Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)

[Otomofan]

Dc could of done it.

Who necroposted this thread to talk about Justice League, anyway? Wrong necropost. We have a Justice League thread. This is the thread that should only be necroposted for pictures of Tao Okamoto.

 

[abake]

Seems like #releasethesnydercut got a lot of traction this weekend... I think all the actors tweeted, including Gal Gadot and Ben Affleck. I think it's a certainty that it will happen.

Hmmm... should've looked for the Justice League thread...

 

[SilverStar17]

Sorry but no matter how u slice it the death of Superman was rushed to hell. Superman dying in his second movie was a dumb choice and the way they handled the team coming together was awful. The whole scene of looking at each member on camera doing something like we are supposed to be hyped about that was lazy. There was no sense of a team. Bvs was a huge JL commercial but in the end it failed to deliver.

Sorry but no matter how much it bothers you, it wasn’t.

 

[The Buffinator]

Because I felt the death of Superman was a better inspiration for the team to come together. All three of the marquee JL characters (WW, Superman, and Batman) kind of took the same individual paths with their own trials and tribulations before ultimately coming to a head. Batman set out to rid Gotham of crime, but had become jaded and sort of gave up on the quest that he started out on when he realized that for every bad guy he gets, another one will simply take his place. Superman set out to be a beacon of hope, but soon realized that no matter what he did, bad things were still going to happen and that the world isn?t black and white. Wonder Woman set out to kill Ares thinking that doing so would bring peace and harmony to mankind, then ultimately realized that the world isn?t perfect and can be a cruel place. All three paths met and all realized that there is still good in the world that is worth fighting for, and witnessing Superman?s sacrifice only reinforced this revelation for Batman and Wonder Woman and inspired them to want to create the JL.

Avengers felt more of like a ?can you guys just get along for five minutes and fight Loki please??

It may have been a better inspiration (although given the Tesseract's destructive power, I think it's a toss-up), but where it came up short was in the set up and execution. Putting Gotham and Metropolis across a bay from each other in BvS was a severe WTF mis-step, and don't get me started on the Martha connection. Both Affleck's Batman and Gadot's WW should have been introduced in their own movies first. Granted Batman didn't need yet another origin story film, but each (as well as Aquaman & Flash) needed further character development (& screen time) in order to really resonate with audiences. On the one hand I can see why Snyder & company didn't want to follow the same script as Marvel, but there was a reason why the MCU approach worked. Superman 2 should have been him vs. Lex Luthor with a Doomsday post-credits teaser, with Batman, WW, Aquaman and Flash solo movies to follow, all leading up to the JL movie we deserved. Ah, what could have been...

 

[SilverStar17]

It may have been a better inspiration (although given the Tesseract's destructive power, I think it's a toss-up), but where it came up short was in the set up and execution. Putting Gotham and Metropolis across a bay from each other in BvS was a severe WTF mis-step, and don't get me started on the Martha connection. Both Affleck's Batman and Gadot's WW should have been introduced in their own movies first. Granted Batman didn't need yet another origin story film, but each (as well as Aquaman & Flash) needed further character development (& screen time) in order to really resonate with audiences. On the one hand I can see why Snyder & company didn't want to follow the same script as Marvel, but there was a reason why the MCU approach worked. Superman 2 should have been him vs. Lex Luthor with a Doomsday post-credits teaser, with Batman, WW, Aquaman and Flash solo movies to follow, all leading up to the JL movie we deserved. Ah, what could have been...

Disagree about Batman, agree about Wonder Woman. I even think Aquaman should have came after BvS, as I think Ocean Master would have made for a great first JL film villain. Suicide Squad I think was rushed and sucked (that should have been the Aquaman film slot), and Flash I think would have been fine being introduced in a solo film post JL I feel.

And the Martha connection really didn’t bother me. Unlike the overwhelming majority of people, I didn’t view it as “Hey your mother’s name is Martha too? Let’s be friends now then.”

 

[The Buffinator]

Disagree about Batman, agree about Wonder Woman. I even think Aquaman should have came after BvS, as I think Ocean Master would have made for a great first JL film villain.

And the Martha connection really didn?t bother me. Unlike the overwhelming majority of people, I didn?t view it as ?Hey your mother?s name is Martha too? Let?s be friends now then.?

I just never bought that Batman would be so hell bent on killing Superman due to the collateral damage of a fight he really didn't have full control over. The world's greatest detective would have realized that and also factored in Supe's preceding heroism in stopping the terraforming of Earth and the annihilation of the human race.

As for the Martha moment, I suppose BvS's early scenes with a young Bruce Wayne were supposed to convey that he still was carrying the emotional trauma of his parents' death, but IMO that wasn't enough to make me think he'd have an epiphany at the mere mention of his mother's name.

