Spoilers Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Both the Mrs and I loved this film. Affleck gave me exactly what I wanted from The Batman and any doubts I had before walking into Cineplex Odeon were happily cast aside. I am often, very often actually, at odds with movie critics and this is another case where this is true. The biggest criticism I have is reserved for Eisenberg's portrayal of Lex Luthor. A tad over the top for me but considering what the upcoming Suicide Squad likely has in store for us, it isn't something that bothers me too much. I am looking forward to what DC will give us in the future.
I'd be interested in seeing a standalone Batfleck movie, preferably a BvS prequel, with Robin.
Oh, and The Flash. Provided they recast him. When I first heard they got Ezra Miller to play Barry, I thought it was a joke.
I dunno... I'm seeing a lot of negative reviews on Facebook from people who aren't professional critics (although several of them are professional writers).
I tried looking over the audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes to get a sense of what the people who gave it higher ratings had to say, maybe try to assess how much of a difference there was in the standards the positive and negative reviewers were using. But I was hampered by the fact that most of the people who gave it 4 or 5 stars didn't really have much to say about why. They mostly just give brief "This film is great" statements without a lot of analysis. And I'm not trying to imply anything here, but some of them don't express themselves very coherently. (There's one who says he "thought it was a great interpenetration." Huh? Did he accidentally see the porn version instead?)
But I did find some more in-depth positive ratings, and though I didn't have the patience to skim through more than the first four pages, I did notice a bit of a trend that I've seen elsewhere as well. Even the reviews that give the movie a high numerical rating tend to agree with the negative reviews about its specific flaws, e.g. lacking plot coherence or being too cluttered or not having a strong Superman performance/characterization. And quite a few of the negative reviews I've read agree on the film's strengths, like Affleck, Gadot, and Irons being standouts. So I think that maybe there's not that great a distance between the reviewers and the audience as the numbers would suggest. After all, the star ratings and "Fresh/Rotten" classifications are oversimplifications of something more complex. (Especially the "Fresh/Rotten" thing, which is too binary to be any good at classifying ambivalent reviews. Some of the critic reviews labeled "Fresh" seem just as critical to me as the ones labeled "Rotten.") The consistent theme I'm seeing is that this movie is a mix of worthwhile and disappointing elements. I think different people are just weighing them differently. Critics are trained to analyze what works and what doesn't, while audiences are generally just concerned with how the experience feels. So if a movie has fun stuff in it but is poorly constructed, a casual moviegoer would give more weight to the former while a professional critic would give more weight to the latter. So I the difference in critics' and audiences' numerical ratings falsely exaggerates the difference in their actual opinions of the movie. I think there's actually a general consensus about what specific parts of the movie work and what parts don't.
(Which is pretty much in keeping with my reaction to Man of Steel, which I described in my blog review as "the best and worst Superman movie ever." When a movie has parts that are brilliant and parts that are terrible, it's hard to reduce its analysis to a simple up/down vote.)
Huh? Lex Luthor isn't in TDKR. The book portrays Superman as a stooge of a corrupt US president (who looks and speaks like Ronald Reagan). The president orders Superman to take out Batman because Batman's ability to bring order in Gotham while the rest of the country is descending into post-EMP chaos is a political embarrassment, and Superman obeys because Miller writes him as an unquestioning tool of the system. (Well, mostly. Superman does redeem himself a tad at the end.)
Last edited:
If you think the actual movie is depressing, don't even try the Axel Braun porn parody. Between Superman abusing Maxima to get a blowjob, Supergirl being submissive to President Luthor even though she knows he's evil, and the Joker killing Lois Lane (yep, that's right), that was all the things one does not seek in a porn parody.
Hey Christopher, you should totally go see it. Today would be ideal, considering it's Easter. If you've read the spoilers, you'll know what I mean. Ahahaha
I think you'll come to the conclusion that it is not the best superhero movie, but it is certainly not the worst. It's certainly better than the now 29% rating it has on RT.
Also, Luthor was in The Dark Knight Strikes Again book. The sequel to The Dark Knight Returns.
I think you'll come to the conclusion that it is not the best superhero movie, but it is certainly not the worst. It's certainly better than the now 29% rating it has on RT.
Also, Luthor was in The Dark Knight Strikes Again book. The sequel to The Dark Knight Returns.
It was better than both Ant-Man, and Guardians of the Galaxy. And both Thor movies.
