BvS What Went Wrong w/ Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice (SPOILERS) - Part 3

[BatLobster]

I never said it was an inherently bad thing either to recreate comic book panels...the issue here for me is with Snyder's execution of that. Context matters. Wasn't a huge fan in general of having that be the backdrop to an opening credits sequence.

More on-topic: The opening is really nice to watch (Beautiful Lie is so great) but it's so overstylized it feels more like a music video than a genuinely dramatic scene to me. It just... tries so hard.

Yup, or a video game cutscene.

It's a matter of taste at the end of the day, Shape brings up a good point that it could be seen as Bruce's own nightmare version of the event that he's replayed over in his head for his whole life. But on the other hand, Snyder brings that a lot of that same heightened stylization to other sequences in the film too so it's not a clear contrast either.

I do like Beautiful Lie on its own, but unfortunately coupled with Snyder's visuals the whole thing does have that music video/commercial/cutscene feel that bugs the crap out of me.

 

[AnneFan]

Recreating comic book panels doesn't make something inherently good, but it doesn't make something inherently bad, either.

I wouldn't have been happy if the film was comprised almost entirely of slow-motion, stylized sequences that were all ripped from the pages of the same comic (a la Watchmen), but in the case of this flashback, I feel the presentation of the scene was completely justified and effective in how it was used.

This is a moment that we've seen presented countless times in various ways across all mediums. There's obviously a stark difference between the way Nolan and Snyder chose to do it, but there's good reason for that IMO. In Batman Begins, we witness the event in real-time with a proper build up of tension because we see everything that led up to the moment and then everything afterwards. It's presented in a way that feels visceral and true to life, echoing how everything can change in a second's time and a boy's life can be altered forever. BOOM BOOM. That's it.

In BvS, we see a dramatic presentation of the moment, but in the form of a flashback/dream sequence juxtaposed with Bruce falling into the cave (then rising up) and a voiceover. "There was a time above... a time before... there were perfect things... diamond absolutes. But things fall..."

Setting aside the obvious TDKR influence, it makes sense to me that we see his parents killed in such a stylized, dramatic way here. Not only is it seemingly part of a dream, but it's also like Bruce thinking back to this pivotal moment as he remembers it and how it's played out in his mind over and over again for decades. It's obviously not how the moment would have played out in real-time, but instead, there's a focus on the small details and images that might have been ingrained into Bruce's mind. Standing behind his father, the gun firing, shell casing hitting the ground, the gun caught in the necklace, pearls rolling into the sewer, his father saying "Martha", his mother's eyes as the life left her, etc.

I disagree that such stylization feels adolescent. It can feel that way depending on the subject matter and overall presentation (like in Snyder's 300 and I'm guessing Sucker Punch although I haven't seen that), but I didn't get that vibe here. The scene is presented in a way that is evocative of reading a comic book, with a rhythmic organization of images depicting the event. The idea that such elements of visual storytelling/stylization in a film are best suited to adolescents is kind of silly to me.

Well said.

 

[Assassin32]

From John Gardner’s The Art of Fiction: Notes on Craft for Young Writers, I give you the answers to the question asked by the thread title:

“Let us now turn to three faults far graver than mere clumsiness–not faults of technique but faults of soul: sentimentality, frigidity, and mannerism. . . . Sentimentality, in all its forms, is the attempt to get some effect without providing due cause. . . emotion or feeling that rings false, usually because achieved by some form of cheating or exaggeration. . . . no reader who’s experienced the power of real fiction will be pleased by it” (115–16).

“The fault Longinus identified as ‘frigidity’ occurs in fiction whenever the author reveals by some slip or self-regarding intrusion that he is less concerned about his characters than he ought to be–less concerned, that is, than any decent human being observing the situation would naturally be. . . . the writer has forgotten that his characters’ situation is serious; he’s responded to his own imagined scene with insufficient warmth, has allowed himself to get carried away . . ., and, momentarily forgetting the scene’s real interest . . . the writer snatches at (or settles for) a detail of, at best, trivial interest. . . The writer lacks the kind of passion all true artists possess. He lacks the nobility of spirit that enables a real writer to enter deeply into the feelings of imaginary characters (as he enters deeply into the feelings of real people). In a word, the writer is frigid” (117–18).

“Mannered writing is writing that continually distracts us from the fictional dream by stylistic tics that we cannot help associating, as we read, with the author’s wish to intrude himself, prove himself different from all other authors” (119).

“Whereas the frigid writer lacks strong feeling, and the sentimental writer applies feeling indiscriminately, the mannered writer feels more strongly about his own personality and ideas–his ego, which he therefore keeps before us by means of style–than he feels about any of his characters–in effect, all the rest of humanity” (120–21).

