Fish (I'm gonna assume you know who that is, based on your handle), but acknowledges that he's a bad singer, is that BS, or are they simply exercising their better judgment and not putting him into the same category as a Frank Ocean or a Lionel Richie? Let's take this a step further; let's say that this individual tells you that Ice JJ Fish is their favorite singer. For the sake of being congruent, should they then declare him to be the very best singer in the world?

Porky's is one of my favorite comedies, but I don't think it's one of the best comedies, or even a particularly good or original one. If you can't reconcile that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Things like batman and robin, or the room don't count because you are enjoying them BECAUSE they're bad. You like it specifically for the fact that it's bad. You like it ironically.

Ima use BvS as an example. If you're discussing how the film was editing. You absolutely cannot say that i like how it was edited, or how it was directed, but it was directed/ edited badly.
There is no objectively bad way to direct or edit a film. If the editing was done in a way it immersed you or gripped you, it did what it was set out to do. You can absolutely not say it was badly edited if YOU ENJOYED how it was edited. Doesn't mean it was badly directed because that's not what a filmmaking textbook said was bad. This is strictly an example and can be applied to any film.

"i really liked this actor's performance in that movie, but it wasn't a very good performance" Completely absurd.


**unless you like it BECAUSE it was bad. Like Ice JJ fish's singing. Batman and robin, the room, etc

 

[The Joker]

I disagree. There's more to evaluating art (which is what you're doing when you say something is good or bad, vice whether you enjoy it or not) than one's personal preference. There's a difference between taste and merit, and the failure (or refusal; take your pick) to acknowledge this shows a staggering lack of self-awareness. Like I said, the idea of guilty pleasures kinda flies in the face of exactly what you're saying. I'm glad you brought up music, because I've got another example for you. If someone tells you that they like Ice JJ Fish (I'm gonna assume you know who that is, based on your handle), but acknowledges that he's a bad singer, is that BS, or are they simply exercising their better judgment and not putting him into the same category as a Frank Ocean or a Lionel Richie? Let's take this a step further; let's say that this individual tells you that Ice JJ Fish is their favorite singer. For the sake of being congruent, should they then declare him to be the very best singer in the world?

Porky's is one of my favorite comedies, but I don't think it's one of the best comedies, or even a particularly good or original one. If you can't reconcile that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Exactly

 

[Kanye West]

The IceJJ argument doesn't count at all.

 

[The Guard]

So the major complaint of the last few days is that Jack didn't tell people to leave Wayne Enterprises until Bruce told him to?

Based on what?

Why are people assuming no one evacuated the building prior to Bruce calling Jack to tell him to do so?

Jack saying "Come on, let's go!" does not mean that he or others in that massive corporation didn't issue any evacuation orders before this. Big corporations don't tend to evacuate that way anyway, by a single person shouting for people to get out.

This is an ALIEN INVASION. Of course some people are going to be in shock, afraid, etc. Nevermind that right before that, there was a gravity weapon destroying the streets and people therein nearby.

The selective imagination here sometimes.

 

[Kanye West]

If this is an actual complaint against the film then holy ****

 

[Raiden]

Not saying you can't recognize faults. But you can't say I like this film, but then say "I think it's an overall bad film".

That's dumb. Especially with film/music.

People enjoy bad movies all the time. Heck, there's a whole genre of film called the B movies where fans were able to have fun BECAUSE they're awful. You can like a movie while acknowledging how bad it is.

 

[Kanye West]

People enjoy bad movies all the time. Heck, there's a whole genre of film called the B movies where fans were able to have fun BECAUSE they're awful. You can like a movie while acknowledging how bad it is.

I specifically said that's not the same thing. Liking a film a because it's bad is different. Liking it ironically is fine.

But it's the people that genuinely enjoy a film (not ironically or because it's so bad it's good like "the room), and then say it's a bad film. This is completely stupid.

 

[Visualiza]

Things like batman and robin, or the room don't count because you are enjoying them BECAUSE they're bad. You like it specifically for the fact that it's bad. You like it ironically.

Ima use BvS as an example. If you're discussing how the film was editing. You absolutely cannot say that i like how it was edited, or how it was directed, but it was directed/ edited badly.
There is no objectively bad way to direct or edit a film. If the editing was done in a way it immersed you or gripped you, it did what it was set out to do. You can absolutely not say it was badly edited if YOU ENJOYED how it was edited. Doesn't mean it was badly directed because that's not what a filmmaking textbook said was bad. This is strictly an example and can be applied to any film.

"i really liked this actor's performance in that movie, but it wasn't a very good performance" Completely absurd.


