Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)

[SNIKT1950]

But Sup's motivation ended with a warning with no real payoff? And the big BVS fight was less about ideological or personal reasons, and more to do with one character, Batman not liking Superman, so it wasn't like they both really wanted to fight. Sups was just there because of his mother, which was a last minute plan by Lex, when he sees the Batsignal...from Metropolis. Ideally, if the main characters are going to have ideological differences, and they both did in the beginning of the film, then it makes more sense for it to have some king of payoff with a big showdown, but it was very one sided, because Sups didn't even want to be there, so there wasn't that much of a build up, imo.

Supes never wanted to fight [or kill] Batman. He only intended to scare him into quitting. It didn't work. The ideological differences are there, they're just not the catalyst for the fight because Batman made up his mind about killing Supes 18 months before. Supes never had any desire to duke it out with him outta fear that he would kill him.

Well, he really only framed him once, because as soon as the Washington explosion happens, they said on the news it was the guy in the wheelchair, so that didn't really work...if his intention was to frame Sups, which it would have been more interesting if everyone thought Sups was responsible.

It worked though. Afterwards you see people protesting on TV suggesting Supes had something to do with the incident.

 

[Destro]

I know the folks that loved this movie would like to think people "just don't get it" or some other nonsense, but the SAME POINTS are being brought up by criticisms of the film. You can see it in this very thread much less across the internet or even people I talk to in my day to day activities. There's no vast conspiracy, no secret illuminati script hidden within the thin dialogue of BvS and no cypher full of genius that us mere mortals cannot comprehend tucked away within the spasms & nervous ticks of Jesse Eissenberg.

I saw this movie for free, so I'm not upset, just thoroughly disappointed. I like Batman, and really enjoy Superman when done well.

I was disappointed due to not only the overall poor execution of the film, but once again, it's portrayal of Supes. I mean, would it kill them to show Superman as what he was intended to be? A defender against social injustice and champion for the working class. I mean, that's a side of Supes we've NEVER seen on film. A Superman that converses with regular people and takes a stance on real human issues, not because it's popular but simply due to it being the right thing to do. I didn't want anymore of this aloof, selfish, grim and sullen Superman.

I grinded through MOS and thought there would be some sort of redemption for the character in this outing. IMO, there was not. Simply put, WB/Snyder doubled down on the grim and depressing trend. The proponents say, "this is a Superman if he existed in the REAL world". Well, I would counter that by saying, why would anyone who could do anything and go anywhere, be grim? "Oh, but he has so many responsibilities!". So what? He's Superman, he'll sack up and do what needs to be done WITH a smile on his face cause he knows there are people out there not gifted with his abilities that are saving lives too. See, that's the disconnect I feel that WB/Snyder doesn't see. By making this Superman so psychologically torn, they've effectively nuetered the character.

Disney/Marvel have absolutely nothing to do with the decisions WB has made in what directions to take these characters in. No one really wants Superman saving cats from trees, or telling hokey jokes. But him basically being Batman in blue and red is the opposite end of the spectrum. You know what? Scratch that comparison. Batman is at least focused, driven, obsessed even. This version of Superman is such a wet noodle, that he could probably be debated out of making a clear cut choice. And the only thing he seems to be focused on, is Lois's cupcake.

 

[Rorywan]

The only thing that really bugged me on my second viewing was Supes shiny suit.
It was like he was wearing bondage vinyl in some scenes.


I think maybe the bad reviews helped me enjoy this movie more, I always support the underdog.
Its not a patch on Zootopia though.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Supes never wanted to fight [or kill] Batman. He only intended to scare him into quitting. It didn't work. The ideological differences are there, they're just not the catalyst for the fight because Batman made up his mind about killing Supes 18 months before. Supes never had any desire to duke it out with him outta fear that he would kill him.

If the ideological differences aren't the catalyst of the fight, then it was pointless to introduce that idea to begin with and waste time on something that doesn't really go anywhere. That BVS fight still works with just Batman not liking Superman since Sups was just there to talk to Batman about Martha/Lex. It's as if the only reason they introduce the idea that Clark has a problem with Batman, is so that both characters have a reason to meet in Gotham...but it's pointless because that idea is eventually dropped. There are other ways they could have gotten those two guys together.

