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

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
There was also the capital explosion.

Maybe he was or wasn't going to confront Batman but no doubt that the explosion changed him even more.

This Superman was evolving while Batman was resolute on his mission to kill Superman.

Then they flip flopped at the end.

Superman became resolute regarding his role and Batman started changing.
 
even After Clark sees the light and Lex tells him to go fight batman, supes is like "Meh..... i dont care man, Lois is safe so no thanks, im good" :lol

I've only seen the film once, so I don't remember some of the details, but how did Batman know where Martha was? I'm sure they explained it, but I don't remember. Also, why did Lois go after the spear after she threw it away? Was she aware of the fight and aware that the monster was vulnerable to Kryptoninte?
 
I've only seen the film once, so I don't remember some of the details, but how did Batman know where Martha was? I'm sure they explained it, but I don't remember.

It was revealed that Alfred had been listening in on their conversation and quickly plugged the coordinates of the Russian guy's cell phone (that Bruce cloned) into the navigation system of the Batwing.

Also, why did Lois go after the spear after she threw it away? Was she aware of the fight and aware that the monster was vulnerable to Kryptoninte?

She was right there when Superman was down for the count and about to die at the end of Batman's spear. Probably not too hard to put 2 and 2 together at that point.
 
It was revealed that Alfred had been listening in on their conversation and quickly plugged the coordinates of the Russian guy's cell phone (that Bruce cloned) into the navigation system of the Batwing.



She was right there when Superman was down for the count and about to die at the end of Batman's spear. Probably not too hard to put 2 and 2 together at that point.

Ok, I remember Bats talking to Alfred. Thanks :)
 
I dug the Congress scene. It reminds me of the tension that builds up in The Dark Knight when the judge blows up, commissioner loeb drinks that acid poison and Joker arrives at that penthouse.

My gripe with it is it isn't fleshed out more. Superman really should have got a chance to shine and speak his piece in that scene in my opinion. Maybe even show Wally coming around to him despite hating and obsessing about Superman. It would make everyone's death in that scene tragic instead of "well, they blew up and are dead now". Superman needed a "moment" there beyond looking disappointed when the entire place turns into a burning cinder.
 
I dug the Congress scene. It reminds me of the tension that builds up in The Dark Knight when the judge blows up, commissioner loeb drinks that acid poison and Joker arrives at that penthouse.

My gripe with it is it isn't fleshed out more. Superman really should have got a chance to shine and speak his piece in that scene in my opinion. Maybe even show Wally coming around to him despite hating and obsessing about Superman. It would make everyone's death in that scene tragic instead of "well, they blew up and are dead now". Superman needed a "moment" there beyond looking disappointed when the entire place turns into a burning cinder.

Well just another personal preference thing but I really liked the "See? This is how a civilized democracy works," and then BOOM. It was almost the political version of the Cairo swordsman getting shot. You think it's going to be this huge discussion that may even be the centerpoint of the narrative and Hunter can't even get her opening statement out. Just the subtext of Clark standing there, braced for a verbal assault, mentally preparing his defense/speech, etc., and then his confusion over Hunter's speechlessness. It was all so unsettling in such an awesome way.
 
Luthor blew up the hearing to make it look like carnage follows Superman where ever he goes (even when he's being law abiding and diplomatic) it killed an outspoken ex-Wayne Enterprises employee whom Bruce was sympathetic toward, plus it killed Holly Hunter who had stated she was going to fight his acquisition of "a weapon of assassination" and it covered his tracks of said acquisition by also taking out the one Senator who gave him full access to everything.
Your first point would make some sense, but none of the really straight-forward, exposition-providing news coverage mentioned that that I could see. So, I don't think that was the intention.

Regarding the Wayne employee, it was obvious Superman had nothing to do with it, and Wayne would know that. And did Lex know Wayne was Batman even at that point? Did Lex know Wayne was Batman at all? It's all so confusing.

Regarding Hunter, Luthor already had a plan to unilaterally attempt to kill Supes, and was going to do it no matter what. I can get why he sought Congressional support in the first place--if he were rational, then he could place the blame elsewhere. So it was petty revenge, and that was obvious with his jar of piss. But that doesn't explain the complex, long-developing plan of orchestrating this explosion.

As Fabio says, it is somewhat effective as a tense, shocking moment in the film. But for what storytelling purpose? Joker always had a pretty obvious reason for the things he was doing, even though he was obviously nuts and just wanted to promote anarchy.

Not sure what you mean by "circular preaching to the choir stuff" exactly, but that was my thoughts going through this movie--people just weren't acting like people act. Not even movie people.
 
I think I have figured out kara's and Clown's confusion, they just need to watch it a 2nd time! :lol

I will before it leaves theaters. But it doesn't matter, because the more I think about the film, the more things I find that bother me. Even though I like the "Martha" moment and it was a good idea, now even that moment bothers me because why would Clark/Superman call his Mom by her name? He never..ever calls her Martha, and in a moment like that when he's about to die, it makes more sense for him to say, "you have to save mother"...not Martha. When Zod grab Martha and Sups got angry and punched Zod, he called her mother. Had her name been Lisa, Batman would have killed Sups. It's still a good idea, but I can see why some people think it was stupid.
 
