By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Reviews - 31% RT

Critics dont want a comic movie to even try to be dark or taken serious, unless you are Nolan and make a master piece once.

They idealize how Superman should be and reject any thing that dont feat.

MoS has tons of problems but critics focused only in that Donner vision that gave Returns no where.



Around the Network

Still going to watch, but I was never too hyped for it.



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Veknoid_Outcast said:

Totally agree. Man of Steel was lousy on three fronts: it was a poorly constructed, leaden movie without levity or chemistry; and thus it represents a shaky foundation on which to build a cinematic universe; and it recast Superman as a brooding, damaged hero, which, incidentally, makes his conflict with Batman, another brooding, damaged hero, much less interesting than it should be.

Making matters worse, Snyder and Warner Brothers jumped immediately into world building with the sequel. Say what you will about the Marvel Cinematic Universe; at least Marvel/Disney took their time. They didn't trot out The Avengers immediately after Iron Man.

I much prefer DC to Marvel in general, but WB has really started off their cinematic adventure on the wrong foot. I'll give BvS a chance once it lands on Redbox or OnDemand, and decide for myself, but I don't have much faith in the decision-makers involved.

 

That is my biggest complain with DC and WB, they should have taken more time. I'm still going to watch the movie because I'm a big superheroe fan, but I completely agree that they are rushing their cinematic universe.



                                                                                     

I'm going to see it because, well Batman. Never was a big Superman fan and I wasn't super hot on the Man of Steel (too dark) but I think I like where the story of BvS seems to be going from the trailers.I like the whole God vs man and the commentary on him being an alien and a threat to the security of the nation/world and him being worshiped as a deity. I'm also liking the older more mature Batman. No more origin story. The characters are established and we can get to newer material.

Besides the BvS comics were a favorite from my childhood (mostly because Batman was able to defeat him) so I gotta see it.

Plus it's Batman. Did I mention it's Batman already?



I am still going to see it.
I did enjoy Man of Steel, and I honestly enjoy the dark and edgy style in contrast to Marvel's movies.



Around the Network

I draw the line at 56%; anything worse than Episode 1 is not worth my time.



celador said:
animegaming said:

i've heard Ben Affleck's Batman is great and is one of the best parts of the film but poor dude i hope it doesn't stay like this.

 

It's sliding back down a bit now. Although I don't think it could really be worse than Daredevil, that was trash.

Probably not, but it's also a matter of expectations.  With the hype and money poured into Batman v Superman, people had higher expectations than Daredevil.

irstupid said:
JWeinCom said:

Again, we expect more from super hero movies nowadays.  First of all, Zod's death was a bit more vague in Superman 2.  There was also a TV edit that showed the villains alive, and this is the version a lot of younger people (like me) have seen.  They go with the classic "villain falling down a huge hole" thing that they like to do to avoid showing death.  Since this is a comic book movie, and comic characters frequently like through that kind of shit, a lot of people probably didn't even think of it that way.  Zods death in Man of Steel however is clear and violent.

And while people complain about Zod being killed (which I didn't have a problem with personally as they never established Superman as a character as a character with a strong moral opposition to killing people, and Superman has I believed killed kryptonians in the comics), that's not the real issue.  The issue is that the movie is relentlessly grim.  Superman (probably) killing Zod in Superman 2 was a weird moment from an otherwise fun movie.  Superman killing Zod in Man of Steel is the last depressing moment in a string of increasingly more depressing moments.  There's simply not one good thing that happens in the film aside from things getting less fucked up than they possibly could have.  By the time we get to the end, it's just too much.  

As for the trucker guy, you're just reaching there.  Clark comes to him rather innocuously allowing him the chance not to be a douche.  He decides to be a douche, and then punches Clark hurting himself.  Then Clark makes him dizzy and slides him across a bar.  The guy is clearly a bully (he also shoves the server for no real reason), and Clark teaches him a lesson.  Not saying I love the scene, but sadistic is a huge stretch.

While they've tried to add some edge to Superman and he's not quite as boyscouty as he was, he's never been that bleak either.  Snyder shouldn't, and couldn't, go back to the 1970s-80s Superman, but he also shouldn't have gone to the opposite extreme.  He's bullied like Peter Parker, hated and feared like the X-men, overwhelmed by his senses like Daredevils, and morose like Batman.  He's more a composite of what made other heroes interesting than a unique take on Superman.

