One way to look at it is that these characters do very well at the box office, despite a decidedly mixed audience response. I don't see them shutting down Justice League for a retool right now. An enormous 2nd weekend drop might change things, but it seems unlikely.
Spoilers Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
- I don't have any issues with Superman in this movie. Cavill was great and Superman as portrayed was great.
- I don't have a problem with the runtime. If anything, it should have been longer. I don't mind a Ten Commandments length film.
- Spoiler for the ending... Superman has been active for only 18 months and everyone hates him. Killing him off now was too soon and what we saw was too rushed.
- Another spoiler for the ending... Some higher ups must know that Clark Kent is Superman since the body was delivered to Martha Kent to bury in Smallville while the public casket for Superman was empty.
Last edited:
I thought it was excellent, I was disappointed by wonder woman though. For the most part she just did an angry model face and stood there in slow motion like a hair commercial or something. It was cringe inducing... still she might be better in her standalone movie.
This movie was a lot of fun and the reception is way off. Rottentomatoes has spiderman 3 at like 60% and BvS at 30%? Batman Forever at 10% higher than BvS? No. Critics see it as a nice juicy target to sink their teeths into and turn into a Phantom Menace. I feel like the only way movies avoid this nowadays is to come out of (relative) nowhere like Fury Road, without expectations in the minds of the critics.
This movie was a lot of fun and the reception is way off. Rottentomatoes has spiderman 3 at like 60% and BvS at 30%? Batman Forever at 10% higher than BvS? No. Critics see it as a nice juicy target to sink their teeths into and turn into a Phantom Menace. I feel like the only way movies avoid this nowadays is to come out of (relative) nowhere like Fury Road, without expectations in the minds of the critics.
Well, technically Friday would have been ideal...
Eh, I think the problem here was just more with the execution than all the different elements they tried to fit in. And the movie does do a pretty good job setting up the Justice League I think, even if it's mostly just hinting at what's to come. For me the little glimpses we got of these characters in action (such as the security footage of Barry stopping a robber in the convenience store) were more than enough to set things up and get one excited for the JL movie (and I also liked their nod to the Arrowverse with the term "metahumans" as well). And the movie also manages to introduce this new Batman pretty quickly and effectively as well in the opening scenes.
Nope, for me the problem was just with the Batman versus Superman part of the story, and the incredibly clunky way Snyder structured and edited the movie together. A better director I think could have made all those different elements flow and work together a LOT better.
Luthor clearly knew, since he targeted Martha Kent to make Superman fight Batman. All it would take would be facial recognition software.
Plus, I'd argue that Clark didn't really go out of his way to hide his identity in Man of Steel. Lois figured out who he was quite easily, and she didn't have the advantage of the tech assets that LexCorp would have.
<<Also, question: If Batman is down with killing, why is the Joker still alive? You'd think Joker would be dead body numero uno for killing Batman's son. And yet???>>
I forgot to mention this part, yeah. If this is a Batman who's willing to kill, why the F would the Joker still be alive?!?!
Actually, if that one crazy rumor is true, I would know why...
I forgot to mention this part, yeah. If this is a Batman who's willing to kill, why the F would the Joker still be alive?!?!
Actually, if that one crazy rumor is true, I would know why...
there's a rumor that the "Joker" played by Jared Leto is actually Jason Todd, twisted by the real Joker. So maybe he DID kill the Real Joker.
He also seemed to know (somehow) that Bruce Wayne was Batman.
^ He was investigating the batman so he must have figured it out along the way.
Carla Gugino's voice is supposed to be in the movie somewhere. Did anyone hear her?
Maybe. Still, Snyder might've done a better job if he hadn't had to shift gears and turn his Superman sequel into a Batman reboot and Justice League prequel.
I think someone suggested earlier that this Batman has only become a killer relatively recently, that he's been driven to the point of abandoning his former policy on killing. So maybe that explains it.
Four, it'll give you 3 more months of commenting on it without having seen it?