As Fabio says, it is somewhat effective as a tense, shocking moment in the film. But for what storytelling purpose?

Well obviously I just answered that and now here we are with "well I don't think that's right," "well I do," bla bla bla. :)

Not sure what you mean by "circular preaching to the choir stuff" exactly, but that was my thoughts going through this movie--people just weren't acting like people act. Not even movie people.

This exact exchange actually. Anything in the movie that isn't literally spelled out in black and white or plain English and is left up for any degree of interpretation is being explained by people it makes sense to and dismissed by those who thought negatively of the film. Those who thought negatively all agree "yeah, that's so stupid, why would Batman put on extra armor to fight Superman, so dumb," or whatever (to pick an example that doesn't involve our current exchange) and each "choir" agrees or disagrees and so on.

I'm not sure why people who didn't even like the film are asking, "But why did..." when all explanations are going be rejected other than "because the writing sucks." I think that's what certain people want to hear because that's what they already believe and they aren't really asking for any real clarification.
 
Last edited:
Well like all the other defenses we're seeing, you can infer things that weren't shown or even explicitly hinted at on screen. She could have checked the news on her phone, saw that Doomsday came from the Kryptonian ship, and put together that he would also be vulnerable to krrrrrryptonite!
 
Well like all the other defenses we're seeing, you can infer things that weren't shown or even explicitly hinted at on screen. She could have checked the news on her phone, saw that Doomsday came from the Kryptonian ship, and put together that he would also be vulnerable to krrrrrryptonite!

Maybe it's in one of the deleted scenes :lol :pray:
 
This exact exchange actually. Anything in the movie that isn't literally spelled out in black and white or plain English and is left up for any degree of interpretation is being explained by people it makes sense to and dismissed by those who thought negatively of the film. Those who thought negatively all agree "yeah, that's so stupid, why would Batman put on extra armor to fight Superman, so dumb," or whatever (to pick an example that doesn't involve our current exchange) and each "choir" agrees or disagrees and so on.

I'm not sure why people who didn't even like the film are asking, "But why did..." when all explanations are going be rejected other than "because the writing sucks." I think that's what certain people want to hear because that's what they already believe and they aren't really asking for any real clarification.
I think there's some truth to what you're saying. And ultimately, you're right, that many who really buy into this movie infer a lot of sophisticated subtext, and faith in the audience on the part of Zach Snyder.* And those who don't, have seen Man of Steel and Sucker Punch.




I kid! . . . I've never seen Sucker Punch.




*so much faith that he has Anderson Cooper et al. going out of their way to beat into the audience's brain with a sledge hammer--"Don't worry! They're fighting on an abandoned island! With robot piloted helicopters! And are going back to the abandoned docks to fight some more!"
 
Lex succeeded in showing that no matter where Superman goes, no matter his intentions, bad things happen either directly or indirectly.

Lex knew he could weaken Superman not only with kryptonite but also with emasculating his heroic image.

In essence Lex kept Superman on edge, not allowing Superman to gather enough confidence to becomre that big hero by manipulating how humans looked upon him.

Lex didn't care if Superman had a one on one with Wally, he only cared to soil his image.

We the audience might enjoy the additional drama but it doesn't serve Lex's character in any meaningful way.
 
Last edited:
Well to up to that point there were only two known kinds of beings, people of Earth and Kryptonians. Doomsday wasn't from the animal kingdom, came from the Kryptonian ship so....

Oh please...it could have been a mutated animal...which technically, he was some kind of hybrid. She didn't know he came from a Kryptonian ship either. Kara is right, you're making stuff up. :lol
 
I think there's some truth to what you're saying. And ultimately, you're right, that many who really buy into this movie infer a lot of sophisticated subtext, and faith in the audience on the part of Zach Snyder.* And those who don't, have seen Man of Steel and Sucker Punch.




I kid! . . . I've never seen Sucker Punch.




*so much faith that he has Anderson Cooper et al. going out of their way to beat into the audience's brain with a sledge hammer--"Don't worry! They're fighting on an abandoned island! With robot piloted helicopters! And are going back to the abandoned docks to fight some more!"

I don't think there's anything wrong with connecting dots. And yes "faith in the director" is involved, even faith in Zach Snyder. If the dots can't be connected with any reasonable explanation then that's a problem, but I haven't seen that be an issue for this film yet.
 
Oh please...it could have been a mutated animal...which technically, he was some kind of hybrid. She didn't know it came from a Kryptonian ship either. Kara is right, you're making stuff up. :lol

So instead of equating the super monster that is attacking the city with other super beings who have also attacked that same city she's instead supposed to suddenly assume she's in ANOTHER studio's movie and go "mutant!" Yeah that totally would be more logical. :lol
 
Back
Top