Spoilers Batman v Superman and Captain America Civil War

[M'rk son of Mogh]

So a take on a character that goes outside the straitjacket of "The Way Things Ought To Be (patent pending)" is not just disappointing anymore to some people. It's now reached the level of "offensive".

To all future adapters of fictional sources--never dare to be different, you might offend someone in the audience.

Good to know.

Heath Ledger's new take (especially compared to what had come before on the screen) was incredibly well done. And I love Ben Kingsley's off the wall take on Mandarin.

On the other end of the spectrum, Jamie Fox take on Electro? I put him on the exact same level as the current Lex. Over the top awful.

New does not equal bad, it's strange you would think that.
Bad equals bad. Dare to be different. Just be good at it!

It's not like there's only 2 people in the audience singing this tune, either.

 

[ichab]

BvS wasn't any more complex than CW; CW was easier to digest simply because it was better written and edited.

No. CW was easier to digest because it was mostly one mindless fight scene after another with the story taking a back seat to all the action. There was nothing complex or interspective about it.

And I dont consider scenes that are cut so quickly that you can barely make out whats going on to be good editing.

 

[ichab]

Heath Ledger's new take (especially compared to what had come before on the screen) was incredibly well done. And I love Ben Kingsley's off the wall take on Mandarin.

On the other end of the spectrum, Jamie Fox take on Electro? I put him on the exact same level as the current Lex. Over the top awful.

New does not equal bad, it's strange you would think that.
Bad equals bad. Dare to be different. Just be good at it!

It's not like there's only 2 people in the audience singing this tune, either.

I agree. As much as I loved BvsS the new Lex was my least favorite part and really brought the movie down a notch. Maybe there's a version in the comics he was imitating that Im not aware of but lex to me has always been a cool and calm miniacle genius. Not some quirky fast talking brat.

 

[Ovation]

Heath Ledger's new take (especially compared to what had come before on the screen) was incredibly well done. And I love Ben Kingsley's off the wall take on Mandarin.

On the other end of the spectrum, Jamie Fox take on Electro? I put him on the exact same level as the current Lex. Over the top awful.

New does not equal bad, it's strange you would think that.
Bad equals bad. Dare to be different. Just be good at it!

It's not like there's only 2 people in the audience singing this tune, either.

I don't think new is bad. I have been among the staunchest defenders of the Snyder take on Superman. I think Luthor was the weakest example of the "different" takes on the DC characters, though I suspect that some of the weakness is owing to editing choices. I do think it's bad to view a different take as "offensive" just because it didn't meet expectations or succeed in its attempt at something new. It is the categorization of his performance as "offensive" to which I object. It's just more of the tiresome hyperbole that permeates commentary needlessly.

 

[Skywalker]

No. CW was easier to digest because it was mostly one mindless fight scene after another with the story taking a back seat to all the action. There was nothing complex or interspective about it.

And I dont consider scenes that are cut so quickly that you can barely make out whats going on to be good editing.

Bzzt. Try again.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

That's kinda my point.
You wrote a really big passage explaining your view of Zemo's actions and why they make sense.

But then...


... you clearly aren't interested in doing the same for Lex.
Neither his motivation, nor his plan are any more complex than Zemo's, and to top it off you didn't even mention that this Zemo "doesn't feel" like comics Zemo, but you made a point of it when referring to Luthor.

And that's kind of how a lot of people respond to these things, the basically same issues that occur in both films have "a perfectly reasonable explanation" in the things one likes, but are "wrong" in things one doesn't.

It's not that I'm not interested in doing the same for lex. It's that I can't. I have no idea what his motivation is. The movie just sort of assumes that he obviously must hate Superman and Batman, because, well, because. His plans... they don't just stretch believability. They literally make no sense. What was his endgame, really? What was his goal, even? Was he trying to unleash unstoppable destruction on the world? Did he want Batman dead? Did he want Superman and Batman dead? Or was he really just a crazy person who thought it would be funny to see heroes fight each other? If he wanted to manipulate them into fighting each other naturally, why did he resort to kidnapping Martha and creating Doomsday? If he just wanted destruction and mayhem, why the long setup trying to turn Batman (and the world) against Superman? If he wanted Superman dead at all costs, why didn't he use the kryptonite himself instead of trying to make Batman his patsy? What was he going to do with Doomsday when the fight was over?

He comes out of nowhere and goes in a dozen different directions. It's just nonsensical. The only thing that makes me think it could even theoretically be redeemed is the final scene in the jail which suggests that, yeah, he really is just completely nuts. But it still doesn't tell me anything about why (I guess it might have something to do with Darkseid?) - if we get to see that in a future movie, and it's done satisfyingly, then it would go some way towards redeeming this one. Until then, there's not much more I can say about him.

