Spoilers Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Grading & Discussion

What I'm hearing a lot is that it's slow-paced and meandering and takes too long to get to the action, and that its attempts to address points of substance are sabotaged by lack of nuance. So it's not just that it's serious, it's that its attempts at seriousness don't succeed.

I'm also hearing near-universal scorn for Eisenberg's Luthor. One review called him a "Schumacheresque" villain, although another acknowledged that at least his presence brought some trace of comic relief to the otherwise bleak proceedings.

Reviewers seem split on Gal Gadot, though. A number are dismissing her as "blank" or mediocre, but others find her presence to be the bright spot of the film, despite the fact that she's essentially tacked on to the story.

 

I'm finding the reviews saying the film's dull but Affleck's great are confusing me.

I find both a dull Batman Superman movie and Affleck not sucking equally unbelievable...

 

From what I've read so far, it's almost a consensus that Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor sucks major ass.

 

Can I just say, having got back from the midnight screening here in New Zealand, that...

... I'm in 100% agreement. Me and my partner were discussing almost all of these points on the way home. Especially agree on your point regarding the humor. The cornball marvel banter is something people have been acclimated to where the humor is spoon fed. This was a refreshing change. Plenty of people laughing in the theater, especially Alfred's cynical quips.

I'll tell ya, I loved Nolan's Batman trilogy. But damn it if I don't love this new incarnation of the Dark Knight.

Luthor's characterization and lines could have used some work. I'm not in a rush to see him again.

But, all in all, great movie. Wonder Woman stole the show, of course.

 

That's reassuring to hear. The reviews make it sound like it's just another over the top and incoherent Sucker Punch, but I have a hard time believing it's really that bad.

And the "lack of fun" criticism in particular I find really baffling. I know not everyone here felt the same way, but for me the "fun" of MOS was just in how visually awe-inspiring and amazing Snyder made that movie look and feel, and in how thrilling much of the action was. And I suspect I'll get a similar charge out of BvS.

I don't need characters smiling and cracking jokes all the time to consider a movie fun.

 

That's the thing I hated the most about Age of Ultron. It got to the point where the "wheadon-isms" got really really annoying.

 

Yeah I'm a huge Whedon fan, but by Age of Ultron his jokey style was really starting to feel tired and predictable, and made it hard to take anything in that movie all that seriously.

 

Couldn't care less about what others think. I'll form my own opinion and if I like it, I like it. If it hate it, I hate it. All this talk about what other people think about it and how people are actually discussing the opinion of others...... Sofar, it seems that most people involved in this topic haven't even seen the movie themselves....

Anyway, is there a mid or end credit scene??

 

No.

 

Great, I can get home 10 minutes earlier.

 

That's not what the critics are saying at all, as far as I can discern. Yes, many are saying they find it dull, but not because it lacks humor -- rather, they're saying it's dull because it lacks weight, because its attempts to tackle serious philosophical questions are too superficial and ungrounded to be interesting. They're saying it's dull because the plot meanders and jumps incoherently from scene to scene without much narrative flow, and because the characters and their motivations are underdeveloped. They're saying it's dull because the action sequences not only take too long to arrive, but are clumsily choreographed and rely mainly on sensory overload to the point of numbing the viewer. And they're saying that the parts that do attempt to be funny -- mainly Eisenberg's Luthor -- are not successful. If the critics just favored lightness over dark, they'd be praising Luthor as one of the best things about the movie. Instead, there seems to be a broad (though not universal) consensus that he's one of the very worst things about it.

Of course, your mileage may vary, and you're free to decide for yourself. I just wanted to make it clear what the critics were actually saying. The negative reactions are not just about lack of humor.

 

To me, the trailers for the film have made this look like a spiritual sequel to Watchmen more than anything. While I didn't like Snyder's execution of Watchmen, I admired his ambition. I'm seeing this tomorrow night, and I'm looking forward to it.

 

Hitfix article about Snyder, and BvS http://www.hitfix.com/harpy/zack-snyder-said-words-about-superman-kansas-morals-and-star-wars

 

^^
Hitfix hating on Snyder?
Must be any weekday.

 

I never said it was. I was just singling that out that one complaint to say that it feels like the critics (much like with MOS) don't seem to find Snyder's dark and serious and showy style to be as inherently thrilling and fun to watch as I do.

 

I definitely agree with the article that argues against snyder's points, especially when it says this

"The idea that violence equals maturity is not a new concept, but it is a tired one."

Also, Snyder trying to compare Man of Steel's destruction to Star wars Episode VIII is really stupid, the situations couldn't have been more different.

 

But as I've said, I haven't noticed many critics, if any, actually saying that at all. On the contrary, many of them are praising Snyder's cinematic style even as they criticize the story for being poorly assembled. It's simply false to say that they're criticizing the film for being too dark. That's not what it's about at all, at least not in the reviews I've been reading. On the contrary, many of them are criticizing the film for failing to commit to its dark premise. They're saying that, instead of really confronting the moral issues and loss of life in these massive, destructive battles, it's just paying lip service to them and then tossing in a casual reference to the areas being evacuated so that the heroes can wage mass destruction without it raising any moral problems.

 

^^
Man of Steel: "Why didn't Superman direct the fight away from the civilians? This is stupid!"
Batman v Superman: "Why did the heroes direct the fight away from the civilians? This is stupid!"

 

I wonder how this will end: https://twitter.com/MuseZack/status/712492060943585281

 

Okay, well, maybe there are some reviews like that (though I don't recall reading any of them myself). But it wouldn't be a fair characterization of all of them.