**unless you like it BECAUSE it was bad. Like Ice JJ fish's singing. Batman and robin, the room, etc

All of the things that you insist can't be said, absolutely can and have been said before; i.e. I didn't particularly like Eisenberg's performance, but, all things considered, I think he did a good job. People are a lot more complex than you're giving them credit for. That you're moving the goalposts (such and such doesn't count because reasons) here is very telling. You're underestimating the degree to which people's perspectives can differ, but that's not surprising when you make statements like this:

Imagining actually thinking that affleck isn't the best batman to date.

Because you can't (or refuse to) reconcile the concept doesn't make it stupid. I wonder then, if you're also of the belief that if one doesn't enjoy a movie that they happen to believe is good, that they're similarly stupid or deluded. You kinda have to believe that, considering what you've been saying otherwise. I'd give you more examples, but it seems like you're quick to play the "that doesn't count" card when something doesn't fit your side of the argument.

 

[Kanye West]

All of the things that you insist can't be said, absolutely can and have been said before; i.e. I didn't particularly like Eisenberg's performance, but, all things considered, I think he did a good job. People are a lot more complex than you're giving them credit for. That you're moving the goalposts (such and such doesn't count because reasons) here is very telling. You're underestimating the degree to which people's perspectives can differ, but that's not surprising when you make statements like this:



Because you can't (or refuse to) reconcile the concept doesn't make it stupid. I wonder then, if you're also of the belief that if one doesn't enjoy a movie that they happen to believe is good, that they're similarly stupid or deluded. You kinda have to believe that, considering what you've been saying otherwise. I'd give you more examples, but it seems like you're quick to play the "that doesn't count" card when something doesn't fit your side of the argument.

No, they can't. at all.

You CAN'T enjoy something but think it's bad. You can't like someone's directing and think it's bad. Because it worked for YOU. that's the only way to judge artistic merit because theres no objective good or bad. People who say i liked it but I know it's **** are basically saying "it did it's job of pleasing me as a viewer but It's not good because it isnt how it's SUPPOSE to be."

"I really like how BvS was edited but I think objectively it was edited terribly" That's 100% ******ed.

 

[Batmannerism]

No, they can't. at all.

You CAN'T enjoy something but think it's bad. You can't like someone's directing and think it's bad. Because it worked for YOU. that's the only way to judge artistic merit because theres no objective good or bad. People who say i liked it but I know it's **** are basically saying "it did it's job of pleasing me as a viewer but It's not good because it isnt how it's SUPPOSE to be."

"I really like how BvS was edited but I think objectively it was edited terribly" That's 100% ******ed.

Gosh this probably isn't the right forum to try and argue if there is such a thing as any kind of objective truth (like 'objectively good' or 'objectively bad' ).

Time for my 2c. I'm with Visualiza on the "guilty pleasure" idea anyway - which is rare, as V and I don't often see eye to eye, although his arguments are usually better than mine (and certainly extremely well articulated), nice to see him posting again.

Anyway as far as guilty pleasures go I'll give you an example. GI-JOE the rise of Cobra, for me is a guilty pleasure, there's very little merit in the story and characters - but it captures enough of the mindless action of the cartoon to be fun, so I'll watch it again from time to time, just as background noise even, also the production values are pretty decent (even the editing).

GI-JOE retaliation took the mindlessness to a whole new level, such that I could barely sit through it once.

So GI JOE ROC is a "guilty pleasure" I know it's not a great film and I know that while I'm watching it, but hell I enjoy it anyway. I could probably think of a few more "guilty pleasure" films ( well for TV there's 'Steven Seagal:Lawman' which is awful but fun to watch).

The opposite would of course be Star Wars (A New Hope) or the Dark Knight, they are great films (well at least the critical consensus says so, and for once I agree with it) and I enjoy them but at the same time appreciate what wonderful examples of film-making they are.

B v S ....well for me I could barely sit through it the first time, and haven't been able to go back for seconds.

However, there is still hope. I saw Tron:Legacy in the cinema in 2010, and hated it (great visuals and music, dreadful tone and pacing) . Years later I bought the DVD (it was cheap) because I thought the visuals would be good in the background, along with the music - kind of like an extended screen-saver.
Anyway, with repetition it grew on me, and the religious elements of the story began to make more sense. Now I'll actually watch it.

Will the same happen with B v S, I'm not sure, but I'll buy the DVD to find out (if for no other reason than my minute financial contribution will help ensure Superman returns to the screen again, which would have probably happened anyway, but it can't hurt).

So, what I'm saying is, you can enjoy something while at the same time know that it's not very good. It is possible to make those distinctions.

