Ultimate edition. I've heard that the added scenes do help clear some things up, though I haven't seen the theatrical to compare, but I know that only about 30 minutes were added, and there's easily over an hour here that could be cut.
[Movies] The DC Cinematic Universe - The David Zazlav Dumpster Fire.
I have to wonder if the crap of the movie's pacing, nonsense, and dream sequence bullshit is really Snyder's fault? People keep blaming him, but it was made clear with Man of Steel, the reason he got that job was because he was willing to start working on the film even when the script wasn't all worked up yet. He's in it to film, not to script tinker.
So likely most of the plot and character problems of this movie really fall to David Goyer. Snyder just wants to shoot pretty moving pictures. At worst he's an enabler.
So likely most of the plot and character problems of this movie really fall to David Goyer. Snyder just wants to shoot pretty moving pictures. At worst he's an enabler.
Yeah, I'd say it's a little of both. We've seen other movies written by Goyer that were disasters. Blade Trinity and The Dark Knight Rises comes to mind.
We've also seen many movies where Snyder prefers style over substance (ALL THE SLO-MO!). He's even admitted himself that his first priority is what looks cool, not necessarily what makes sense or fits to the story.
We've also seen many movies where Snyder prefers style over substance (ALL THE SLO-MO!). He's even admitted himself that his first priority is what looks cool, not necessarily what makes sense or fits to the story.
Last edited:
Honestly, Snyder has a lot of talent. I mean, as shit as this movie is, he still knows how to frame a shot. Visually, the movie is very appealing, there are some really great shots and creative action sequences. I can blame him for whatever direction he gave to Jesse Eisenberg, which I have to assume was "do it again, but worse."
The dream sequences... oh god the dream sequences. The big one that everyone knows about serves no goddamn purpose. It opens by blatantly showing you it is a dream sequence, and so none of the drama that happens in it matters. Oh no, Batman's been captured, Superman's learned his identity and is going to kill him? We know it's a dream, why is this sequence still going on after fifteen minutes? And then it pulls some inception bullshit to make you think oh, maybe this isn't a dream after all, maybe it's an important vision, only to go nope, that was a dream too.
Also, there are several shots of Superman looking angry and evil that are only there to be shown in the trailer, because in context they're either a dream or just a weird but momentary outburst.
I'm not sure they understood what dreams are. First we have a dream that starts as a flashback, intercut with another flashback, but then the outer one turns out to be a dream. Then the Flash warns Batman in a dream--because that's one of his powers?
Honestly, I think the editor forgot he'd already shown Bruce waking up.
I liked Man of Steel. I thought it was a good movie, but a bad Superman movie.
Batman v Superman is a bad movie.
Watched the climax of the movie on Youtube, which means (from what I'm told) I've already seen the best part? Doesn't really give Batman much to do, he's kind of outside his weight class when it comes to Doomsday. But Wonder Woman is boss.
I have to gripe about the nuclear missile though. Really unnecessary to the whole situation since Wonder Woman's appearance alone would be a significant dramatic turn. It's only there to recreate the scene from The Dark Knight Returns, except less graphic and less meaningful. But my real problem with it is the pacing. The moment it's brought up, it's happening. It feels like it should be a bigger deal, more slowly paced moment to be deciding to nuke Superman, but instead even the ultimate edition flies through it in seconds in favor of Superman uselessly punching Doomsday a few more times.
Though on a cheese level, I do have to appreciate that Doomsday gains nuclear powers after getting nuked, even radiation breath. I'd still rather watch a real Godzilla movie, but it was the kind of logic you don't see in movies anymore and made me laugh.
Also, when Superman is regenerating, it's so quiet and calm, I was for just a second fooled into thinking I was about to hear heroic music like the John Williams score ... then he opens his eyes and the chorus goes BWAH!!! and yeah, why did I expect any differently. Though I did like Wonder Woman's theme.
I have to gripe about the nuclear missile though. Really unnecessary to the whole situation since Wonder Woman's appearance alone would be a significant dramatic turn. It's only there to recreate the scene from The Dark Knight Returns, except less graphic and less meaningful. But my real problem with it is the pacing. The moment it's brought up, it's happening. It feels like it should be a bigger deal, more slowly paced moment to be deciding to nuke Superman, but instead even the ultimate edition flies through it in seconds in favor of Superman uselessly punching Doomsday a few more times.