As I've said, I'm not willing to see it in the theater because I gather it will simply be too loud and overpowering for me to endure. I will see it when it comes out on DVD, so I can turn down the volume when I need to.
But Mr. Light said Luthor was in "DKR." I guess he was mixing up the two?
The Superman Returns sequel would have featured Brainiac. The ending of the movie would have been more controversial than the ending of Man of Steel -- the climax of the Returns sequel would have had Superman killing Brainiac who, at the time, has possession of his young son's body. Superman has to sacrifice his son to save the Earth.
Ok, fair enough. I saw it in IMAX and it was pretty overwhelming during the final act. If you can find a small theater to see it in, one not dedicated to "putting you in the film" as you watch, I'd recommend that.
He likely mixed them up.
Luthor was not in TDKReturns. TDKReturns and TDKSAgain were both written by Frank Miller. TDK3 The Master Race is also a sequel to Miller's original book.
Well, watching on DVD has several other advantages. One, I won't have to spend money on it (at least, no more than I already spend for Netflix, or none at all if I get it from the library). Two, I won't have to sit through the whole really long film in one unbroken session. Three, I can hit fast play at the tedious parts.
There was an intermission in my theater. It's pretty common for longer movies. I like it, gives me the opportunity to strech my legs, take a bathroom break and get myself some snacks and beverage.
Yeah, my bladder really wished for an intermission during the screening I attended. I'll have to make a mental note to choose a screening with intermission for rewatching.
I'm seeing a lot of critics, both professional and otherwise, say the movie has no plot.
There is no point where Lex lays out his plan Bond-villain-style.
Bruce does not connect-the-dots audibly during the "Martha" moment.
At the end he does not literally say "I've gotten too hardened and I'm going too far and I've learned something."
If you were looking for things like that (or needed them to explain the plot) it possibly says more about you than it does the movie.
About the most on-the-nose analysis comes from Alfred about Bruce and even then he doesn't literally accuse him of anything.
There is no point where Lex lays out his plan Bond-villain-style.
Bruce does not connect-the-dots audibly during the "Martha" moment.
At the end he does not literally say "I've gotten too hardened and I'm going too far and I've learned something."
If you were looking for things like that (or needed them to explain the plot) it possibly says more about you than it does the movie.
About the most on-the-nose analysis comes from Alfred about Bruce and even then he doesn't literally accuse him of anything.
<<Luthor was not in TDKReturns. TDKReturns and TDKSAgain were both written by Frank Miller. TDK3 The Master Race is also a sequel to Miller's original book.>>
TDKSA established that the reason Superman was under the President's thumb in TDKR was because Lex had Kandor hostage.
TDKSA established that the reason Superman was under the President's thumb in TDKR was because Lex had Kandor hostage.
To be completely fair, Bruce Wayne and Wonder Woman were the best parts of the movie. They had some character development but it too a hell of a time to get there and like I said last night his movie felt like a slog to get through. As for Clark, he was brooding the whole movie. Maybe I just don't like this version of Superman but I didn't recognize this version at all. Maybe that's just the movie being unrelentingly dark, but I didn't see anhinga in Clark that said anything about character growth. Then Lex and Lois were just all over the place, like this movie.
I think there were about 3 different movies in here that could have been told as one and made the movie great. To put everything in here sacrificed everything else.
Having seen BvS twice now, I can say it is definitely a Batman movie first. The Superman bits were him trying to do right and wrestling with how he effects the world. There always seems to be a bad news rain cloud above Superman despite everything he does to make a difference, and he does to some titanic things in BvS. I think the hearings and the bombing at Congress he failed to stop shook his confidence.
I saw it last night and was very disappointed. As a Batman fan who just recently (about five months) starting buying the tpbs of both the older stories and New52, I didn't recognize the character at all.The dialogue, particularly Lex's seemed intended to be deep and thought provoking, but sounded like lines I've read out of bad fanfic. There were parts that were fun,but the majority of it was very hard to follow.
Pro: Ben Affleck as Batman/Bruce Wayne. He might be tied with Michael Keaton for best live action Batman, since he finally gave just as much weight to the character of Bruce as he did Batman. He at least made me excited for any future solo Batman movies we might get.
Pro: Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. Not so much as Diana Prince; she came off like a bond girl or somewhat wooden, but once she was out there fighting there was a moment where she grinned and seemed to be having a grand old time doing battle with a worthy opponent. Liked that bit. She's an Amazon after all, and in that moment, I bought it.
Pro: Jeremy Irons as Alfred. Best lines and characterization. Loved every scene he had.