I don't really remember the rest of the plot well enough to comment.  But, I will say that Man of Steel has more than enough plotholes of its own.

As for Superman Returns, it definitely doesn't deserve a 76%, but it was still a way better movie than Man of Steel.  In the same way that a shit sandwich is better than eating shards of broken glass.  It at least moderately felt like a Superman movie with Clark actually contributing to the world in some way and not being a somber little bitch. 

Yes i know superhero movies nowadays should have more substance. I never went into why Man of STeel is great and has amazings substance. All i've done is compared a beloved film, to Man of Steel displaying hipocracy. 

And if we expect more from Superhero movies these days, then why is Marvel rated so high. THey are cheap popcorn flicks. THeir end credit scenes are often times more important than the whole movie was.

But lets talk Man of Steel. 

First we have an amazing intro. we get Krypton like nothing before. Not just a quick mom/pa sending clark on ship, we get a look at their culture, the world, technology, bioloogy, exposition like crazy. It was like we were watching a sci movie not a comic book movie. We get small teases like the codex looking like brainiacs ship.

Then we move ot earth and for the next hour and half deal with one of supermans staple backstory. His being alone in this world. He grows up in a world where he is so different he can't be like others. He can't form friends, he can't play sports, ect. I saw an article tryign to say batman was better cause he had dead parents to be all moody about for a characteristic and superman had nothign so batman was better. Batman could have lived a normal life after their death, he could have moved on. Superman can't change who he is. He wold always be hiding/pretending. 

Then his dad Johnathon was also a realistic dad. THe Maybe line was amazing. His dad doesn't know everything. HIs dad is trying to protect him. I mean what woudl you do if your son was superman. THe gov finds out somethign and they take him away and experiement or turn him into a weapon, ect. He is just trying ot protect him, he dont' have answers. He is doing his best to raise this alien that defies all logic. (and dont' say gov can't hurt clark, johnathon has no idea how strong clark is. I doubt he shot him with a shotgun or something to see if he was bullet proof. he has no idea if clark can be hurt and how bad)

Then the tornado scene furthered this theme of johnathon. INstead of preachign his "the world is not ready for you" he flat out sacrifices himself and is proud to do it for his son's safety.  And while I do like the heart attack lesson, i thought this was just as powerful. WHile the heart attack lesson teaches Superman he can't save everyone, this time it was clark choosing to not save someone. He could have but didn't, cause he trusted his dad. He believed in his dad and listend to him. Even though it meant his dad dying. That is more powerful than being helpless to heart attack/cancer.

NOw on to saving people. Clark saved as many people as he could in his first fight with zod/kryptonians. I don't think anyone died except those that Fiora killed while superman was fighting the other dude. Oh and pilot that the one dude squeezed his head exploding it.

But on to metroplis. Rewatch his fight with Zod. It's not as bad as people make it seem. THe first building to collapse is zod getting his vision suddenly. Hard to stop. Next big explosion i believe is the tanker blowing up on the car lot. Watch superman. He dodges the truck and then it explodes behind him. He turns around looking at it like "oh shit" then receiving a cheap shot from zod while he is dumbfounded by the casual destruction he caused by dodging something. The rest of the fight is some of him being smashed through the skyscrapers on the outside, not really causing too much damage. No buildings falling and if no one was staring out the window, no deaths. Then up to space, and back to ground and zod death.

But as for Zod's death. What was superman to do? In superman 2, superman knew of not only the power removing machine, but also of kryptonite. He had two options he could use. What does this new superman who has been wearing the suit for all of like 24 hours know? He knows of no weakness of his own. So how does he stop this guy who like himself, through all this fighting has yet to bleed even once. If he does knock him out, wherek does keep him locked up. What prison could hold Zod? The phantom zone is gone. 

I thought killing him was a smart and gutsy move. Too many writers take the easy way out and don't write themselves into a corner so to speak. Superman was written into a corner. He had no choice but to kill, and so he did the only thing he could. And he killed. Cheap writing is always having some escape, or a deux ex machina to save yourself from a hard choice. Superman had a hard choice and no escape. He made the hard choice. 

 

Now the movie isn't without fault. I would have l ike Lois to be more reportery. Remove their kiss. Have Johnathon run back to save a trapped person/kid or something and not a dog. Not sayign dogs aren't worth it, just saying no dog is the last person to leave a car or stays in it when others leave. Remove tentacles from machine that superman destroyed. OH and the bad cgi of his chest on fire at the oil plant. I assume it was from his shirt burning off, since he wouldn't burn at all, but still the cgi was bad.