I don't consider that a perk. I don't like commenting without having seen it. I'm just handicapped by the fact that I don't think I could physically tolerate the sensory overload of the movie in a theater. But I freely admit that my reactions to the secondhand info I have are tentative and subject to change once I do manage to see the film. I just hope you'll bear with me in the interim.
Heck, if anything, reading all the negative reviews of the film in advance of seeing it will probably lower my expectations enough that I won't think too badly of it when I actually see it. That's happened with me before -- for instance, I didn't really mind The Last Airbender that much. It certainly wasn't very good, but it was refreshingly not as abysmal as the reviews insisted. And avoiding it in the theater may help me think better of it as well. The climax of Man of Steel was such a relentless sensory barrage that I felt assaulted by the film, and that's a factor in my visceral hatred for its third act. By waiting until I can soften the sensory impact of BvS as much as possible, I'm increasing the chance that I'll have a positive reaction to it.
Last edited:
And yet here you are, one of the most prolific posters in this thread.
Either go and watch it or stop commenting until you do.
She's the robot thingy on the Kryptonian ship that tells Lex creating Doomsday is a bad idea.
Christopher, have you considered bringing earplugs or noise-reducing headphones into the cinema and applying them at appropriate scenes?
I gave it a 'C' it was a mediocre film at best. The script REALLY needed a few more drafts and they really needed to settle on a main storyline and service that - and not try to do 'the kitchen sink' analogy of:
- Batman vs Superman
- The Doomsday storyline
- The introduction of ONLY the other 3 characters that will most likely be "The Justice League"
ALL in a single very meandering film. It smacked of 'Spiderrman 3' syndrome with the studio saying; "We HAVE to have all thios in a SINGLE film.
Also, sorry, but the way the scriptwriter handled Lex Luthor <--- he came across more like 'The Joker' than Lex Luthor to me (and a small nitpick, but WHY is the last few Superman outings featuring the character is he always depicted with hair until the VERY END of the film?) And BTW - they do not shave a new prisoner bald when they're incarcerated to begin with; so even there I was like really? This Is why/how Lex Luthor becomes bald?
I really thought WB was finally going to give us a great film, as I like the opening (past the obligatory Batman origin sequence which I did like) with Bruce Wayne being in Metropolis when Zod attacked and seeing the massive and wanton destruction being inflicted by the Kryptonians <--- And that was a really great setup as to why batman would see Superman as a real threat to humanity. I also liked that they showed Lex Luthor trying to frame Superman for more wanton acts - but as soon as Lex luthier appeared on screen in person the film started to meander and fall apart in many ways, Also, I thought it would have been better for the story is Lex ALSO tried to make it appear the destruction of the Senate building (and murder of the somewhat sympathetic Senator (who blocked Luthor's import permit for the Kryptonite) WAS ALSO done by Superman and would have 'sealed the deal' as to Batman wanting to take him out (and would have worked well with Batman's first unsuccessful - then second successful attempt to steal the Kryptonite from Luthor.) Plus, that was the scene where to me (with the jar the sentator saw, etc.) where I said, that's not Lex Luthor, that's the Joker. Yes, Lex isn't above killing someone in his way, but he's never vindictive or that petty about it - he does it - and in a way you really can't pin it on him <-- THAT would be in character with Lex Luthor.
Also, the CIA gives Luthor FULL access to the Kryptonian ship with ZERO supervision whatsoever? (Especially when the CIA and Military also know Luthor was responsible for the dead terrorists that was pinned on Superman?) And again, I wouldn't mind if they ALSO showed some 'secret government organization' out to frame/discredit Superman, but they really didn't. The meta-human cameos didn't do much for me either; and just felt tacked on because the studios wanted to say - "See fans, we WILL do a 'Justice League' film eventually...". Then there's the whole 'Lex Kidnaps Clark's mother to make sure he confronts Batman (so Batman can kill him with the Kryptonite) - and Kidnaps and throws Lois off a building to 'bring Superman to him'; so he can send Superman to confront Batman.