It worked though. Afterwards you see people protesting on TV suggesting Supes had something to do with the incident.

Those were the same people hating on him when he got there, and it was on the news that Superman had nothing to do with it...he was innocent. But let's pretend that the plan worked and that the world thought he was responsible, no one ever proves Sups wasn't responsible for the Washington explosion, the story just moves on from that incident. But like I said, it was public knowledge that Superman was innocent...that's why the government didn't say he should be arrested or accused of murder. Those people hating on him didn't like him to begin with.

 

[Destro]

I keep hearing Zootopia is great.

 

[cmiller99]

Re character motivations:

Gonna address this post because I think it is a good appraisal of the character motivations in the movie, I just want to outline my problems with said motivations:

Bruce blames Supes for the thousands who died because of his fight with Zod. He thinks killing Supes is the right thing to do.

True, this is a very understandable motivation and the one that makes most sense in the movie. However, later in the film Batman proves himself to be hypocritical, coming to the ludicrous conclusion that during the final fight he must 'lure the creature back to Gotham' in order to kill it with the spear. This would lead to devastation similar to that which Batman hated so much and forms his motivation for the entire movie. The logical conclusion is 'one of us must sneak off and bring back the spear to this deserted island'.

So Batman is a hypocrite in the end.

Supes thinks Batman's outta control with the branding.

More hypocrisy. Superman thinks that Batman's killing and branding is out of control. Remember that this is the man who engaged his Kryptonian foes by slamming them into skyscrapers right in the middle of a densely populated city and, in action, has shown no real qualms with killing in the past, while maintaining that he is a beacon of goodness in the world when he's not fighting criminals.

So you think its out of character for Supes to size ****tard Lex up with words after he frames him twice by killing a bunch of people?

Nonsense. Lex is lucky Supes is a moral man. Batman would have thrown him off the roof.

And Supes didn't "help to destroy half of Metropolis". He saved Metropolis from Zod who would have destroyed ALL of it had Supes not snapped his neck.

Yes, I think it is out of character. Superman shouldn't say things like "next time I'll kill you, consider this mercy" or "I ****ing hate you and I want to break every bone in your body, but I won't because IM TEH GOOD GUY". That's not truth, justice and the American Way. That's barely suppressed blood lust.

Just because Superman is more moral than Batman doesn't make Superman particularly righteous or moral.

Superman did help to destroy half of Metropolis; again, in his hypocritical manner, he did save the other half of the city. But he destroyed areas of Smallville and Metropolis just as much as General Zod did - this in fact forms Batman's entire motivation in the film!

So in short, the Superman portions of the movie maintain the line of thought from Man of Steel, and the Batman portions of the movie present a different interpretation - that of many fans, that Superman basically is equally culpable for the destruction in Man of Steel. These two ideologies never really reconcile. They just join forces essentially due to coincidental naming of their mothers.

 

[Destro]

If the ideological differences aren't the catalyst of the fight, then it was pointless to introduce that idea to begin with and waste time on something that doesn't really go anywhere. That BVS fight still works with just Batman not liking Superman since Sups was just there to talk to Batman about Martha/Lex. It's as if the only reason they introduce the idea that Clark has a problem with Batman, is so that both characters have a reason to meet in Gotham...but it's pointless because that idea is eventually dropped. There are other ways they could have gotten those two guys together.

I would've enjoyed seeing Clark do some actual investigative journalism and been on the trail of the Kryptonite as well. Would help to explain why he stops Batman.

 

[SNIKT1950]

I was disappointed due to not only the overall poor execution of the film, but once again, it's portrayal of Supes. I mean, would it kill them to show Superman as what he was intended to be? A defender against social injustice and champion for the working class. I mean, that's a side of Supes we've NEVER seen on film. A Superman that converses with regular people and takes a stance on real human issues, not because it's popular but simply due to it being the right thing to do. I didn't want anymore of this aloof, selfish, grim and sullen Superman.