 

[SilverStar17]

I just never bought that Batman would be so hell bent on killing Superman due to the collateral damage of a fight he really didn't have full control over. The world's greatest detective would have realized that and also factored in Supe's preceding heroism in stopping the terraforming of Earth and the annihilation of the human race.

As for the Martha moment, I suppose BvS's early scenes with a young Bruce Wayne were supposed to convey that he still was carrying the emotional trauma of his parents' death, but IMO that wasn't enough to make me think he'd have an epiphany at the mere mention of his mother's name.

Well I felt it went deeper than that. Batman had become so jaded and as I mentioned, sort of given up because he realized that no matter what he did, he was never going to truly rid Gotham of crime. That for every criminal he stopped, two more just replaced the previous one, so he felt like he hadn’t made an impact or done anything meaningful. What happened in Metropolis was merely the breaking point for him, as he had already been feeling this way for years. Consequently, he felt that stopping Superman would remedy that and in doing so, would be his ticket to regaining his former self and give him a sense of purpose again.

Yeah, I can see that. I’ve always maintained the conviction that in the famed scene where Bruce had the epiphany, when he showed him replay his parents’ murders in his head, it should have showed the face of the killer and showed Bruce’s face instead. I felt that would have given more weight to the scene and conveyed even better to the audience what Bruce was realizing he was ironically turning into. And the “Martha” trigger to me wasn’t really any different than the “Cause I’m with you ‘til the end of the line” trigger with Bucky in TWS.

 

[EndoSickness]

Sorry but no matter how much it bothers you, it wasn?t.

...to you.

I thought about it, but didn?t do it. Thank you for this!

 

[franpincho]

No it didn?t

Exactly. Same **** different smell. Just as nauseating.

 

[The Buffinator]

Well I felt it went deeper than that. Batman had become so jaded and as I mentioned, sort of given up because he realized that no matter what he did, he was never going to truly rid Gotham of crime. That for every criminal he stopped, two more just replaced the previous one, so he felt like he hadn?t made an impact or done anything meaningful. What happened in Metropolis was merely the breaking point for him, as he had already been feeling this way for years. Consequently, he felt that stopping Superman would remedy that and in doing so, would be his ticket to regaining his former self and give him a sense of purpose again.

Yeah, I can see that. I?ve always maintained the conviction that in the famed scene where Bruce had the epiphany, when he showed him replay his parents? murders in his head, it should have showed the face of the killer and showed Bruce?s face instead. I felt that would have given more weight to the scene and conveyed even better to the audience what Bruce was realizing he was ironically turning into. And the ?Martha? trigger to me wasn?t really any different than the ?Cause I?m with you ?til the end of the line? trigger with Bucky in TWS.

No disrespect, but IMO that's the interpretation of someone who's trying a bit too hard to justify the events of the movie. This was supposedly an older, wiser Batman, so however jaded he'd become it shouldn't have precluded him from looking at the Superman situation logically. To each his own, but it simply didn't work for me.

As for your comparison of trigger lines, again I respectfully disagree. Clark/Superman had never referred to Mrs. Kent as anything other than "Mom", so to suddenly refer to her as Martha was out of character and IMO completely contrived. Conversely, the line with Bucky had a clear & established emotional weight.

 

[SilverStar17]

...to you.

Of course. But the overwhelming majority of people on here seemingly struggle with distinguishing opinion from fact, so when addressing those people, I’ll do the same because it bothers them being they think their opinion is matter of fact.

No disrespect, but IMO that's the interpretation of someone who's trying a bit too hard to justify the events of the movie. This was supposedly an older, wiser Batman, so however jaded he'd become it shouldn't have precluded him from looking at the Superman situation logically. To each his own, but it simply didn't work for me.

As for your comparison of trigger lines, again I respectfully disagree. Clark/Superman had never referred to Mrs. Kent as anything other than "Mom", so to suddenly refer to her as Martha was out of character and IMO completely contrived. Conversely, the line with Bucky had a clear & established emotional weight.

No disrespect at all. Idc that you don’t like it, as it doesn’t change my viewing experience of the film. We just interpreted things differently based on what we saw, and that’s fine. I’m not attempting to justify anything. I feel you’re approaching it assuming Batman was “supposed” to be the same Batman that he started out as 20+ years ago and therefore to you, he should have done this, he should have done that, etc, because that’s what you wanted to see. He wasn’t, and that was the point (this was made more evident in the UE). It worked for me. I could say the same for you in attempting imo a bit too hard to justify why you loathe it. No disrespect, of course.

I get that, but Batman would have no clue what “my mom” means, and I don’t think it wouldn’t carry the same emotional weight. Plus, Clark knew Bruce’s mother’s name was Martha from having done his own detective work and likely knew that would stun him. Again, perhaps we just saw something different in the same film.

