Thoughts on the Batman v Superman movie?

[Papaya]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

[img=400x600]http://cultsirens.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/lynda-carter-21.jpg[/img]

THIS is Wonder Woman

 

[kbell]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

Reposting from Forum lounge where we had a small discussion about his movie.

Lex Luther was horrific. At the beginning he seemed like he was good, since he wanted to stop Superman from being unchecked. Than he started doing that nerdy raspy voice "the red capes are coming!" or "ding ding" and is suddenly evil. He is the millennial version of lex luther, who does not have a commanding presence like the character should.

Batman killed quite a few people in this. I liked that, no half measures, but out of character for him.
When did Lois learn that Superman was Clark Kent?

Not sure why there was two funeral ceremonies. And not sure why they had to fight each other plotwise. I went to the bathroom a ton so might of missed that part.

The dream sequences were just padding, no reason for them. And the bullet subplot seemed like it would have been more interesting if developed more.

Why did they need to fight btw? I thought that was glossed over. Also the bats lifting him out of the hole was stupid too. Its was not well displayed the difference between a dream or real life either.

 

[Paracelsus]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

When did Lois learn that Superman was Clark Kent?

About halfway through Man of Steel.

Also the bats lifting him out of the hole was stupid too. Its was not well displayed the difference between a dream or real life either.

Funny that - I actually thought that was the one homage to earlier incarnations of the Bat that actually worked, because it was a take on Batman Begins but then twisted the homage by making it uncertain whether Bruce was dreaming or awake or not. I got a chuckle out of the homage and a nice thrill out of the imagery: it combines Bale's Batman being afraid of bats and the fact the fear helped him rise out of the pit (as he did in Rises, literally).

 

[Papaya]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm a big film buff and was at a major film festival a couple years ago and had the opportunity to discuss editing with William Goldenberg. He's an Oscar winning editor ( and has nominated 38 times so he knows his shit) and one of things we talked about directors fucking up a movie by doing their own editing. The example he gave me was ZERO DARK THIRTY He said the director (Kathryn Bigelow) actually had compiled over 12 hours of actual footage and because they's worked together on HURT LOCKER and it was in his contract that he had final cut she had relatively little input over the final product. She let a professional editor do what he does best...edit

I got a sense that BATMAN VS SUPERMAN was another casualty of the director's ego leading him to believe he can edit. There's so many convoluted and poorly developed story lines in this movie interspersed with flashes of really cool material that I believe the makings of a great movie are somewhere laying on the proverbial cutting room floor.

Such a shame

 

[Paracelsus]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm a big film buff and was at a major film festival a couple years ago and had the opportunity to discuss editing with William Goldenberg. He's an Oscar winning editor ( and has nominated 38 times so he knows his shit) and one of things we talked about directors fucking up a movie by doing their own editing. The example he gave me was ZERO DARK THIRTY He said the director (Kathryn Bigelow) actually had compiled over 12 hours of actual footage and because they's worked together on HURT LOCKER and it was in his contract that he had final cut she had relatively little input over the final product. She let a professional editor do what he does best...edit

This. I've heard Star Wars was a beneficiary of the same concept: Lucas shot a lot of footage, but his wife edited the footage (and from memory got an Oscar for it) and what emerges is a fantastic piece of work.

 

[kbell]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm surprised nobody noticed that this thread was about Naan.




Man of Steel was long depressing, and I don't remember anything about it. This movie was too long too. Could have shaved off a good 30 minutes and it would still make about the same amount of sense.

 

[porscheguy]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm a big film buff and was at a major film festival a couple years ago and had the opportunity to discuss editing with William Goldenberg. He's an Oscar winning editor ( and has nominated 38 times so he knows his shit) and one of things we talked about directors fucking up a movie by doing their own editing. The example he gave me was ZERO DARK THIRTY He said the director (Kathryn Bigelow) actually had compiled over 12 hours of actual footage and because they's worked together on HURT LOCKER and it was in his contract that he had final cut she had relatively little input over the final product. She let a professional editor do what he does best...edit

This. I've heard Star Wars was a beneficiary of the same concept: Lucas shot a lot of footage, but his wife edited the footage (and from memory got an Oscar for it) and what emerges is a fantastic piece of work.