Though on a cheese level, I do have to appreciate that Doomsday gains nuclear powers after getting nuked, even radiation breath. I'd still rather watch a real Godzilla movie, but it was the kind of logic you don't see in movies anymore and made me laugh.
Also, when Superman is regenerating, it's so quiet and calm, I was for just a second fooled into thinking I was about to hear heroic music like the John Williams score ... then he opens his eyes and the chorus goes BWAH!!! and yeah, why did I expect any differently. Though I did like Wonder Woman's theme.
Sorry, not done. I should really go to bed; I have to be up in 5 hours.
From what I gather, it took the whole movie for Superman to act like Superman? Fuck that. The death scene is sad for that reason only, because in that moment there's actually a Superman action, but the movie didn't earn it, especially since (of course) he's not really dead. The fakeout Lois death in the 70s movie was a lot heavier for being a scene with far less going on.
The way Superman and Wonder Woman moved was nice; I liked how they did the speed there without trying to make them move like the Flash. There was also some nice fighting as far as how the characters moved around. I especially liked seeing Wonder Woman and Doomsday fighting in the background; gave a nice sense of scope. I can only imagine how fights like that would feel in a good movie, with a decent story and characterization, so one could really get invested in all the CGI flailing. But I guess Marvel's put a patent out on that?
In any case, I didn't watch the other 2 hours and 30 minutes that took place before then, so I can just assume they're exactly like their DCAU counterparts and never watch the rest of the movie to correct myself. Didn't hear a peep out of Lex Luthor (Junior).
From what I gather, it took the whole movie for Superman to act like Superman? Fuck that. The death scene is sad for that reason only, because in that moment there's actually a Superman action, but the movie didn't earn it, especially since (of course) he's not really dead. The fakeout Lois death in the 70s movie was a lot heavier for being a scene with far less going on.
The way Superman and Wonder Woman moved was nice; I liked how they did the speed there without trying to make them move like the Flash. There was also some nice fighting as far as how the characters moved around. I especially liked seeing Wonder Woman and Doomsday fighting in the background; gave a nice sense of scope. I can only imagine how fights like that would feel in a good movie, with a decent story and characterization, so one could really get invested in all the CGI flailing. But I guess Marvel's put a patent out on that?
In any case, I didn't watch the other 2 hours and 30 minutes that took place before then, so I can just assume they're exactly like their DCAU counterparts and never watch the rest of the movie to correct myself. Didn't hear a peep out of Lex Luthor (Junior).
Ok, I "acquired" the extended version. Haven't seen the theatrical version to compare. The statute of limitations on spoilers has run out, right?
On the whole, it was... okay. I really wanted to like this movie. There was some good stuff in it. The visuals were, as expected, pretty spectacular. The fight against Doomsday felt like the Zod fight from the first movie, in that you could really feel the super powers of the combatants, including the welcome addition of Wonder Woman. The cast delivered a pretty solid performance. Batman felt like a detective, Lois Lane felt like a good journalist, and I quite liked Jeremy Irons's snark as Alfred. Gal Gadot's so hot, and she's a pretty convincing Wonder Woman. Even Eisenberg's Luthor, while unorthodox, could work if you just tried to forget he's portraying Lex Luthor. They got the scheming and "hates Superman for reasons only he himself understands" part right, at least. The exploration of issues like how the world would react to a superpowered alien, how Clark himself would try to figure out what he's supposed to do, etc, these are interesting topics for a movie to delve into. Oh, and I liked the references to the comics. Dark Knight Returns is the most obvious one, but there were some nods to Injustice too.
On the other hand, right from the start, the movie tells you it's not going to respect the source material. "Hi, I'm Jimmy Olsen, photographer... and I'm actually a CIA agent who's going to be killed off right away." Superman apparently hasn't learned not to kill people yet, because the first person he fights in the movie gets sent through a wall. Batman's fighting style is strongly reminiscent of the Arkham series, which is good, except he's also very gun-happy and kill-happy. Also, his suit is apparently made of vibranium. I also think it's a bit of a pity that they've wasted Doomsday in this movie. Doomsday could've been an interesting villain for another movie down the line, but they used him up here as an excuse for a superpower battle.
And holy crap, who thought this running length was okay? There's so much you could've cut from this movie. Every Batman dream sequence could've been cut, and nothing would've been lost. Most of Eisenberg's ramblings could've been cut or simplified, and the movie would've been much improved. The stuff about the other metahumans felt pretty unnecessary too. They could've just gone down the Marvel route, and added a reference to other metahumans in a post-credits sequence.