Lastly, if you think SUperman returns was a good superman you are delusional. What did he do to contribute to the world? He saved one plane from falling. Then random city glass falling from when kyrptonite island formed. Otherwise he floating around wondering about being alone. The same theme as Man of Steel in a way, except executed extremely poorly.  Then the kicker, his final climax of the movie is him picking up a freaking island of kryptonite and throwing it into space. Let's ignore the fact the kryptonite should have made that impossible. The feat alone is boring. 

But the movie was directed by a holleywood golden boy. People love everything bryan singer does, and hates everything zack snyder does. 

Marvel Movies are rated well because they're solid movies.  You're saying popcorn flick like it's a bad thing, and I don't know why.  They're fun and enjoyable, and better than most other popcorn films.  There's nothing wrong with a movie just being a good time.  That's kind of what DC's movies are missing.  It's ok to be fun, and it's ok to smile.  DC is so focussed on making sure their movies are "not just comic book movies" that they're missing why these characters have endured for so many years to begin with.  Marvel embraces its comic book heritage.  DC is ashamed of it.

As for Man of Steel... I didn't really care much about Krypton.  The second we see it we know it's going to blow up, and it honestly just felt tonally off.  If you're a big Superman fan and it's an accurate portrayal, you might have really enjoyed it.  For others... meh...

The whole point of Superman is that he was not tortured or picked on.  He was above that.  He was developed by a kid who was lonely and picked on as a fantasy to escape into.  The model of confidence, power, and righteousness.  The protector that we all wish was watching over us.  Trying to portayed him as a poor bullied little kid defeats the purpose.  We have the X-men, we have Spider-man, we have Bat-man, we have Captain America, we don't need another super hero who was bullied as a kid.

If I had a kid with Clark's powers, I'd probably want him to not let a bus of kids drown.  And, from what I do know about Superman, Pa Kent should also not tell him to let a kid drown.  Yeah there are risks, but isn't that the point of doing the right thing?  That it requires selflessness and risk?  Pa Kent is telling him to value his own survival over the lives of others.  Keep your head down and let whatever happens to those fuckers happen.  Practical?  Maybe.  Noble?  Heroic?  Not a bit.

The tornado scene was just stupid.  A sacrifice is only meaningful if it's necessary. People do survive tornadoes and a healthy young man could have very feasibly outrun that without people being like "HE MUST BE AN ALIEN"!  It was a sacrifice simply to tick off the dead father box.  No other reason.  And by the way?  An overpass is a terrible place to go during a tornado.  Not powerful, stupid.

And when it was time for Clark to eventually show himself to the world, what did his dad expect?  All he taught him was to hide his secret identity and not help people under any circumstance.  Hard to see why Clark would grow up to show the least bit of compassion.  

As I've said, the point is not that Superman is actively killing people, it's that

a) he doesn't seem to care that much about it till Zod brings it up. He's standing in the ashes of Metropolis.  Instead of mourning the dead or sifting through rubble he's making out with Lois.

and 

b) the destruction was not necessary at any level except for showing of special effects.  It was just a poor design choice that made the movie really not fun to watch.  And there can be good movies that are not very fun to watch (Waltz with Bashir, Revenant, Dark Knight) but a Superman movie should not be in that category.

I actually have no issue with Superman killing Zod whatsover.  Superman doesn't kill humans because they are so much weaker than he is.  It's bullying.  Zod is his equal.  Plus, they never showed that Superman is that against death anyway.  

In Superman Returns Superman saves the city from a whole bunch of shit Lex cooks up, and stops his zany evil plot.  That being said, I compared the movie to a turd sandwich, so I don't know where you got the idea that I think it was good.  It was just a lot less bad than Man of Steel.



That wont help DCs future movie pretentions at all...



Marvel respect s their comicbook roots???

Do they?

Well, tell me when are we gonna see "The Devil in the bottle" or the Henk Pin slaping his wife.

Dont think Deadpool is the only violent comicbook carácter out there.

As I said those critics DO NOT know what are comicbook. They now belive this genre should follow Marvel stile or die.

I hope people are still open for diferente takes.



Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

It's more of a Batman movie with other super heroes.
&
Not a Man of Steel sequel.


I haven't seen it yet, but am I right?



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5