Cons: Way too long. Also very choppy. I'd settle into a scene, only to have it end abruptly and have an entirely new scene start.
Cons: Lex Luthor. Ugh. He didn't bother me initially, but after the nth time he started with the fluttery hand moments and ADD style of talking I began to dread his every scene.
Cons: They stopped fighting, because Superman's mom and Batman's mom had the same name. wtf? I'm sure some of the people Bats ran over had mother's and sisters and whoever else with that name, too. Blah.
Cons: Speaking of which, Batman kills people. A lot of people. Not even by accident. Runs them over, explodes them, probably broke a neck or two (not just during that Nightmare dream sequence either). I was holding out hope that we'd get a live action take on Under the Red Hood eventually, but after seeing Batman have no troubles with killing, that kind of eliminates the conflict and morals of that story. 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???
Cons: bad CG monster. Doomsday looked awful. The rest of the graphics, not so bad. But Doomsday looked like video game graphics from the early 2000s.
There were also a lot of dumb moments that served no reason other than moving some story bit along. Like why did Jimmy pull out his camera to take photos during a secretive interview with a terrorist, when the obvious result would be his camera getting smashed or taken, and the tracker being discovered? Why not just keep it in your bag??? Superman also came off as a dick. Gets dozens killed, but as long as his gf is okay, then well. *shrug*
They're setting up the Injustice: Gods Among Us storyline, aren't they?
I gave it a solid C. You can do better DC.
Pro: Ben Affleck as Batman/Bruce Wayne. He might be tied with Michael Keaton for best live action Batman, since he finally gave just as much weight to the character of Bruce as he did Batman. He at least made me excited for any future solo Batman movies we might get.
Pro: Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. Not so much as Diana Prince; she came off like a bond girl or somewhat wooden, but once she was out there fighting there was a moment where she grinned and seemed to be having a grand old time doing battle with a worthy opponent. Liked that bit. She's an Amazon after all, and in that moment, I bought it.
Pro: Jeremy Irons as Alfred. Best lines and characterization. Loved every scene he had.
Cons: Way too long. Also very choppy. I'd settle into a scene, only to have it end abruptly and have an entirely new scene start.
Cons: Lex Luthor. Ugh. He didn't bother me initially, but after the nth time he started with the fluttery hand moments and ADD style of talking I began to dread his every scene.
Cons: They stopped fighting, because Superman's mom and Batman's mom had the same name. wtf? I'm sure some of the people Bats ran over had mother's and sisters and whoever else with that name, too. Blah.
Cons: Speaking of which, Batman kills people. A lot of people. Not even by accident. Runs them over, explodes them, probably broke a neck or two (not just during that Nightmare dream sequence either). I was holding out hope that we'd get a live action take on Under the Red Hood eventually, but after seeing Batman have no troubles with killing, that kind of eliminates the conflict and morals of that story. 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???
Cons: bad CG monster. Doomsday looked awful. The rest of the graphics, not so bad. But Doomsday looked like video game graphics from the early 2000s.
There were also a lot of dumb moments that served no reason other than moving some story bit along. Like why did Jimmy pull out his camera to take photos during a secretive interview with a terrorist, when the obvious result would be his camera getting smashed or taken, and the tracker being discovered? Why not just keep it in your bag??? Superman also came off as a dick. Gets dozens killed, but as long as his gf is okay, then well. *shrug*
They're setting up the Injustice: Gods Among Us storyline, aren't they?
I gave it a solid C. You can do better DC.
A lot of people were skeptical of WB's effort to force the kind of universe-building that Marvel did gradually over multiple films. Instead of establishing several solo heroes with subtle linkages that built into a bigger shared universe, they started with a Superman solo film and then, after it wasn't as well-received as they hoped, they panicked and tried to repurpose its sequel as both a Batman reboot and a Justice League prequel, and it ended up trying to be too many things at once. No wonder the standalone Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman look more promising (although of course either one could still disappoint, though I hope they won't).
I regret that we didn't get to see the sequel I feel Man of Steel could've had, a strictly Superman-oriented movie that would've let him grow and learn from his mistakes in MoS, and one where the ethical questions of his use of power and the themes of humanity's divided reactions to him could've really been explored rather than just being excuses to set up the marquee fight with Batman. Maybe it could've included a similar Wonder Woman guest role and a teaser to set up a separate Batman movie. That might've worked better than giving up on Superman solo films altogether and trying to build a whole universe in one film.