“Mannered writing, then–like sentimentality and frigidity–arises out of flawed character. In critical circles it is considered bad form to make connections between literary faults and bad character, but for the writing teacher such connections are impossible to miss, hence impossible to ignore. . . . To help the writer, since that is his job, the teacher must enable the writer to see–partly by showing him how the fiction betrays his distorted vision (as fiction, closely scrutinized, always will)–that his personal character is wanting” (121).

 

[Longshot777]

What went wrong???


Well the HomePage of SHH, JL is the most anticipated movie of 2017.

After all the he haters saying BVS killed the whole DC Movieverse.

I guess it's the minority who are just the loudest along with the Disney bought media that making it seem that there's something that went wrong with BVS.

So what went wrong??? Absolutely nothing. Man of Steel and BVS are a better start compared to Ironman and Thor.

Bring on SS, WW, and JL!!!

 

[The Joker]

I don't see anything on SHH page for that. Link?

 

[Longshot777]

It's the polls on the right side of the main page.

There were 2 polls actually

1. Most anticipated movie of 2017

2. Best Comic Con trailer

JL won them both

 

[The Joker]

Polls? They're just fanboy voting. I thought this was a serious link showing audiences were anticipating it most.

 

[Victarion]

Some dialogue needed polishing. Like, the human trafficker's lady should've had a line like, "Violence is the only language the Bat speaks, or "The only way you stop the Bat is a bullet in the skull." It gets the same point across as her line in the movie.

Seeing the prosthetic work on Croc, I would've gone that way with Doomsday and used the rest of the CGI budget for the lightning stuff.

I would've cut the truncated Batman origin and opened on Bruce looking at Superman articles, then a flashback to the scenes where Bruce arrives in Metropolis during the Supes/Zod fight and all of that.

I would've cut Lex feeding the politico jolly ranchers.

 

[jihado86]

I would've cut Lex feeding the politico jolly ranchers.

I would've cut Lex himself t:

 

[batfreakforever]

What went wrong was that Snyder was forced to hack up a great film and alter his vision into something the studio thought they needed but they ultimately knew what Zac would do. I don't have anything against Zac. He is a visionary and brutal director who doesn't hold back. WB keeps giving him lots of insane amounts of money to make his films so he must be doing something right from a business side of things. WB knew what they were getting with him and fans fail to point that fact out. They gave him the keys to the dc kingdom knowing what type of films he makes. Fans rip apart things too easy and too much and think with emotion first and not with rational. Snyder gave us his usual breed of filmmaking. Tuff. Brutal. Balls to the wall action. Dark and moody settings. Questionable characters. Anti heros. Mixed with a dose of his usual flair. BvS is no different. Don't know what fans and critics were expecting. Oh yes........a Marvel type film. One that is with restraints and made in a board room and one that not would annoy any kids or family's or anyone. Critics. You name it. People need to wake up and realize that was chosen for a reason by WB to spear head the dc on film. They needed a stark contrast to Marvel with someone who knows dark comic book films and Snyder is that guy.
Marvel would never dream of going this dark and brutal with their characters on film because it's still under Disney. DC isn't under a film company that mainly makes family entertainment like Disney. Snyder went all out with dc characters. Marvel can't do that with their's. Is as simply as that. There are not extended cuts of the Marvel films but I think DC will do that every so often with their's that might show a harder or adult cut of a film.

 

[jihado86]

man, the problem with BvS wasn't the darkness and all that.
it was simply poor as a film itself, in all aspects. More importantly writing, script, dialogues, characters.

The Dark Knight was the darkest comic book super hero movie, but it had all the elements of a great film, and it nailed everything with excellence.

 

[chamber-music]

This video summed up the flaw with BvS better than I ever could
[YT]/38Cy_Qlh7VM[/YT]
It is a film made up of moments rather than scenes

 

[Rowen]

This movie was boring and it was way to long. I about fell asleep a couple of times.

 

[Victarion]

I would've cut Lex himself t:

I'd keep him a manic twit in the public eye. Then when you have him and Lois on the helipad, Lex switches gears into a stonecold sociopath.

I'd probably give Supes a line like, "I'm not going to break a broken man. You need help," when he confronts Lex. Following Lex's speech about his father and God.

 

[Lencho01]

This video summed up the flaw with BvS better than I ever could
[YT]/38Cy_Qlh7VM[/YT]
It is a film made up of moments rather than scenes

That was a pretty good video.

 

[Victarion]

In layman's terms, how do you differentiate a moment from a scene?

 

[Zero_Effect]

This video summed up the flaw with BvS better than I ever could
[YT]/38Cy_Qlh7VM[/YT]
It is a film made up of moments rather than scenes

Just watched that thanks to Dan Murrell pointing it out on Screen Junkies Movie Fights. Good video.

 

[Brother Jack]

In layman's terms, how do you differentiate a moment from a scene?