As to comparing things to the comics - I can't compare Zemo to the comics, I've never read a comic with him in it. I was surprised to see that he had no ties to Hydra, since I did some minor reading up on the basics of the character prior to watching. But he was a great character, so I really couldn't care less that he wasn't what I expected. Which was my point - when the character is well executed, people are much more forgiving.

And I'm not saying Lex was terrible. I liked Eisenberg's performance. He did a great job. But the script did not support him at all, the character suffered for it, and the audience was irritated by it.

 

[RAMA]

In terms of responsibility for their actions, Superman is on a different level than the heroes in Captain America, he could easily defeat them all, which makes it harder for any kind of oversight. He has to be willing to follow the laws. As the film mentions, he's seen as something of a "god" to Earth people despite being raised in middle America.

As for the movies themselves CW is very entertaining, large scale, but not particularly stylish as with most Marvel movies. BvS was more stylish, dark and less comedic. Both make it obvious that superheroes are still big and here to stay.

Zemo's subtle manipulations are kind of hard to believe. There is so much coincidence for them to come out right, and then we have to come to the point where Iron Man can even make it to his hide out, and at the same time as Captain America and Bucky.

I give a slight edge to BvS but the difference isn't really that big.

 

[dahj]

I have no idea what his motivation is.

Basically, daddy issues.
Growing up as a son of a powerful tyrant he grew to resent power and savior figures that did nothing to save him.

They literally make no sense. What was his endgame, really?

Destroy Superman, both as an icon and also to literally kill him.

What was his goal, even?

Destroy Superman.

Was he trying to unleash unstoppable destruction on the world?

No.

Did he want Batman dead?

Didn't care either way. Batman was a means to an end for him.

Did he want Superman and Batman dead?

Just Superman.

Or was he really just a crazy person who thought it would be funny to see heroes fight each other?

He was not crazy as in batshit crazy let's do whatever la-di-da. He had a singular goal that made sense from how the character was depicted and everything he did made sense to achieve his goal.
He progressively started losing his mind in his obsession throughout the movie, and his actions became more extreme, but they had a purpose, they were not random.

If he wanted to manipulate them into fighting each other naturally, why did he resort to kidnapping Martha and creating Doomsday?

He created Doomsday after Batman stole the kryptonite as a contingency. He had no way of knowing if Batman will decide to fight Superman, will he save the Kryptonite for later, what he was gonna do with it, or if it will even work.

He kidnapped Martha after Batman dared Superman to a confrontation to make sure they fight. Again he didn't know what Batman's plan was, if he's just gonna warn him, slap superman around a bit or actually try to destroy him.

If he just wanted destruction and mayhem, why the long setup trying to turn Batman (and the world) against Superman?

Turning the world against Superman was his plan, killing him was not enough, he had to show the world he's not a god, or a saviour, he literally says that in the movie.

If he wanted Superman dead at all costs, why didn't he use the kryptonite himself instead of trying to make Batman his patsy?

Lex isn't a hands on guy, obviously. Especially when it comes to fighting.
He turned to the most skillfull and resourceful human being that he knew of.

What was he going to do with Doomsday when the fight was over?

He presumed he could control it(through his blood) or destroy it.
Nobody knew a nuke wouldn't destroy them until they launched it.

He comes out of nowhere and goes in a dozen different directions. It's just nonsensical.

It's not.

 

[Tosk]

He presumed he could control it(through his blood) or destroy it.

Because...?

 

[dahj]

Because...?

... nothing is indestructible, not even Superman.
Why would he assume otherwise for Doomsday?

He was obviously unconcerned with collateral damage.

 

[Tosk]

Yeah, but how does he control it "through his blood"?

... nothing is indestructible, not even Superman.
Why would he assume otherwise for Doomsday?

To kill Superman, he tried using 'the most skillful and resourceful human being that he knew of', AND a crazy Kryptonian monster. So what would he use to take down the crazy monster afterwards? A bigger monster? A gorilla that thrives on snake meat?

 

[RAMA]

I would agree Luthor progressively lost his mind, which confuses people about his motivations. I don't think he had full control at the very end as you suggest because by then, he saw evidence of a "greater god" than Superman. It is possible that Luthor wanted Zod as a contingency to create a monster capable of defeating Darkseid..Doomsday. It is possible, depending on when he found out about Darkseid, that he was rejecting all superhumans because of what Superman and especially Darkseid represent, but at the very end he almost seemed to give up and chose the scarier of the two..the assumed winner.

Basically, daddy issues.
Growing up as a son of a powerful tyrant he grew to resent power and savior figures that did nothing to save him.