It makes sense. The editor doesn't have the same emotional investment or attachment to the movie. Their job is to know what works and what doesn't.

 

[Paracelsus]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm a big film buff and was at a major film festival a couple years ago and had the opportunity to discuss editing with William Goldenberg. He's an Oscar winning editor ( and has nominated 38 times so he knows his shit) and one of things we talked about directors fucking up a movie by doing their own editing. The example he gave me was ZERO DARK THIRTY He said the director (Kathryn Bigelow) actually had compiled over 12 hours of actual footage and because they's worked together on HURT LOCKER and it was in his contract that he had final cut she had relatively little input over the final product. She let a professional editor do what he does best...edit

This. I've heard Star Wars was a beneficiary of the same concept: Lucas shot a lot of footage, but his wife edited the footage (and from memory got an Oscar for it) and what emerges is a fantastic piece of work.

It makes sense. The editor doesn't have the same emotional investment or attachment to the movie. Their job is to know what works and what doesn't.

If there's one shot that really, really works in the movie, it's one that was shown in the trailers: the shot of Bruce Wayne running into the dustcloud of his falling building. This was about as fantastic an illustration of the character and his situation as you could get. Normal people are terrified and run away when a building is collapsing close by them. Bruce Wayne runs towards the disaster. At full tilt. Not a moment's hesitation, not a moment's despair for all the people who must have died, he only cares about saving who can be saved. It works as a metaphor, too, I realise, sitting here a couple days after seeing the film: Wayne runs towards the disaster and figuratively into the "moral grey area" that Superman's existence creates within the film's universe. We can hear whispering the old adage: "Americans for generations have marched towards the sound of the guns." It's an extraordinary shot, and for once Snyder knows better than to pretty it up with slow motion bullshit: the shot sells Affleck as Batman ten times more than the most fanserviced suit ever could.

 

[CaptainS]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

Lex Luther was horrific. ... does not have a commanding presence like the character should.

Lex wasn't nearly as smart as he's supposed to be (he's supposed to make Tony Stark look like a moron) and there was no menace to the character. He was a little crazy - like a low-grade Joker - not the calm, reserved guy from either the comics or the JLU animated series.

Batman killed quite a few people in this. I liked that, no half measures, but out of character for him.

So did Supe - it's out of character for both. It's like Snyder and Goyer HATE the characters. Their version of Supe is completely different than anything we've seen - and not in a good way.

the bullet subplot seemed like it would have been more interesting if developed more.

Why would Lex take the time to set up Superman only to leave behind bullets that could easily be traced to him?

Commander: "Mr Luthor, we're ready to leave on this top secret mission to make Superman look like a bad guy, should we use untraceable standard NATO rounds?"

Lex: "No, use these bullets that are only made by my company."

Commander: "Are you sure? Are they special in some way? Will they help the mission?"

Lex "No, why do you ask?"

Snyder and Goyer: "Now THAT'S what we call plot development! Start clearing a space for our Oscar!"

Also the bats lifting him out of the hole was stupid too. Its was not well displayed the difference between a dream or real life either.

I'm pretty sure that was a dream sequence. Not sure about how Bats got a vision/dream about Parademons, Darkseid or the Flash.

 

[beta_plus]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

It's OK.

Ben Affleck did surprisingly well as Batman/Bruce Wayne. All of the actors gave at least decent performances - even the chick who plays Wonder Woman and Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. I felt like that the movie came in as less than the sum of its parts but not awful.

I admit that I only watched it to get through the last 3 hours of intermittent fasting so I could break at 10PM. But if you feel like killing some time, it will entertain.

I wouldn't have gone to see it myself otherwise but would have if friends had said "let's go". If cable or netflix has it on, give it a watch if you're in the mood for an action flick.

