Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) DEUX YOU BLEED?

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 7738
Joined: February 2012
Location: Boston, Taxachusetts.
The problem (well one of many problems) is they rushed the whole DCEU worse than Marvel did. I always thought Marvel rushed Phase 1 to get to Avengers (Phase 2 and 3 have been better) but at least each character got one movie before the big team up, and in the case of Iron Man he got two. Going from one Man of Steel movie to Batman vs. Superman was always going to be a problem. Then adding WW and the others made it an even bigger fuck up. I blame Snyder for a lot but this here isn't even his fault because I don't think even the greatest director could have turned BvS into a great movie using this rushed and convoluted formula. Then they kill off Superman in his second appearance... it isn't earned at all. This is mostly WB fault, Snyder makes it worse but nothing was going to save it from being a critical and B.O. failure.

User avatar
Posts: 42463
Joined: May 2010
Still haven't finished this.

almost three and a half years!

Image

User avatar
Posts: 26234
Joined: February 2010
Location: Texas
idk, that whole reveal ended up being cooler than the film

User avatar
Posts: 1094
Joined: January 2016
Location: DE
In my opinion the whole Africa incident was completely superflous. It didn't make any sense to begin with. Didn't anybody examine the corpses and find all the bullets in them? Also why did Lex have to stage to whole thing for a commitee to exist? Superman's fight with Zod had killed thousands of people in MoS, which was shown in BvS again, and which is the main cause for Batman's hate for Superman as well as Wally's (that guy in the wheelchair if you don't remember). Why not just make the hearings about that instead of the unnecessary and boring Africa thing? It fits perfectly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uMONOEMcrI It would have made for a much more consistent and shorter film. Lex still could've blown up everything and planned everything as he did. Maybe the writers just needed an excuse for Lois Lane to be in the movie.

User avatar
Posts: 13584
Joined: May 2010
Location: Mumbai
Because for some reason, international conflict was deemed necessary for the plot.

Same problem I had with Civil War, it could've picked up right after the incident at Sokovia which was caused by Tony's creation. Apparently there was need to tie up Crossbone's plot, introduce Wakanda, Redwing, and cause Scarlet Witch's guilt trip in same sequence.

User avatar
Posts: 54573
Joined: May 2010
Location: Arrakis
International conflict is important because he's not just Superman for USA, he is Superman for the whole world. Same goes for Mexico scene etc.

User avatar
Posts: 19779
Joined: June 2012
m4st4 wrote:International conflict is important because he's not just Superman for USA, he is Superman for the whole world. Same goes for Mexico scene etc.

User avatar
Posts: 54573
Joined: May 2010
Location: Arrakis
Or you can just make up your own sentence or two? Quoting what I posted immediately after the original post is a bit silly don't you think.

User avatar
Posts: 19779
Joined: June 2012
m4st4 wrote:Or you can just make up your own sentence or two? Quoting what I posted immediately after the original post is a bit silly don't you think.
damn, salty much
Nomis wrote:big spoilers for BvS
I'd like to add that people have a basic understanding who Batman is. Nolan has shown us Batman from the beginning to his own conveyed ending. And it's fantastic. In this universe they had to introduce people to another incarnation of Batman. He had to be able to exist in this world set up in Man of Steel, wherein Superman's place in the world was handled rather well and to an extent realistically so. I must say I'm not surprised we got this very hard/rugged version of Batman. That the film began with his origine has multiple functions as well. At first, they show us the origin of their Batman and it helps later in the film to reconcile Batman and Superman, that being Batman seeing the humanity in Superman only when he was able to reflect it on himself. Another function is that the direct scene after the prologue we see our first sequence of this incarnation of Batman operating in the same world as Man of Steel. It's basically a second origin but it sets him on the completely wrong thread. Then at the very end of the film, when Superman sacrifices himself, it's a turning back to basis for Batman. His eyes are opened and he returns to being the Batman we are more familiar with. However, since it was the end of the film, we don't get to see much of that. It's up to JL to show us that Batman, just with their backstory.

What I'm trying to say is that it seems like they trusted the audience in knowing who Batman is, and this Batman has been around for two decades already (stated in the film as well) he hit rock bottom, was at his most cynical and thus so sees Superman as a huge threat to humanity (black zero event etc). They had their own spin on it but I recognize that it's still a tough introduction to this new incarnation of him on film. Just shy of four years after we got to conclusion to Nolan's incarnation.

I also think that Superman will become the Superman we're more familiar with in Justice League. They decided to build him from his very first (lol literally) moment on. I really dig this more fractured, human and to some extent relatable Clark. I think him coming back from the grave and seeing that others are willing to follow him (the league especially) gives him more confidence and hope in the Earth. Even more so when he finally accepted Earth as his world.
I was just agreeing with you. Why is that so bad? smdh

Post Reply