Finally, Mercy Graves is hot and I wish she was in more of the movie.
All in all, it's got some good parts, but these good parts do not a good movie make.
EDIT: A few more thoughts:
I did like the Batmobile sequence, it showed Batman's awesome car-fu.
Superman apparently thought that when he needed to explain stuff to Batman, it would be a good idea to talk as slowly as possible. Idiot.
Superman should've, by all logic, killed Batman several times over in their fight. He hurls Batman insane distances, sometimes through walls. Also, when Superman threw Batman through that wall, it would've been hilarious if Batman had made a bat shaped hole.
What was Luthor's plan for after Doomsday kills Superman? Just leave the super-destructive unkillable monster to its own devices? For someone so smart, this seems like a rather large oversight.
On the other hand, right from the start, the movie tells you it's not going to respect the source material. "Hi, I'm Jimmy Olsen, photographer... and I'm actually a CIA agent who's going to be killed off right away." Superman apparently hasn't learned not to kill people yet, because the first person he fights in the movie gets sent through a wall. Batman's fighting style is strongly reminiscent of the Arkham series, which is good, except he's also very gun-happy and kill-happy. Also, his suit is apparently made of vibranium. I also think it's a bit of a pity that they've wasted Doomsday in this movie. Doomsday could've been an interesting villain for another movie down the line, but they used him up here as an excuse for a superpower battle.
And holy crap, who thought this running length was okay? There's so much you could've cut from this movie. Every Batman dream sequence could've been cut, and nothing would've been lost. Most of Eisenberg's ramblings could've been cut or simplified, and the movie would've been much improved. The stuff about the other metahumans felt pretty unnecessary too. They could've just gone down the Marvel route, and added a reference to other metahumans in a post-credits sequence.
Finally, Mercy Graves is hot and I wish she was in more of the movie.
All in all, it's got some good parts, but these good parts do not a good movie make.
EDIT: A few more thoughts:
I did like the Batmobile sequence, it showed Batman's awesome car-fu.
Superman apparently thought that when he needed to explain stuff to Batman, it would be a good idea to talk as slowly as possible. Idiot.
Superman should've, by all logic, killed Batman several times over in their fight. He hurls Batman insane distances, sometimes through walls. Also, when Superman threw Batman through that wall, it would've been hilarious if Batman had made a bat shaped hole.
What was Luthor's plan for after Doomsday kills Superman? Just leave the super-destructive unkillable monster to its own devices? For someone so smart, this seems like a rather large oversight.
Last edited:
Oh very well.
Psh, dude, I spoiled the whole end of the movie in detail across two lengthy posts just above yours, no spoiler tags. You're good
.That's a good point I hadn't thought of. Luthor is dumb as shit in this movie. I feel like this was trying to go way way back to mad scientist Lex, but we've had evil genius businessman Lex for the last 30 or so years, and that's been the stronger character with more dimensions and intrigue.
If Luthor had been properly written as Luthor, he would've had a backup plan once/if Superman failed: send in a squadron of LexCorp soldiers who would mop up the mess and make Lex look good. He'd also frame a LexCorp scientist and make it look like the whole thing was their idea and that he was just an innocent businessman who wasn't aware it was happening. Basically, he'd do everything in his power to cover his own ass, first. And probably foot the bill for the cleanup effort...while buying up all the destroyed properties out of the "goodness" of his heart.[DOUBLEPOST=1468245434,1468245304][/DOUBLEPOST]
It honestly makes the most sense for the character. He's not just a mad scientist. He's always been a criminal genius, even before he was a businessman. And what better way to continue his criminal empire than right in Superman's face and under the noses of the adoring public?
Just saw the Ultimate Edition (which is the only version I've seen). Guys, this movie ain't that bad. The pacing is goofy and I'm not a fan of the interspersing of scenes (especially at the end between funerals and batman talking to Lex), but overall it's really not that bad.
Overall, I really really liked BA as Batman. The Batmobile was probably the single best version of it since Keaton's Batman. I really dug how Batman is so disgusted and disgruntled (and far gone into vigilante land) that he's resorted to branding criminals. Batman was well done in this movie.
Wonderwoman was also surprisingly great. I think Gal really nailed the role, and her appearance in full form at the finale was really welcome and good.
As for Superman, well... I liked Man of Steel, so we get more of that, which I'm cool with.