^^^
This ENTIRE thing was contrived and somewhat unnecessary IMO because the confrontation motivation HAD ALREADY BEEN setup nicely in that Superman did feel Batman was a Vigilante; and had confronted batman himself saying "The next time they put your signal in the sky DON'T answer it - the Bat's dead!' Which prompted a great response in the film from Batman that I enjoyed - "Do you bleed?" (Superman flies off) "You will." <--- There was your setup. Hell, Batman even put his own Bat Signal on the roof to DRAW a response from Superman - so again the whole Luthor scheme to kidnap Clark's mother was unnecessary. (My point being with a few tweaks they COULD have made the script and film a lot tighter - the foundation was there - but either the studio or the screenwriter wanted to just pile it on with Doomsday and their interpretation of the 'Death of Superman' comic book arc (which if they make more films will come).
Personally I also liked what little they did with the Wonder Woman character (which wasn't much - and I'll bet Doomsday was added just to get her into an action sequence in the film and say 'Here's Wonder Woman'); but again, I think they could have salvaged something where she breaks up the Superman/Batman fight directly; and then they ALL realize Lex was framing Superman and go together to bring him in (Hell, have them fight Lex in his Supersuit Armor - which he's been shown using many times in the comics.) I'm also not against a Superman vs Doomsday film story or a 'Death of Superman' film story - but IMO cramming it all into this film was a bit much and didn't do the final result any favors.
Lastly, I laughed when it was Batman basically saying to Diana: "Hey, we need to form a 'Justice League'..", because anyone who KNOWS this overall comics history of the League; batman would be one of the LAST people to instigate that, and further, once it was formed; would be a part time supporter at best.
Again, I didn't hate the film. I just was disappointed that it was as mediocre as it was when a good foundation was in there.
It's just interesting to me how much I enjoy WB/DCs handling of their current Live Action shows on television, while their big budget film attempts of late turn out mediocre at best. YMMV.
- Batman vs Superman
- The Doomsday storyline
- The introduction of ONLY the other 3 characters that will most likely be "The Justice League"
ALL in a single very meandering film. It smacked of 'Spiderrman 3' syndrome with the studio saying; "We HAVE to have all thios in a SINGLE film.
Also, sorry, but the way the scriptwriter handled Lex Luthor <--- he came across more like 'The Joker' than Lex Luthor to me (and a small nitpick, but WHY is the last few Superman outings featuring the character is he always depicted with hair until the VERY END of the film?) And BTW - they do not shave a new prisoner bald when they're incarcerated to begin with; so even there I was like really? This Is why/how Lex Luthor becomes bald?
I really thought WB was finally going to give us a great film, as I like the opening (past the obligatory Batman origin sequence which I did like) with Bruce Wayne being in Metropolis when Zod attacked and seeing the massive and wanton destruction being inflicted by the Kryptonians <--- And that was a really great setup as to why batman would see Superman as a real threat to humanity. I also liked that they showed Lex Luthor trying to frame Superman for more wanton acts - but as soon as Lex luthier appeared on screen in person the film started to meander and fall apart in many ways, Also, I thought it would have been better for the story is Lex ALSO tried to make it appear the destruction of the Senate building (and murder of the somewhat sympathetic Senator (who blocked Luthor's import permit for the Kryptonite) WAS ALSO done by Superman and would have 'sealed the deal' as to Batman wanting to take him out (and would have worked well with Batman's first unsuccessful - then second successful attempt to steal the Kryptonite from Luthor.) Plus, that was the scene where to me (with the jar the sentator saw, etc.) where I said, that's not Lex Luthor, that's the Joker. Yes, Lex isn't above killing someone in his way, but he's never vindictive or that petty about it - he does it - and in a way you really can't pin it on him <-- THAT would be in character with Lex Luthor.
Also, the CIA gives Luthor FULL access to the Kryptonian ship with ZERO supervision whatsoever? (Especially when the CIA and Military also know Luthor was responsible for the dead terrorists that was pinned on Superman?) And again, I wouldn't mind if they ALSO showed some 'secret government organization' out to frame/discredit Superman, but they really didn't. The meta-human cameos didn't do much for me either; and just felt tacked on because the studios wanted to say - "See fans, we WILL do a 'Justice League' film eventually...". Then there's the whole 'Lex Kidnaps Clark's mother to make sure he confronts Batman (so Batman can kill him with the Kryptonite) - and Kidnaps and throws Lois off a building to 'bring Superman to him'; so he can send Superman to confront Batman.