That's my view anyway. Cheers.

 

[Kanye West]

Gosh this probably isn't the right forum to try and argue if there is such a thing as any kind of objective truth (like 'objectively good' or 'objectively bad' ).

Time for my 2c. I'm with Visualiza on the "guilty pleasure" idea anyway - which is rare, as V and I don't often see eye to eye, although his arguments are usually better than mine (and certainly extremely well articulated), nice to see him posting again.

Anyway as far as guilty pleasures go I'll give you an example. GI-JOE the rise of Cobra, for me is a guilty pleasure, there's very little merit in the story and characters - but it captures enough of the mindless action of the cartoon to be fun, so I'll watch it again from time to time, just as background noise even, also the production values are pretty decent (even the editing).

GI-JOE retaliation took the mindlessness to a whole new level, such that I could barely sit through it once.

So GI JOE ROC is a "guilty pleasure" I know it's not a great film and I know that while I'm watching it, but hell I enjoy it anyway. I could probably think of a few more "guilty pleasure" films ( well for TV there's 'Steven Seagal:Lawman' which is awful but fun to watch).

The opposite would of course be Star Wars (A New Hope) or the Dark Knight, they are great films (well at least the critical consensus says so, and for once I agree with it) and I enjoy them but at the same time appreciate what wonderful examples of film-making they are.

B v S ....well for me I could barely sit through it the first time, and haven't been able to go back for seconds.

However, there is still hope. I saw Tron:Legacy in the cinema in 2010, and hated it (great visuals and music, dreadful tone and pacing) . Years later I bought the DVD (it was cheap) because I thought the visuals would be good in the background, along with the music - kind of like an extended screen-saver.
Anyway, with repetition it grew on me, and the religious elements of the story began to make more sense. Now I'll actually watch it.

Will the same happen with B v S, I'm not sure, but I'll buy the DVD to find out (if for no other reason than my minute financial contribution will help ensure Superman returns to the screen again, which would have probably happened anyway, but it can't hurt).

So, what I'm saying is, you can enjoy something while at the same time know that it's not very good. It is possible to make those distinctions.

That's my view anyway. Cheers.

ok.

I'm not talking in general terms. I'm not saying you can't think the characters or the plot can't be criticized if you enjoy it. I'm saying you can't enjoy let's say the PLOT of the movie, but then say it's not a good plot. You can say I liked the movie a lot but the plot had some problems. But when you're talking about something specific, like plot of characters, it makes no sense to then criticize it.

I really liked the plot, but it was pretty bad. Does no one see how insanely stupid that is? The only way to judge art for YOURSELF is to see how your brain responded to it, what effect it had on you. If that effect is positive then you can't say it was bad.

Unless, I'll say again, you enjoy it specifically BECAUSE it's bad. Ironically

 

[Batmannerism]

I'm saying you can't enjoy let's say the PLOT of the movie, but then say it's not a good plot.

I enjoyed the plot of GI-JOE Rise of Cobra, but at the same time thought it was pretty so-so...... so, I did enjoy the plot and also admitted it wasn't very good.

On that note the plot of Mad Max Fury Road is pretty much " Max has to help escort some supermodels across the desert while being chased by the hell's angels version of cirque du soleil "

It's not a very sophisticated or clever plot, but wow it's one incredible film. I don't think that's what you're saying, but I thought I'd put that in there.

You know, the plot of B v S should have been super-simple, as in "Batman wants to take down Superman, they fight, make up and then fight somebody else." That's all that was necessary to make a really enjoyable film, but wow did they fill in a ton of other unnecessary crap.

 

[Kanye West]

I enjoyed the plot of GI-JOE Rise of Cobra, but at the same time thought it was pretty so-so...... so, I did enjoy the plot and also admitted it wasn't very good.

On that note the plot of Mad Max Fury Road is pretty much " Max has to help escort some supermodels across the desert while being chased by the hell's angels version of cirque du soleil "

It's not a very sophisticated or clever plot, but wow it's one incredible film. I don't think that's what you're saying, but I thought I'd put that in there.

You know, the plot of B v S should have been super-simple, as in "Batman wants to take down Superman, they fight, make up and then fight somebody else." That's all that was necessary to make a really enjoyable film, but wow did they fill in a ton of other unnecessary crap.

none of that contradicts what I was saying.
being so-so isn't necessarily negative. Mad max has a simple plot and you acknowledge that but still enjoy the overall product.

My thing is that you can't like a certin aspect of something, but then think it was "bad". Like a certain performance.
"I really liked this actor's performance, but I think it was a pretty bad performance" This will never not sound completely dumb to me.