Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice movie thread for your reading pleasure 2 2

[Bosco685]

I just don't get how you people can say that Ultron sucked.

 

It was a freakin' comic book on the screen, man!

 

My goodness.

 

What, did someone post about comic book women with small boobs again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bosco685]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

 

That's because you weren't given enough hugs as a kid.

 

[Comicopolis]

I just don't get how you people can say that Ultron sucked.

 

It was a freakin' comic book on the screen, man!

 

My goodness.

 

Yep.

[Comicopolis]

Ultron sucked.

 

It's better than BVS.

[Comicopolis]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

 

That's because you weren't given enough hugs as a kid.

 

 

He's just a grump.

[Bosco685]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

 

That's because you weren't given enough hugs as a kid.

 

 

He's just a grump.

 

 

But a good grump.

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

Posted this elsewhere, but will post it again...

 

Firstly, the good bits. Affleck was very good as both Bruce and Bats and, handled correctly, I'm more than happy to give him a run in the cape. He's confirmed in Suicide Squad and I'd be really interested to see how that plays out. Fingers crossed.

 

Gadot was also a sound piece of casting. They could have gone for more of a 'stunna' (copyright The Sun), but her mysterious beauty was a better fit. The few scenes she was in outside of costume again gives hope and I really want DC to take the same tack as they did with Batman Begins and Marvel did with Iron Man and keep her first film clear of extraneous junk. It would seem that some of it is set a century ago and that's, IMHO, a move in the right direction. Again, fingers crossed.

 

Another positive was the general themes of this film...the big questions of Gods being amongst us and how that actually takes away from us, or how that divides us. It could have really given us food for thought, perhaps thrown us an angle that we hadn't before considered.

 

But it didn't, because it was utterly empty of any heart whatsoever. There was no moral compass, there was no sense of hope, there was nothing to inspire us...and there was zero connection with any of the characters. I ended up not giving a shit who lived or died, because they were all either unloveable or utterly pointless.

 

I didn't find it was too dense or confusing. Lord heaven help me, I completely understood what was going on...and found half of it risible or simply clumsy.

 

Particular stand-out bug bears include Heath Ledger's Joker. He was much better in The Dark Knight...and when did he get to be some genius scientist with pots of money?

 

The infamous Martha scene is possibly the laziest plot device committed to film. Ever.

 

Doomsday. I can only assume they ran out of money at this point and had to borrow the rock troll from Fellowship Of The Ring?

 

The 'big battle'. Utterly one note...not a hint of inspiration. Charge, yell, punch, repeat.

 

Lois and Martha...they should have appeared in the credits as simply Kidnap Victim 1 and Kidnap Victim 2. I'm not going with charges of misogyny...certainly not from somebody who has zero grounds to offer a critique on anything related to this film...but women do tend to be relegated in Snyder films. It's not about who they are, but rather what they mean to the Hero

 

Supes. If they had replaced him with a cardboard cut out, would anybody have noticed? He alternated between glowering, looking noble and being overcome by emotion. Cavill should have walked off set when he got his page and a half of lines.

 

Overall, I'm giving this a 5/10, mainly out of love for Bats and WW...but this was a real let-down. How DC continually manages to mishandle such iconic and well-loved characters is beyond me...

[Bosco685]

Now that's how you write a review!

 

 

I may disagree with some of the points. But at least it contains examples and references actually seeing the film before dropping a load on it.

[Davenport]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

You'll probably see it on another viewing.

In that moment Batman mentally connected the dots from previous scenes. The "why haven't I seen these" scene (You Let Your Family DIE), his employee that blew up the senate, Luthor importing the kryptonite Batman stole, and so on.

 

Lois: "Martha is is mother and Luthor has her."

Superman: "He wants to trade her life for yours."

 

Luthor had been emotionally playing him for some time, stoking his rage, setting him up. And Batman realizes in the 'Martha' scene he had taken Luthor's bait, hook, line and sinker.

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

You'll probably see it on another viewing.

In that moment Batman mentally connected the dots from previous scenes. The "why haven't I seen these" scene (You Let Your Family DIE), his employee that blew up the senate, Luthor importing the kryptonite Batman stole, and so on.

 

Lois: "Martha is is mother and Luthor has her."

Superman: "He wants to trade her life for yours."

 

Luthor had been emotionally playing him for some time, stoking his rage, setting him up. And Batman realizes in the 'Martha' scene he had taken Luthor's bait, hook, line and sinker.

 

Saw it and I still don't buy that...whether he was played or not, he was there when Metropolis came down, which was the start of his 'crusade'. The fact that the perp was 'human' should not matter much...if at all.

[roulette44]

Now that's how you write a review!

 

 

I may disagree with some of the points. But at least it contains examples and references actually seeing the film before dropping a load on it.

 

I agree (with what Bosco said here)

[Davenport]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

You'll probably see it on another viewing.

In that moment Batman mentally connected the dots from previous scenes. The "why haven't I seen these" scene (You Let Your Family DIE), his employee that blew up the senate, Luthor importing the kryptonite Batman stole, and so on.

 

Lois: "Martha is is mother and Luthor has her."

Superman: "He wants to trade her life for yours."