I think that the critics vindictively wanted to tear it apart since they think Zack Snyder time-they-can-never-get-backed raped them with Sucker Punch. They wanted revenge. It certainly deserved a certification of fresh on rottentomatoes.com at just above 60%. I've seen far worse. I enjoyed it far more than the first two fantastic fours, which had about the same score.

We need to remember that the critics and journalists do collude. Just look at how they went after Captain Capitalism and ROK over Mad Max: Feminist Road and Social Justice Wars: The Faggoting Awakens.

 

[Hades]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

Lex Luther was horrific. ... does not have a commanding presence like the character should.

Lex wasn't nearly as smart as he's supposed to be (he's supposed to make Tony Stark look like a moron) and there was no menace to the character. He was a little crazy - like a low-grade Joker - not the calm, reserved guy from either the comics or the JLU animated series.

I'll have to avoid this thread due to spoilers but I'm not surprised they went with a low rent Joker style villain.

Serious question for anybody who has seen it - do you see the setup right now as being conducive to good sequels?

I'm not going to rule out that it's possible for the first movie in a series to suck somewhat while it places a context for the rest of the story to kick ass.

 

[El Chinito loco]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm surprised nobody noticed that this thread was about Naan.

IRT Supernaan

 

[Paracelsus]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

Lex Luther was horrific. ... does not have a commanding presence like the character should.

Lex wasn't nearly as smart as he's supposed to be (he's supposed to make Tony Stark look like a moron) and there was no menace to the character. He was a little crazy - like a low-grade Joker - not the calm, reserved guy from either the comics or the JLU animated series.

I'll have to avoid this thread due to spoilers but I'm not surprised they went with a low rent Joker style villain.

Serious question for anybody who has seen it - do you see the setup right now as being conducive to good sequels?

I'm not going to rule out that it's possible for the first movie in a series to suck somewhat while it places a context for the rest of the story to kick ass.

Doing some clicking around on the Net, it appears that the inclusion of the "setup" scenes was not part of the original vision of the film. Per this Collider page:

In an interview that will be on Collider soon, producer Deborah Snyder revealed to us that this Flash sequence didn’t become part of the movie’s script until the middle of production, when Zack Snyder and Co. were in the midst of developing the outline for Justice League and Snyder sparked to the idea of including this bridge of sorts between the two movies. So this makes us think that we’ll get to see the other side of this Flash sequence in that 2017 superhero team-up film.

That's why the scenes with other metahumans come across as bolted on at the last minute: because, at least in the Flash's case, that's pretty much exactly what they were. Again, the film is trying to serve too many functions: it wants to introduce Batman, have him take on Superman, have him make friends with Superman, introduce Lex Luthor, give Superman a chance to fight Lex Luthor and/or Doomsday, introduce Wonder Woman, and then give Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman some reason to form the Justice League.

I don't have a problem with setting up for future films. Despite its other sins, Star Wars: The Farce Awakens did a masterful job of that by making the entire film a Macguffin quest for a cameo of Mark Hamill. My main issue is that it's just not done well in BvS. The rationale for the Justice League forming at all comes down to Batman's one line right at the end of the film: "Just a feeling." Even sitting in the theatre I lost suspension of disbelief at that point.

Is the setup conducive to good sequels? Maybe -- but the whole thing feels a lot like building an airplane while it's taking off.

 

[CaptainS]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

A much better movie (assuming you wanted to keep the elements of this one) would have been to have Bats and Supe fighting in the first 45 minutes. This fight attracts WW's attention and she comes to town. Bats and Supe resolve their differences and TOGETHER investigate Lex's plan, it's connection to their original fight and find hints of Darkseid's involvement. Once they discover what Lex up to, it's too late, Doomsday is created and the ending follows as seen.

Having both the BvS and Doomsday fights at the end created huge pacing problems in the movie giving us over 2 hours of setup with very little action (in a superhero action movie) followed by 45 minutes of destruction porn.

 

[CaptainS]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

Lex Luther was horrific. ... does not have a commanding presence like the character should.