Hilarious.

The guy is shown saving dozens of people from the flood, rescuing the girl from the burning building, saving the shipwrecked crew by pulling the ship out of the ocean, catching the rocket ship so it wouldn't land on civilians and LITERALLY killing himself to stop Doomsday from destroying everything in sight - but you think he's selfish, aloof, grim and sullen? WTF???

Your hate for this movie is obvious, bruh.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

I would've enjoyed seeing Clark do some actual investigative journalism and been on the trail of the Kryptonite as well. Would help to explain why he stops Batman.

Well, I remember about a year ago seeing pics of Cavill/Clark in Gotham working as a reporter and talking to people when they were filming the movie, but those scene aren't in the film. I don't know what Clark was doing or who he was talking to, but he was doing his job.

 

[cmiller99]

Hilarious.

The guy is shown saving dozens of people from the flood, rescuing the girl from the burning building, saving the shipwrecked crew by pulling the ship out of the ocean, catching the rocket ship so it wouldn't land on civilians and LITERALLY killing himself to stop Doomsday from destroying everything in sight - but you think he's selfish, aloof, grim and sullen? WTF???

Your hate for this movie is obvious, bruh.

Cool it SNIKT, you're doing exactly what you did in the Kylo Ren thread. You're attacking others who have posted differing views and accusing them of blind hatred for doing so. We can all be civil here, it's just a dumb summer blockbuster.

 

[SNIKT1950]

Cool it SNIKT, you're doing exactly what you did in the Kylo Ren thread. You're attacking others who have posted differing views and accusing them of blind hatred for doing so. We can all be civil here, it's just a dumb summer blockbuster.

Attacking? Nah. Accusing? Yes.

The blatant hate for this movie needs opposition.

 

[Destro]

Hilarious.

The guy is shown saving dozens of people from the flood, rescuing the girl from the burning building, saving the shipwrecked crew by pulling the ship out of the ocean, catching the rocket ship so it wouldn't land on civilians and LITERALLY killing himself to stop Doomsday from destroying everything in sight - but you think he's selfish, aloof, grim and sullen? WTF???

Your hate for this movie is obvious, bruh.

You're obviously emotional. Let's take a step back.

Everything we saw in this movie was simply a "splash page" set into a montage. Superman is literally just a god come down from on high doing deeds cause he "guesses it's the right thing to do". As evidenced by his moping and indecision of his true path throughout most of the film.

Superman, in damn near every characterization would stop those people from idolizing him as a god. He would tell them "get up!", "I'm no different than you, just from a little farther away". See, those "splash pages" only work when you have the context to frame them. But whatever. I'm just a hater, right?

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

Attacking? Nah. Accusing? Yes.

The blatant hate for this movie needs opposition.

No, you really are

 

[Destro]

Well, I remember about a year ago seeing pics of Cavill/Clark in Gotham working as a reporter and talking to people when they were filming the movie, but those scene aren't in the film. I don't know what Clark was doing or who he was talking to, but he was doing his job.

Yea, more than likely it shows CK gathering info for his story that he's adamant on writing, despite his Editor in Chief's wishes.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Superman did help to destroy half of Metropolis; again, in his hypocritical manner, he did save the other half of the city. But he destroyed areas of Smallville and Metropolis just as much as General Zod did - this in fact forms Batman's entire motivation in the film!

Well, it wasn't half of Metropolis, and most of that damage was actually caused by Zod's world engine, not Superman. Also, Sups didn't just save half of Metropolis, he saved the whole world by taking down the world engine at the expense of a fraction of Metropolis, so he did save billions of lives. Once he fights Zod, Sups was mostly chasing Zod and it was Zod who was throwing Superman into the buildings, which again...that's what would happen if two creatures with unlimited power fought each other. Sups could have been a bit more careful a few times, but considering he was using his powers for the first time, he did alright, so to suggest that he cause as much damage as Zod, well that's just crazy...no offence.