Destroy Superman, both as an icon and also to literally kill him.



Destroy Superman.



No.



Didn't care either way. Batman was a means to an end for him.



Just Superman.



He was not crazy as in batshit crazy let's do whatever la-di-da. He had a singular goal that made sense from how the character was depicted and everything he did made sense to achieve his goal.
He progressively started losing his mind in his obsession throughout the movie, and his actions became more extreme, but they had a purpose, they were not random.



He created Doomsday after Batman stole the kryptonite as a contingency. He had no way of knowing if Batman will decide to fight Superman, will he save the Kryptonite for later, what he was gonna do with it, or if it will even work.

He kidnapped Martha after Batman dared Superman to a confrontation to make sure they fight. Again he didn't know what Batman's plan was, if he's just gonna warn him, slap superman around a bit or actually try to destroy him.



Turning the world against Superman was his plan, killing him was not enough, he had to show the world he's not a god, or a saviour, he literally says that in the movie.



Lex isn't a hands on guy, obviously. Especially when it comes to fighting.
He turned to the most skillfull and resourceful human being that he knew of.



He presumed he could control it(through his blood) or destroy it.
Nobody knew a nuke wouldn't destroy them until they launched it.



It's not.

 

[dahj]

A gorilla

Grodd was unavailable.

 

[Xerxes82]

Zemo's subtle manipulations are kind of hard to believe. There is so much coincidence for them to come out right, and then we have to come to the point where Iron Man can even make it to his hide out, and at the same time as Captain America and Bucky.

Again, there's really nothing subtle about them at all. And it's not about needing coincidences, it's about taking opportunities that present themselves. His actual manipulations are simple, straightforward and with purpose. And the movie's climax is merely him being opportunistic. As I've said before in this very thread, Bucky, Steve and Tony showing up at the Siberia bunker together IS IN FACT coincidence. Zemo didn't plan on it happening that way, and his actual plan doesn't require it. But since they were kind enough to show up, he was more than happy to spring his weapon on them and get to personally enjoy the show.

People keep wanting to say that Zemo is trying to be some elaborate mastermind, but that's not at all what the movie has presented us with.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Plenty of characters have been put on film differing from their comic counterparts in some significant way.

He's not that different Luthor always seems to be batshit insane just under the surface until he starts to actually show it.

Need I remind you he caused a bunch of people top fall out of the sky becuase he was convinced Superman was hiding just to screw with him, or how he was going to let an asteroid devastate the planet while he focused on screwing with Superman, or the screwy shit with the clone body.

Seriously the man has always been a wack job, this version just shows it more.

You're giving Zemo WAY more manipulator credit than he actually deserves.

I think thats because most people misinterpret his motive rant as meaning he had grander plans, when he was just pointing out that his motivation were just more personal.

 

[Xerxes82]

I think thats because most people misinterpret his motive rant as meaning he had grander plans, when he was just pointing out that his motivation were just more personal.

Oh, I agree. I just keep bringing it up because I loved Zemo in Civil War and enjoy sharing my take on the character. No, he's not deep. But he's driven and focused, and easily the least powerful threat any of the Avengers have ever faced. But he wastes no time. There isn't any pomp or circumstance. The whole movie is basically him reaching for the gun. And the moment he has it in his hands, he simply fires it. It's beautiful, in its way.

 

[davejames]

The other thing I think both movies shared was a surprisingly slow and dull first hour. They both had to go to such great lengths to justify and rationalize why this battle needed to happen (while also making it seem much more meaningful and important than it really is), that I think the two movies ended up suffering a bit for it as a result. And even after all that, I still didn't buy the two conflicts escalating as much as they did, or that the two sides would really decide that this was something they needed to go to literal war over and try to kill each other over.

Obviously in the end Civil War ended up executing it's story a whole lot better than BvS, but there was still something really forced and contrived about the whole thing that keeps me from loving the movie as much as I'd like.

 

[JD]

Well he's not the comicbook Zemo, Yet.

Well, he didn't appear to be the grandson of a WWII era enemy of Captain America, which is a pretty big part of the comic version. He didn't wear the purple mask, but he could always get it later.
We can't totally rule out him being a member of a Thunderbolts team later on, but right now I don't know if there are enough surviving villains left to build a team. I guess they could just bring in new characters and use Zemo as the one familiar team member.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Well he's not the comicbook Zemo, Yet.

But, would he want to be comicbook Zemo? I just don't buy it, I mean he did what he set out to do. So I don't see why he would go supervillain.

 

[Tom Hendricks]

But, would he want to be comicbook Zemo? I just don't buy it, I mean he did what he set out to do. So I don't see why he would go supervillain.

I don't disagree with you, however events could happen to change that.