Lex wasn't nearly as smart as he's supposed to be (he's supposed to make Tony Stark look like a moron) and there was no menace to the character. He was a little crazy - like a low-grade Joker - not the calm, reserved guy from either the comics or the JLU animated series.

I'll have to avoid this thread due to spoilers but I'm not surprised they went with a low rent Joker style villain.

Serious question for anybody who has seen it - do you see the setup right now as being conducive to good sequels?

I'm not going to rule out that it's possible for the first movie in a series to suck somewhat while it places a context for the rest of the story to kick ass.

It sets up sequels - whether they're good or not is another story. Since you haven't seen it, maybe I should say why but it does end on a bit of a cliffhanger.

 

[lavidaloca]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I actually really enjoyed it but there were a number of issues I had with it..

Lex Luthor is suppose to be a rich, large and strong villain. What we get is a small, frail villian who talks about "daddy" repeatedly. I would've liked to see the actor who played Kingpin in Dare Devil Season 1 (vincent d'onofrio) instead we got a mad scientist type Lex Luthor which is not how I envisioned him.

Ben Affleck was great as Batman and Henry Cavill was a reasonable Superman though I find him about as boring as it gets he played the role well.

Lois Lane was way to old compared to what I'd expect to be Supermans girlfriend. I expect Supermans girlfriend to be 25-30 not 40+.

Gal Gadot in my opinion was a very good Wonderwoman.

 

[CaptainS]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

They're already releasing deleted scenes.

 

[justin]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I'm surprised nobody noticed that this thread was about Naan.

IRT Supernaan

IRT Supernaan and Spidernaan

 

[Paracelsus]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

Lois Lane was way to old compared to what I'd expect to be Supermans girlfriend. I expect Supermans girlfriend to be 25-30 not 40+.

On the other hand, she does have bigger tits than Gal Gadot and had at least a little more to show of them in that bathtub scene.

Amy Adams is 41 - within reason, I'd call her a Wall resister if not a Wall survivor. Check out some shots from Night at the Museum 2 where they squeeze her into jodphurs, she's got a pretty fucking nice ass for that age.

But yes, it's a bit odd that she's banging Cavill, who's 32.

 

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

RE: Thoughts on the Batman v Supernan movie?

I've just watched this and found it even worse than the reviews here. This is a horrible clusterfuck of a movie that makes zero sense and inspires zero emotion. Even the action sequences are horrible because of over-reliance on explosions and collapsing buildings.

Some random comments - SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ON:

- More than half of the movie could be cut and the nonsensical story would not suffer one bit. All the time spent on the bullet plot and whatnot was totally pointless. There are way too many dreams, hallucinations and visions.

- The filming and editing is really bad - scenes are rushed and chaotically jumping around while shots (segments which together make a scene) are slow and fake. This is probably a consequence of Snyder's insane obsession with imitating the (already quite autistic) comic book panels shot-for-shot.

- Lex Luthor is possibly the most unconvincing villain in cinematic history. Some hipster faggot menacing and hatching plans of world domination? Please. Also, his lines sound like someone threw a dictionary into a random number generator.

- Out of all the new DC superheroes to introduce in this movie, Wonder Woman is possibly the worst choice. The movie already suffers boredom from containing the overpowered and immortal Superman, and Wonder Woman (despite being a pleasant and well-acted character overall) doesn't help.

- Ben Affleck as Batman turned out fine (although I'm not sure why his eyes are glowing), but Jeremy Irons as Alfred seems wooden and needlessly antagonistic. He doesn't seem loving or devoted at all and the characters don't even seem to like working together.

- Action sucks, with most of it consisting of A) explosions B) buildings collapsing and C) people being thrown around or performing stupid ramming attacks. Is Superman capable of doing anything except charging someone through a wall?

- Instead of keeping the enemy roster low-key, the movie straight-out jumps to planet-destroying monsters. Watching planet-destroying monsters endlessly ramming each other is NOT fun at all.

Conclusion: 2/10, WNW