 

Luthor had been emotionally playing him for some time, stoking his rage, setting him up. And Batman realizes in the 'Martha' scene he had taken Luthor's bait, hook, line and sinker.

 

Saw it and I still don't buy that...whether he was played or not, he was there when Metropolis came down, which was the start of his 'crusade'. The fact that the perp was 'human' should not matter much...if at all.

So Batman should've killed Superman, using Luthor's krytonite?

 

imho those who conclude Batman's (manipulated) attitude towards Superman is justified, yeah, the movie's going to suck. Not much way around that. But those who accept Alfred's take, 'been wrong for some time' and 'he's not our enemy', are experiencing the same movie differently. imho.

[Flaming_Telepath]

So because Supes had a 'mommie', Bats was suddenly able to set aside all of those who died in Metropolis?

 

I thought the scene...and the idea behind the scene...was the worst plot device committed to film in a long time.

You'll probably see it on another viewing.

In that moment Batman mentally connected the dots from previous scenes. The "why haven't I seen these" scene (You Let Your Family DIE), his employee that blew up the senate, Luthor importing the kryptonite Batman stole, and so on.

 

Lois: "Martha is is mother and Luthor has her."

Superman: "He wants to trade her life for yours."

 

Luthor had been emotionally playing him for some time, stoking his rage, setting him up. And Batman realizes in the 'Martha' scene he had taken Luthor's bait, hook, line and sinker.

 

Saw it and I still don't buy that...whether he was played or not, he was there when Metropolis came down, which was the start of his 'crusade'. The fact that the perp was 'human' should not matter much...if at all.

So Batman should've killed Superman, using Luthor's krytonite?

 

imho those who conclude Batman's (manipulated) attitude towards Superman is justified, yeah, the movie's going to suck. Not much way around that. But those who accept Alfred's take, 'been wrong for some time' and 'he's not our enemy', are experiencing the same movie differently. imho.

 

I'm not saying he shouldn't have had a volte-face, but thought that the trigger was poor. Casual. Lazy.

 

It was put in the fight scene to make it more dramatic...but then you're painted into a corner.

[Bosco685]

I'm not saying he shouldn't have had a volte-face, but thought that the trigger was poor. Casual. Lazy.

 

It was put in the fight scene to make it more dramatic...but then you're painted into a corner.

 

Just wondering how the -script using the name 'Martha' painted the story into a corner?

[Rip]

It's not that he was just human, but that Superman clearly cared for someone MORE than himself. He didn't say "Don't kill me". It was "Save Martha".

It's hard for Batman to kill a someone you are afraid will "try to take over the world" when he's asking you to look after someone else before you drop the final blow. The name Martha only makes it hit harder.

 

I also think Batman realized he was becoming the opposite of who he wanted to become, he was going deeper into that darkness. Consumed by his own demons and dreams (quite literaly). Becoming more ruthless in his methods. Now he realized he's been a pawn. Even worse Superman's mother named Martha may die because of Batman.

Batman knew he could never bring back his mother, but if he could save Superman's, well maybe he could get a little piece of his own mother back. A piece of his own salvation.

 

This hits at the core of who and why and Batman is. Why Batman had such urgency to save her.

Best part of the movie. Best Batman ever.

 

My 2 cents.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Rip

[Flaming_Telepath]

I'm not saying he shouldn't have had a volte-face, but thought that the trigger was poor. Casual. Lazy.

 

It was put in the fight scene to make it more dramatic...but then you're painted into a corner.

 

Just wondering how the -script using the name 'Martha' painted the story into a corner?

 

No, what I was saying is that because the change of heart happened in the heat of battle, it had to be a one word answer, a 'silver bullet' that had Bats stunned.

 

The real reasons for a change of heart should have been much more nuanced...but Snyder went for the drama and missed the mark entirely.

 

Bats is the world's best detective...could he not have investigated, figured things out, weighed the possibilities...and then decided that his emotional response to the destruction of Metropolis was wrong?

 

Not if you want a mid-battle enlightenment, he couldn't.

[Rip]

I think if the movie changed Batman's mom to Martha just to suit the story, it might be a little cheap. But its always been Martha.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think if the movie changed Batman's mom to Martha just to suit the story, it might be a little cheap. But its always been Martha.

 

It has. But use of that coincidence was lazy, IMHO.

 

Why was it Lois Lane tracking the source of the bullets rather than the detective?

 

If Bats was true to himself, he would have connected those dots before taking the actions he did.

 

And that would have led to the moment of realisation that was required.

 

They still could have had the initial encounter, but Snyder wanted a showdown following that and then had to shoehorn in a turning point.

[Bosco685]

It has. But use of that coincidence was lazy, IMHO.

 

Why was it Lois Lane tracking the source of the bullets rather than the detective?

 

If Bats was true to himself, he would have connected those dots before taking the actions he did.

 

And that would have led to the moment of realisation that was required.

 

They still could have had the initial encounter, but Snyder wanted a showdown following that and then had to shoehorn in a turning point.

 

Could it be Bruce Wayne had lost himself so much in vengeance due to years or pain and suffering he had gotten away from his core strength?

 

I wasn't as troubled with the scene. But I sure appreciate a more logical discussion.

 

[Rip]

I think Batman was too consumed by his demons at the time. The dream/future sequence put him further off track.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by Rip