Sups is responsible for Zod going to earth...but still, he shouldn't be blamed for Zod's actions, after all, Sups did the right thing, the peaceful thing to do, and he turned himself in to both the US military and Zod...and both the US and Zod ended up shooting at Superman in Smallville, so the military is also responsible for the damage in Smallville

 

[SNIKT1950]

More hypocrisy. Superman thinks that Batman's killing and branding is out of control. Remember that this is the man who engaged his Kryptonian foes by slamming them into skyscrapers right in the middle of a densely populated city and, in action, has shown no real qualms with killing in the past, while maintaining that he is a beacon of goodness in the world when he's not fighting criminals.

Nonsense. The guy broke down emotionally after killing Zod for Christ's sake.

Yes, I think it is out of character. Superman shouldn't say things like "next time I'll kill you, consider this mercy" or "I ****ing hate you and I want to break every bone in your body, but I won't because IM TEH GOOD GUY". That's not truth, justice and the American Way. That's barely suppressed blood lust.

More nonsense. Basically you're saying Superman can't show that he has a pair. He needs to sound more diplomatic and restrained or else "he's not really Superman." Nonsense.

 

[tylerdurden]

The blatant hate for this movie needs opposition.

totally agree. i think batman v superman has a number of flaws for sure, but they've been severely blown out of proportion.

if any of you guys want some semblance of a balanced perspective on the film, then check out this review. it's got a pretty clever approach: it takes direct quotes from actual critic's reviews and turns it into an one-on-one debate with the reviewer. it's a great breakdown and analysis of the film's many issues, with some pretty solid answers to the issues...

Batman v Superman v Criticman | www.electroshadow.com

 

[Destro]

Here's a foreign concept. People don't like, what they don't like.

And people like what they like. Folks get way to emotional over stuff they have no control over.

 

[cmiller99]

Your hate for this movie is obvious, bruh.

Attacking? Nah. Accusing? Yes.

The blatant hate for this movie needs opposition.

I think you are attacking, even if you don't mean to. It does come off as a bit aggressive, and I recognise that sarcastic 'bruh' from previous encounters with you. I think you once replied to me with "your points are idiotic, bruh". I don't really harbour any ill will towards you over past debates we've had, but I do think that I'm getting familiar with your posting style when it comes to debates over movies.

Well, it wasn't half of Metropolis, and most of that damage was actually caused by Zod's world engine, not Superman. Also, Sups didn't just save half of Metropolis, he saved the whole world by taking down the world engine at the expense of a fraction of Metropolis, so he did save billions of lives. Once he fights Zod, Sups was mostly chasing Zod and it was Zod who was throwing Superman into the buildings, which again...that's what would happen if two creatures with unlimited power fought each other. Sups could have been a bit more careful a few times, but considering he was using his powers for the first time, he did alright, so to suggest that he cause as much damage as Zod, well that's just crazy...no offence.

Sups is responsible for Zod going to earth...but still, he shouldn't be blamed for Zod's actions, after all, Sups did the right thing, the peaceful thing to do, and he turned himself in to both the US military and Zod...and both the US and Zod ended up shooting at Superman in Smallville

True, maybe I am being a bit harsh. It's been a while since I last watched Man of Steel, and I've only seen it the once. I do think that Superman could have been a lot more careful though - tried to drag the battle further away from the city, for instance. I can't remember any real evidence of him trying to do that in the movie.

Nonsense. The guy broke down emotionally after killing Zod for Christ's sake.

What about the guy he smashed through concrete walls to save Lois Lane? I can't see him living after what surely must be organ crushing trauma.

Most of deaths that were caused around him were more due to his lack of proactive saving rather than malice though, admittedly.

More nonsense. Basically you're saying Superman can't show that he has a pair. He needs to sound more diplomatic and restrained or else "he's not really Superman." Nonsense.

I've just never thought of Superman as the type of guy to say "I'd love to hurt you really really badly". Because that's what he's essentially saying.
I usually dislike throwing things back to the comics as I don't read them, but has he notably done something like that in the past? He certainly didn't in any previous film I've seen.

 

[jye4ever]

Admittedly the extended cut has its work cut out for it.

More for Clown though than me and khev.