As the video says, it's not an easy thing to define. I think one of the hallmarks is that a scene has room to breathe within its established rhythm. When you can get a sense of the scene's setting; where it occurs geographically, sequentially, etc. Snyder rarely lets that happen in either of his DC movies. He doesn't use establishing shots to acclimate the audience to setting, opting instead to shoot nearly everything at medium or close range with handheld cameras and murky color grading. It's why Gotham and Metropolis look virtually interchangeable. Big, grey, characterless city backdrops.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

What went wrong....absolutely Nothing

 

[The Joker]

What went wrong....absolutely Nothing

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34036559&postcount=407

You say they didn't do justice to your favorite character, and made Lex Luthor childish, but yet you claim nothing went wrong

 

[Timebomb]

I am noticing a scary trend in fandom that started after BVS and looks to be happening with SS as well. I just started visiting this site after BVS so I don't know if happened with MOS and I don't visit the Marvel threads so I don't know if it happens there as well. So I guess what I am noticing is just based on my observations of the DC threads. BVS had a lot of technical flaws ( i won't even go into my personal feelings about the movie and these characters) I think we can all agree that there were many editing flaws. However the movie was defended vehemently by many fans who for some reason could not accept the movie was flawed. It is blind fandom and I find it odd and scary. I am a huge DC fan, but not once did they earn my praise or devotion just because of the DC on the cover. My fandom and loyalty has to be earned, every time. I won't go into what happened with some of these same fans started doing once the UC came out. Now with SS, I see that posters in these threads are already blindly calling this movie awesome and great when it hasn't even come out yet. I want it to be awesome but come on, wait for it to come out so you can actually see the quality before we start vehemently defending it. I hope it's awesome but any negative thought or concern about the movie is met with astounding levels of anger. I hope DC gets this right but I will wait until actually seeing it before I start defending or condemning it. Otherwise I'm just a blind fanboy and in my opinion that's the greatest enemy of quality.

 

[DC Batman]

I think in this day and age, we have such high or low expectations for films because we are given so much information prior to watching them. That is the consequence of living in the internet age. Some people, especially general moviegoers, are more capable of enjoying many films and accepting them for what they are. They come into theaters with a clear mind and little to no preconceived notion of a film. They only see trailers and tv spots in theaters or on television and if a film happens to spark their interest they may see it. I am not saying that people will always end up liking a film by having little to no expectations for it. I am saying that people would still feel like they got their money's worth from the theatrical experience. More importantly, I think people can properly assess films when they watch them with an open mind and have civil discussions about them. If they don't like a film, they express their opinion and move on.

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34036559&postcount=407

You say they didn't do justice to your favorite character, and made Lex Luthor childish, but yet you claim nothing went wrong

Not liking everything about a movie and admitting it has faults does not mean that it is a disaster of disappointment as some on here want to believe. I haven't had this much fun watching a movie since I was a teenager, so again NOTHING went wrong.

 

[FunkMiller]

I am noticing a scary trend in fandom that started after BVS and looks to be happening with SS as well. I just started visiting this site after BVS so I don't know if happened with MOS and I don't visit the Marvel threads so I don't know if it happens there as well. So I guess what I am noticing is just based on my observations of the DC threads. BVS had a lot of technical flaws ( i won't even go into my personal feelings about the movie and these characters) I think we can all agree that there were many editing flaws. However the movie was defended vehemently by many fans who for some reason could not accept the movie was flawed. It is blind fandom and I find it odd and scary. I am a huge DC fan, but not once did they earn my praise or devotion just because of the DC on the cover. My fandom and loyalty has to be earned, every time. I won't go into what happened with some of these same fans started doing once the UC came out. Now with SS, I see that posters in these threads are already blindly calling this movie awesome and great when it hasn't even come out yet. I want it to be awesome but come on, wait for it to come out so you can actually see the quality before we start vehemently defending it. I hope it's awesome but any negative thought or concern about the movie is met with astounding levels of anger. I hope DC gets this right but I will wait until actually seeing it before I start defending or condemning it. Otherwise I'm just a blind fanboy and in my opinion that's the greatest enemy of quality.

Absolutely right. The blind adoration some people have towards Snyder & BvS is very puzzling. It's almost cult-like behaviour.

In my opinion, The Dark Knight is the best movie ever made, but I can still detail things I think are flawed about it (that crappy batsuit, for instance).

The inability to criticise any element of a movie because you feel you need to defend a film maker you've never met and a company you have no stake in, is weird in the extreme!

 

[The Joker]

Not liking everything about a movie and admitting it has faults does not mean that it is a disaster of disappointment as some on here want to believe. I haven't had this much fun watching a movie since I was a teenager, so again NOTHING went wrong.

Things going wrong doesn't automatically equal disaster or disappointment. The very fact you admit it has faults means some things went wrong. Saying nothing went wrong just because you still enjoyed the movie is illogical. Things go wrong in movies all the time and people still enjoy them. You admitting faults and then say nothing went wrong is a hilarious contradiction. If nothing went wrong you wouldn't have those complaints.