 

[The Buffinator]

No disrespect at all. Idc that you don?t like it, as it doesn?t change my viewing experience of the film. We just interpreted things differently based on what we saw, and that?s fine. I?m not attempting to justify anything. I feel you?re approaching it assuming Batman was ?supposed? to be the same Batman that he started out as 20+ years ago and therefore to you, he should have done this, he should have done that, etc, because that?s what you wanted to see. He wasn?t, and that was the point (this was made more evident in the UE). It worked for me. I could say the same for you in attempting imo a bit too hard to justify why you loathe it. No disrespect, of course.

I get that, but Batman would have no clue what ?my mom? means, and I don?t think it wouldn?t carry the same emotional weight. Plus, Clark knew Bruce?s mother?s name was Martha from having done his own detective work and likely knew that would stun him. Again, perhaps we just saw something different in the same film.

But I don't loathe it, as I love the characters too much to ever say that. And I like the actors playing them too. There's much to enjoy about the film (especially the UE), it's just that there's a few glaring things that IMO keep it from being as good as it could have been. Like having a plausible premise, sound narrative thread and believable character motivations. Sorry, couldn't resist! But any way you slice it, it will always be a fun movie to discuss and dissect.

 

[SilverStar17]

But I don't loathe it, as I love the characters too much to ever say that. And I like the actors playing them too. There's much to enjoy about the film (especially the UE), it's just that there's a few glaring things that IMO keep it from being as good as it could have been. Like having a plausible premise, sound narrative thread and believable character motivations. Sorry, couldn't resist! But any way you slice it, it will always be a fun movie to discuss and dissect.

Well you can still like a character or characters, but dislike a film. For instance, I like the character of Luke Skywalker and liked his portrayal in TLJ, but disliked TLJ as a film overall.

I thought the premise was plausible and that the storylines and character motivations were believable. I felt it gave the characters more depth and more layers to dissect and discuss.

Which is probably why three years later, it’s still a fun film to discuss and dissect indeed.

 

[Prime Clone]

Putting Gotham and Metropolis across a bay from each other in BvS was a severe WTF mis-step

That's straight from the comics, but I agree to non-comic-fans it might seem weird.

and don't get me started on the Martha connection.

That was a Martha-stroke, but sadly most people don't seem to get it. It's Bruce's chance to finally be free of his demons by "saving Martha".

 

[ironwez20]

Sorry but no matter how much it bothers you, it wasn?t.

And I?m sorry but no matter how much you like it , it was

 

[ironwez20]

Well you can still like a character or characters, but dislike a film. For instance, I like the character of Luke Skywalker and liked his portrayal in TLJ, but disliked TLJ as a film overall.

I thought the premise was plausible and that the storylines and character motivations were believable. I felt it gave the characters more depth and more layers to dissect and discuss.

Which is probably why three years later, it?s still a fun film to discuss and dissect indeed.

Lol nobody likes the last jedi aside from a handful of people. I?m not even like not even into the OT trilogy to much but even I could feel the pain of fans

 

[SilverStar17]

And I?m sorry but no matter how much you like it , it was

No need to apologize. Because no matter how much you dislike it, it wasn’t.

Lol nobody likes the last jedi aside from a handful of people. I?m not even like not even into the OT trilogy to much but even I could feel the pain of fans

Nobody likes TLJ aside from a handful of people? That’s a contradictory statement. You said that nobody likes TLJ, then summarily acknowledged there’s somebody who does.

 

[The Buffinator]

That's straight from the comics, but I agree to non-comic-fans it might seem weird.

Wow, I didn't know that was from the comics. Still, after 3 Nolan era Batman films and MoS (especially MoS) never mentioning it , it seemed too convenient. I also thought it was unnecessary, because it wasn't as if Superman couldn't fly a few hundred miles in a matter of seconds to reach Gotham and have the same confrontation with Batman.

That was a Martha-stroke, but sadly most people don't seem to get it. It's Bruce's chance to finally be free of his demons by "saving Martha".

It's not that it wasn't apparent what Snyder was going for, it's just that IMO it didn't come off as intended. I think in this instance Zack tried to be a bit too clever and it just came off as contrived.

 

[SilverStar17]

I forgot to mention that in my response as well. That in the comics, Gotham and Metropolis are indeed next to one another. I’m not a stickler for comic accuracy though myself. I don’t think that what worked in comics invariably works in film.

But in this case, them being neighboring cities I didn’t find to be a tremendous deal.

 

[The Buffinator]

I forgot to mention that in my response as well. That in the comics, Gotham and Metropolis are indeed next to one another. I’m not a stickler for comic accuracy though myself. I don’t think that what worked in comics invariably works in film.

But in this case, them being neighboring cities I didn’t find to be a tremendous deal.

Have they always been neighboring cities, or was that a retcon for a particular run of comics? I'm guessing the latter?