^^^
This ENTIRE thing was contrived and somewhat unnecessary IMO because the confrontation motivation HAD ALREADY BEEN setup nicely in that Superman did feel Batman was a Vigilante; and had confronted batman himself saying "The next time they put your signal in the sky DON'T answer it - the Bat's dead!' Which prompted a great response in the film from Batman that I enjoyed - "Do you bleed?" (Superman flies off) "You will." <--- There was your setup. Hell, Batman even put his own Bat Signal on the roof to DRAW a response from Superman - so again the whole Luthor scheme to kidnap Clark's mother was unnecessary. (My point being with a few tweaks they COULD have made the script and film a lot tighter - the foundation was there - but either the studio or the screenwriter wanted to just pile it on with Doomsday and their interpretation of the 'Death of Superman' comic book arc (which if they make more films will come).
Personally I also liked what little they did with the Wonder Woman character (which wasn't much - and I'll bet Doomsday was added just to get her into an action sequence in the film and say 'Here's Wonder Woman'); but again, I think they could have salvaged something where she breaks up the Superman/Batman fight directly; and then they ALL realize Lex was framing Superman and go together to bring him in (Hell, have them fight Lex in his Supersuit Armor - which he's been shown using many times in the comics.) I'm also not against a Superman vs Doomsday film story or a 'Death of Superman' film story - but IMO cramming it all into this film was a bit much and didn't do the final result any favors.
Lastly, I laughed when it was Batman basically saying to Diana: "Hey, we need to form a 'Justice League'..", because anyone who KNOWS this overall comics history of the League; batman would be one of the LAST people to instigate that, and further, once it was formed; would be a part time supporter at best.
Again, I didn't hate the film. I just was disappointed that it was as mediocre as it was when a good foundation was in there.
It's just interesting to me how much I enjoy WB/DCs handling of their current Live Action shows on television, while their big budget film attempts of late turn out mediocre at best. YMMV.
Last edited:
Another thing... I guess they don't ground flights when there's a big battle going on in the city. Or maybe they did and we just didn't see it.
BvS is expected to beat Avengers' worldwide opening; repeat business is already stronger than usually expected for one of these.
http://deadline.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-opening-weekend-box-office-records-1201726300/
http://deadline.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-opening-weekend-box-office-records-1201726300/
Well, I saw it. Pretty packed for the first showing in the morning on a Sunday, I'd think, but maybe people were trying to get it out of the way early to make way for Easter dinner.
It...wasn't that bad. Like MoS, there's a good movie in there that has something to say, but it isn't being told as well as it could be. It is possible to convey weighty subject matter without evoking such a grimdark atmosphere.
And it definitely could have used some trimming, which could have been done in a way that wouldn't have lost any important story beats. For example, did we really need the credits montage to retell Batman's origin? Seriously? I know they want to tell their own story, but whatever continuity they may take place in, there have been SEVEN major Batman films in the last 27 years (not to mention his presence in other media in that time, notably various animated series)...we know this shit, get on with it. Take a cue from the Adam West series and drop an early passing reference to Bruce's parents having been killed by dastardly criminals if you must. Bruce's brief flashback during the "Martha" scene could have been all that we saw of Batman's origin and it would have gotten the point across.
One bit that struck me was how they played "Night and Day" at the party where Bruce and Clark first meet...which might be a nice wink if these versions of Superman and Batman were really as different as day and night, as they've often been portrayed in the comics. Here it seems like Superman lives in Batman's world...Metropolis isn't the day to Gotham's night.