Only major think off for me was the portrayal of LL as completely batshit insane instead of an insane super genius criminal whos super intellect counters Superman's brawn and morals, but at the same time it's kinda nice they did something different with the character and didn't copy Hackman or Spacey's performances. But like Bhamv was saying, what the hell was he planning on doing with Doomsday after the fight, or is he literally just batshit insane where he just wants to destroy the world? I think that's the answer judging by his conversation with Batman at the end. He's just plain nuts and the real villains are coming.
Overall, not bad. I think Suicide Squad will be better since it won't take itself as seriously.
Overall, I really really liked BA as Batman. The Batmobile was probably the single best version of it since Keaton's Batman. I really dug how Batman is so disgusted and disgruntled (and far gone into vigilante land) that he's resorted to branding criminals. Batman was well done in this movie.
Wonderwoman was also surprisingly great. I think Gal really nailed the role, and her appearance in full form at the finale was really welcome and good.
As for Superman, well... I liked Man of Steel, so we get more of that, which I'm cool with.
Only major think off for me was the portrayal of LL as completely batshit insane instead of an insane super genius criminal whos super intellect counters Superman's brawn and morals, but at the same time it's kinda nice they did something different with the character and didn't copy Hackman or Spacey's performances. But like Bhamv was saying, what the hell was he planning on doing with Doomsday after the fight, or is he literally just batshit insane where he just wants to destroy the world? I think that's the answer judging by his conversation with Batman at the end. He's just plain nuts and the real villains are coming.
Overall, not bad. I think Suicide Squad will be better since it won't take itself as seriously.
Last edited:
I might Redbox it when my folks are back in town, my dad, brother and I can give it a watch. I'm not expecting much but I'm hoping to at least enjoy Batfleck as I really do want him to be good.
I actually think Afleck is one of the best Batmans. Watching his performance in BvS reminded me a lot of the Arkham asylum game series Batman.
I thought the movie was dogshit and boring. But I agree that Affleck was great as Batman.
Yeah Affleck was fine, more the character I had a problem with.
It's funny how the one thing everyone thought would suck the most in this movie turned out to be one of its few saving graces.
I actually think the characterization of Batman was fine.
The Batman depicted is an older, darker Batman. He's someone that's lost real hope and has gone over the edge. He's mentally unstable, he's full of guilt, he apparently let Robin die and didn't even bother to rebuild Wayne Manor when it was destroyed, now living full time inside the bat cave. He's a man broken and obsessed, with no purpose now other than his anger and guilt.
In a better movie, he would have been the actual villain of the story, with Superman being the one that could bring him back from the ledge.
AH-reverse Dark Knight Returns, nice.
To be fair, you didn't see the version they all saw in March, which was apparently nonsensical. They didn't just cut scenes for the theater, they cut pieces of scenes, anything to quicken it along to the action even if it meant dropping character, inviting plot holes, or screwing up the pace of the film, so some scenes were just incoherent.
And even when the character is only the character in name, that can be acceptable if it's an interesting or well acted or well written character. For example, Helmut Zemo in Civil War. Eisenberg's Luthor wasn't all that interesting, or well written, and I can't decide if his weird characterization of Luthor is his fault or the director's fault.
Maybe the director was like, "No, I need it to be over the top!" and Eisenberg was just like, "...fine."
--Patrick
Charlie's still gonna peg you with a disagree over that? I guess he's still clinging onto his trailer hopes, because he sure wasn't defending this movie when it came out.
I'm thinking a little of Column A, a little of Column B. They were probably looking for someone to stand out in contrast to the heroes' stoicism (such a weird thing to write) and this is what they came up with. "We need our film to have someone like the Joker, but not BE the Joker, so, um.... do that."
fade
Staff member
I mean Charlie can disagree, but when there's nearly 90 years of established character, why even bother calling him Luthor? The only reason to do so is to evoke the familiar relationship. But then throwing the most fundamental aspects of the character away completely undoes the point of evoking the name. Might as well call him Schmex Schmuthor or something.
There's always Zod...
It's just. I dunno, some weird semantic denial of reality I see on y'alls side. If his name is Lex Luthor and he hates Superman, he's a take on Lex Luthor? Like you can call it bad and all the other things, but you can't say it doesn't exist.
I can more honestly see this reaction to Jimmy Olsen. I haven't seen the 3 hour take, but isn't he still just a random CIA agent undercover in the middle east? And not even Superman/Clark's friend?
I can more honestly see this reaction to Jimmy Olsen. I haven't seen the 3 hour take, but isn't he still just a random CIA agent undercover in the middle east? And not even Superman/Clark's friend?