And what the hell was Lex's ultimate motivation anyway? I'm not convinced that he was initially motivated by some contact with the Fourth World...that knowledge could be something that he picked up during the film from the Kryptonian ship. Seems like he wanted to kill Superman because that's what Lex Luthor does. Byrne's Luthor, to use an example, only wanted to destroy Superman after it was clear that Superman wouldn't work for him.
(BTW, in that last scene, Luthor is saying "Ding ding ding," in reference to bells, not "Ping ping ping.")
Luthor definitely did come off like something of a Joker wannabe, but I wonder if they were partially going for something else? Lex Luthor as an eccentric, wisecracking billionaire genius...a little stab at the competition's most popular character, perhaps...?
There was a very small smattering of applause at the end of my showing, and relatively few and weak audience reactions to some parts. The senator's "tea" jar got the most audible reaction.
In that scene with the warning (which seemed to be happening after Bruce's vision, not during it), I wouldn't have known who the Flash was supposed to be if I hadn't read it here.
On the subject of who knows whose secret identities...there were rumors after MoS that Perry was supposed to be in the know, but if he was, he was keeping his cards pretty close to the vest.
As for the greater DC franchise...I haven't had any interest in Suicide Squad, don't expect that to change...looks like next up after that are Wonder Woman and Justice League next year...think I'll see those and go from there.
In the wake of the events of this film, I have to wonder if they shouldn't have done Shazam! sooner. It seems like, in-universe, there's a void he could have attempted to fill, that probably won't need filling by the time he's introduced.
It...wasn't that bad. Like MoS, there's a good movie in there that has something to say, but it isn't being told as well as it could be. It is possible to convey weighty subject matter without evoking such a grimdark atmosphere.
And it definitely could have used some trimming, which could have been done in a way that wouldn't have lost any important story beats. For example, did we really need the credits montage to retell Batman's origin? Seriously? I know they want to tell their own story, but whatever continuity they may take place in, there have been SEVEN major Batman films in the last 27 years (not to mention his presence in other media in that time, notably various animated series)...we know this shit, get on with it. Take a cue from the Adam West series and drop an early passing reference to Bruce's parents having been killed by dastardly criminals if you must. Bruce's brief flashback during the "Martha" scene could have been all that we saw of Batman's origin and it would have gotten the point across.
One bit that struck me was how they played "Night and Day" at the party where Bruce and Clark first meet...which might be a nice wink if these versions of Superman and Batman were really as different as day and night, as they've often been portrayed in the comics. Here it seems like Superman lives in Batman's world...Metropolis isn't the day to Gotham's night.
And what the hell was Lex's ultimate motivation anyway? I'm not convinced that he was initially motivated by some contact with the Fourth World...that knowledge could be something that he picked up during the film from the Kryptonian ship. Seems like he wanted to kill Superman because that's what Lex Luthor does. Byrne's Luthor, to use an example, only wanted to destroy Superman after it was clear that Superman wouldn't work for him.
(BTW, in that last scene, Luthor is saying "Ding ding ding," in reference to bells, not "Ping ping ping.")
Luthor definitely did come off like something of a Joker wannabe, but I wonder if they were partially going for something else? Lex Luthor as an eccentric, wisecracking billionaire genius...a little stab at the competition's most popular character, perhaps...?
There was a very small smattering of applause at the end of my showing, and relatively few and weak audience reactions to some parts. The senator's "tea" jar got the most audible reaction.
In that scene with the warning (which seemed to be happening after Bruce's vision, not during it), I wouldn't have known who the Flash was supposed to be if I hadn't read it here.
On the subject of who knows whose secret identities...there were rumors after MoS that Perry was supposed to be in the know, but if he was, he was keeping his cards pretty close to the vest.
As for the greater DC franchise...I haven't had any interest in Suicide Squad, don't expect that to change...looks like next up after that are Wonder Woman and Justice League next year...think I'll see those and go from there.
In the wake of the events of this film, I have to wonder if they shouldn't have done Shazam! sooner. It seems like, in-universe, there's a void he could have attempted to fill, that probably won't need filling by the time he's introduced.
They've been using that term in DC Comics since at least the '90s...it's not an Arrowverse-specific thing.
Last edited: