Batman v Superman Shrugs Off Reviews, Heads For $180 Million Weekend

Sorry you're right. I should've said "any logical reason to fight".

Batman deciding to finally kill superman because a madman he employed killed a bunch of people in an attempt to kill superman was the catalyst?

If that's this batman's thinking he should've killed the Joker years ago.

Too bad these two superbros couldn't just talk before they fought. Probably would've cleared up a lot of grief.

And Gotham is right across the bay from metropolis? Why didn't supes just fly over there and arrest batman instead of trying to bash him with an editorial as Clark Kent?

Sorry for ranting, I'm still trying to get my head around this movie.

The guy blowing himself up was the final straw. It started from the Zod vs Superman fight. Something you have to remember is that we, the audience, know that Superman was the good guy. Some people in Metropolis see him as a hero, but look at the beginning of the movie. Bruce tries to get his building evacuated and hundreds of people would have been killed, just from that building collapse alone. He finds one of his employees who had his legs crushed and then saves a little girl. The girl is obviously the daughter of another one of his employees, an employee that died in the building collapse.

Man of Steel is the first time that world ever saw a, as they call them, Meta-Human. Wonder Woman was around in the early 1900s but it's likely her abilities were only known to a few people and nearly 100 years later any tales of those would have been long forgotten or dismissed. So Superman is the first world wide known Meta-human and as people see it he has the powers of a God. For a Bruce Wayne that has obviously been Batman'ing for a long time and has gone through some hell (the costume of an obviously dead Robin and the possibly bombed out Wayne Manor are evidence of that along with how he acts) this terrifies him. Bruce never looks at the bright side of things. He is paranoid, he is insane. Bruce controls his insanity by being Batman and fighting villains but at this point in his career he's clearly barely holding it together. So he sees Superman as a potential threat. Bruce believes, as he tells Alfred, that if there is even a chance that Superman might turn on them (humanity) then they need to take him out. The movie is drawing clear parallels between Bruce and Lex for most of the movie. Lex is also terrified of Superman. For different reasons but he still doesn't believe Superman is a good thing to have around.

Speaking of Lex. At some point Lex figured out who Batman is and then used the incident in Africa to confirm Superman's identity. From there he set things up so the two would meet first in their disguises (Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne) and then later. You can see when the truck pulls into Lex's warehouse that Lex is happy. Batman attacked and was stopped. As we see he was stopped by Superman, who gave Batman a warning. This only further drives Bruce into his madness. I need to rewatch the movies and see what the returned checks from the guy said, but it was the final tipping point for Bruce. Superman flying away unharmed while dozens, if not hundreds, of people all die probably triggered some PTSD from the Metropolis battle. Bruce would have seen it as Metropolis all over again.

As for Superman arresting Batman. How? Outside of that big chase through the streets it would be hard for Superman to find Batman. Superman doesn't know his identity until Lex points it out so it's not like he can knock on Bruce's door and drag him in. Batman also operates in the shadows most of the time and Superman only hears about what happens after the fact. He can't use his X-ray vision to find a Batcave he doesn't know exists and with scrutiny on him trying to interfere in everything it wouldn't look good if he kept flying around Gotham watching every single person and place until he managed to find Batman.

Superman DID try talking, Batman refused to listen. Batman was too far gone a that point. There was no reasoning with him. It took being reminded of his mother "Save Martha" to snap him out of it. On top of an explanation that Superman's mother is also named Martha. It brought Batman back to his senses and made him realize how far he had gone as well as Lex's manipulations.
 
The guy blowing himself up was the final straw. It started from the Zod vs Superman fight. Something you have to remember is that we, the audience, know that Superman was the good guy. Some people in Metropolis see him as a hero, but look at the beginning of the movie. Bruce tries to get his building evacuated and hundreds of people would have been killed, just from that building collapse alone. He finds one of his employees who had his legs crushed and then saves a little girl. The girl is obviously the daughter of another one of his employees, an employee that died in the building collapse.

Man of Steel is the first time that world ever saw a, as they call them, Meta-Human. Wonder Woman was around in the early 1900s but it's likely her abilities were only known to a few people and nearly 100 years later any tales of those would have been long forgotten or dismissed. So Superman is the first world wide known Meta-human and as people see it he has the powers of a God. For a Bruce Wayne that has obviously been Batman'ing for a long time and has gone through some hell (the costume of an obviously dead Robin and the possibly bombed out Wayne Manor are evidence of that along with how he acts) this terrifies him. Bruce never looks at the bright side of things. He is paranoid, he is insane. Bruce controls his insanity by being Batman and fighting villains but at this point in his career he's clearly barely holding it together. So he sees Superman as a potential threat. Bruce believes, as he tells Alfred, that if there is even a chance that Superman might turn on them (humanity) then they need to take him out. The movie is drawing clear parallels between Bruce and Lex for most of the movie. Lex is also terrified of Superman. For different reasons but he still doesn't believe Superman is a good thing to have around.

Speaking of Lex. At some point Lex figured out who Batman is and then used the incident in Africa to confirm Superman's identity. From there he set things up so the two would meet first in their disguises (Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne) and then later. You can see when the truck pulls into Lex's warehouse that Lex is happy. Batman attacked and was stopped. As we see he was stopped by Superman, who gave Batman a warning. This only further drives Bruce into his madness. I need to rewatch the movies and see what the returned checks from the guy said, but it was the final tipping point for Bruce. Superman flying away unharmed while dozens, if not hundreds, of people all die probably triggered some PTSD from the Metropolis battle. Bruce would have seen it as Metropolis all over again.

As for Superman arresting Batman. How? Outside of that big chase through the streets it would be hard for Superman to find Batman. Superman doesn't know his identity until Lex points it out so it's not like he can knock on Bruce's door and drag him in. Batman also operates in the shadows most of the time and Superman only hears about what happens after the fact. He can't use his X-ray vision to find a Batcave he doesn't know exists and with scrutiny on him trying to interfere in everything it wouldn't look good if he kept flying around Gotham watching every single person and place until he managed to find Batman.

Superman DID try talking, Batman refused to listen. Batman was too far gone a that point. There was no reasoning with him. It took being reminded of his mother "Save Martha" to snap him out of it. On top of an explanation that Superman's mother is also named Martha. It brought Batman back to his senses and made him realize how far he had gone as well as Lex's manipulations.

I dunno, I wasn't feeling it. I'm used to seeing Batman brutal and cruel, but not so easily manipulated. He just happened to receive all those cheques from the bomber right before the bombing occurred? He even questioned the messenger why they just arrived now. "ehh, I dunno" or something was the guy's reply. C'mon Bruce, you're smarter than that.

As for Superman not being able to find Batman, if Superman was obsessed at putting a stop to Batman's vigilante campaign as Clark Kent seemed to be, it wouldn't take Superman long to find Batman. With his super hearing and vision, he could've just perched himself atop Gotham and picked out Batman easily enough. Or why didn't Superman just arrest Batman when he stopped him in his batmobile? "Oh, excuse me, Mr Batman, you just killed a dozen criminals with your tank and blew up some passenger vehicles. Consider this your warning not to do it again." Instead of just picking Batman up, flying him to the authorities, and letting them deal with Batman as they wish.

As for Lex, I kinda liked this characterization more than the recent 'corrupt realtor' he was in the previous movies. More evil scientist (like the original Lex). My only gripe was that it should've been Metallo he was creating (maybe having the Wallace Bomber-guy wearing the suit), and had I not seen the trailer that would've been my first assumption after he unearthed that big chunk o' kryptonite.

I think if they would've focused the story more on the Lex shenanigans and the creation (or at least the baby steps) towards the Justice League and less on setting up the fight scene from The Dark Knight Returns, this movie would've been a lot better.
 
I dunno, I wasn't feeling it. I'm used to seeing Batman brutal and cruel, but not so easily manipulated. He just happened to receive all those cheques from the bomber right before the bombing occurred? He even questioned the messenger why they just arrived now. "ehh, I dunno" or something was the guy's reply. C'mon Bruce, you're smarter than that.

As for Superman not being able to find Batman, if Superman was obsessed at putting a stop to Batman's vigilante campaign as Clark Kent seemed to be, it wouldn't take Superman long to find Batman. With his super hearing and vision, he could've just perched himself atop Gotham and picked out Batman easily enough. Or why didn't Superman just arrest Batman when he stopped him in his batmobile? "Oh, excuse me, Mr Batman, you just killed a dozen criminals with your tank and blew up some passenger vehicles. Consider this your warning not to do it again." Instead of just picking Batman up, flying him to the authorities, and letting them deal with Batman as they wish.

As for Lex, I kinda liked this characterization more than the recent 'corrupt realtor' he was in the previous movies. More evil scientist (like the original Lex). My only gripe was that it should've been Metallo he was creating (maybe having the Wallace Bomber-guy wearing the suit), and had I not seen the trailer that would've been my first assumption after he unearthed that big chunk o' kryptonite.

I think if they would've focused the story more on the Lex shenanigans and the creation (or at least the baby steps) towards the Justice League and less on setting up the fight scene from The Dark Knight Returns, this movie would've been a lot better.

The letters didn't just arrive. Bruce was told that they guy kept sending them back every month. Bruce didn't ask why he just got them now he asked "Why haven't I seen these?" to which the guy said "I don't know sir, I'll look into it". Meaning that someone, probably someone running the mail room or someone that handles Bruce's messages, stopped them from getting all the way to the top. While watching the senate hearing Bruce asked if the guy had been getting the checks and his attendant (possibly his secretary or something) said they kept getting sent back. Then he went to get the letters to show Bruce.

Superman sitting on the building and spying on everyone on Gotham goes back to my point on there being a big discussion in the movie on how far should Superman go to help and where should he limit himself. That Knightmare dream/premonition/time travel sequences shows us a world in which Superman has no limits and tries to "help" the entire world by policing it constantly and ruthlessly. That is what Batman (and Lex and the senate committee) fear. Superman warning Batman is a bit silly, but it's what he would do. Tell someone that is supposedly trying to take down villains (there were hints in the film that Batman was a lot less brutal before his reappearance) and give them a chance. Clark doesn't like Batman (at least at that point) but he's the eternal good guy. If he had run across Batman again after that point (and before the forced confrontation) I have no doubt he would have taken him. However, Clark is a bit of an idiot at times.

I agree. Bringing in Doomsday like that is just a waste of a seriously badass villain. "Killing" Superman was a great idea, as I love the thought of it being Bats and WW that have to form the league, but it should have been another villain. Metallo would have been great, or Solomon Grundy even. I'm equally unsure about them using Darkseid for Justice League. It seems way too soon to bring him in. Brianiac would be a fun villain to use to bring the League together, or hell Vandal Savage would be great. I know they're using him (incredibly well) over on Legends of Tomorrow but Vandal is always a fun character when he's scheme'ing and comes up against teams like the Justice League.
 
I dunno, I wasn't feeling it. I'm used to seeing Batman brutal and cruel, but not so easily manipulated. He just happened to receive all those cheques from the bomber right before the bombing occurred? He even questioned the messenger why they just arrived now. "ehh, I dunno" or something was the guy's reply. C'mon Bruce, you're smarter than that.

Bruce has occasionally been manipulated in the comics and other media. This is especially true when he over extends himself while trying to do too much. In the film I got the impression that he spent a lot of time coming up with a plan of attack against Superman. In the actual fight, you can see the planning that went into that. I think Bruce was easily manipulated because he was so focused on Superman being the enemy.

As for Superman not being able to find Batman, if Superman was obsessed at putting a stop to Batman's vigilante campaign as Clark Kent seemed to be, it wouldn't take Superman long to find Batman. With his super hearing and vision, he could've just perched himself atop Gotham and picked out Batman easily enough. Or why didn't Superman just arrest Batman when he stopped him in his batmobile? "Oh, excuse me, Mr Batman, you just killed a dozen criminals with your tank and blew up some passenger vehicles. Consider this your warning not to do it again." Instead of just picking Batman up, flying him to the authorities, and letting them deal with Batman as they wish.

Superman in most incarnations rarely goes beyond Metropolis unless there is a world ending threat looming. I think he was more interested in dealing with the Batman as Clark Kent but no one gave a damn about it. So one night he went out and stopped him. I think he very well listened for him and tried to put a stop to things when he heard Batman shooting up cars. Superman letting Batman go is a bit unusual. I can only see this as a matter of him giving Batman a professional courtesy in recognition of some of the good he's done. He likely knew about Batman for years, but only went after him when Batman began escalating his violation of civil liberties as Clark put it. Also, Clark may not have judged him too harshly being keenly aware that he was responsible for the death of thousands. Batman's killing was incidental as well, but the body count was far less. This is the type of thing that should have been explored in more depth, but big budget Hollywood movies rarely do anymore. They transition from one action sequence to another with story as a thinly veiled excuse for the action scenes. It sets them up so they make sense and that's it. This is the biggest problem with this movie and why shoving too much into it hurt the overall product.

As for Lex, I kinda liked this characterization more than the recent 'corrupt realtor' he was in the previous movies. More evil scientist (like the original Lex). My only gripe was that it should've been Metallo he was creating (maybe having the Wallace Bomber-guy wearing the suit), and had I not seen the trailer that would've been my first assumption after he unearthed that big chunk o' kryptonite.

In a sense it was nice to see something different than a real estate scheme. Especially since Lex was always a master at manipulation. Having said that, the real estate scams were more in line with the titan of industry version of the character that has dominated the comics for so long. This one, as we've both pointed out got back to his mad scientist roots. Although I don't recall Lex ever being so awkward and socially inept.


I think if they would've focused the story more on the Lex shenanigans and the creation (or at least the baby steps) towards the Justice League and less on setting up the fight scene from The Dark Knight Returns, this movie would've been a lot better.

I disagree with this. This version of Lex couldn't hold the story and keep people interested enough to sit through it. I'm not blaming the actor, but this Lex just isn't that much fun to watch.

The guy blowing himself up was the final straw. It started from the Zod vs Superman fight. Something you have to remember is that we, the audience, know that Superman was the good guy. Some people in Metropolis see him as a hero, but look at the beginning of the movie. Bruce tries to get his building evacuated and hundreds of people would have been killed, just from that building collapse alone. He finds one of his employees who had his legs crushed and then saves a little girl. The girl is obviously the daughter of another one of his employees, an employee that died in the building collapse.

Despite his outward behavior as Batman, Bruce Wayne as a person cares deeply for those in his employment. Because a Wayne Enterprises facility was destroyed and the loss of life was significant, I think it pushed Bruce's buttons. Despite having no family and sometimes alienating people from his life in pursuit of his mission, Bruce cultivates people in both personas in a way that fills that void. He picks up young and aspiring super heroes like strays as Batman. As Bruce he sort of does the same with his employees.

Man of Steel is the first time that world ever saw a, as they call them, Meta-Human. Wonder Woman was around in the early 1900s but it's likely her abilities were only known to a few people and nearly 100 years later any tales of those would have been long forgotten or dismissed. So Superman is the first world wide known Meta-human and as people see it he has the powers of a God. For a Bruce Wayne that has obviously been Batman'ing for a long time and has gone through some hell (the costume of an obviously dead Robin and the possibly bombed out Wayne Manor are evidence of that along with how he acts) this terrifies him. Bruce never looks at the bright side of things. He is paranoid, he is insane. Bruce controls his insanity by being Batman and fighting villains but at this point in his career he's clearly barely holding it together. So he sees Superman as a potential threat. Bruce believes, as he tells Alfred, that if there is even a chance that Superman might turn on them (humanity) then they need to take him out. The movie is drawing clear parallels between Bruce and Lex for most of the movie. Lex is also terrified of Superman. For different reasons but he still doesn't believe Superman is a good thing to have around.

I have to disagree with this. First and foremost, Superman is known to the world as an alien. He is not a "meta-human." This is an important distinction. I believe meta-humans are less threatening to the populace than aliens are. An alien and their motivations are more of an unknown quantity to the world. A meta-human at least grew up on Earth and was a person until something triggered the meta-gene into being active. We also don't know if anyone associated with the future Justice League will be the first super powered individuals aside from Superman and Batman to be known to the public. They really haven't said. Batman has been active for 20 years at this point. It stands to reason some of his enemies have been too. Granted most of them don't have powers, but he often crosses paths with those who do. Wonder Woman basically stated she's been out of touch with the world for 100 years or so. You are correct in that some people view Superman's powers and benevolence as suspicious. I think Batman does the same.

Secondly, I don't think Wayne Manor is bombed out as much as it's falling apart due to being neglected. I think Bruce moved out probably the minute he got back to it after his parents death. What we see in the film is more than 30 years of neglect combined with Gotham's horrible weather. The fact is, a building will deteriorate quickly if not occupied. As for Bruce barely holding it together, I wouldn't say that. Bruce is suspicious of everyone. That's how he's always operated. He's always gathered information and come up with plans to immobilize and capture every major villain and super powered being he runs across and those he might encounter. Justice League Doom is an example of this.

Speaking of Lex. At some point Lex figured out who Batman is and then used the incident in Africa to confirm Superman's identity. From there he set things up so the two would meet first in their disguises (Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne) and then later. You can see when the truck pulls into Lex's warehouse that Lex is happy. Batman attacked and was stopped. As we see he was stopped by Superman, who gave Batman a warning. This only further drives Bruce into his madness. I need to rewatch the movies and see what the returned checks from the guy said, but it was the final tipping point for Bruce. Superman flying away unharmed while dozens, if not hundreds, of people all die probably triggered some PTSD from the Metropolis battle. Bruce would have seen it as Metropolis all over again.

No argument here.

As for Superman arresting Batman. How? Outside of that big chase through the streets it would be hard for Superman to find Batman. Superman doesn't know his identity until Lex points it out so it's not like he can knock on Bruce's door and drag him in. Batman also operates in the shadows most of the time and Superman only hears about what happens after the fact. He can't use his X-ray vision to find a Batcave he doesn't know exists and with scrutiny on him trying to interfere in everything it wouldn't look good if he kept flying around Gotham watching every single person and place until he managed to find Batman.

I think Superman probably could have, but again he's normally got enough to deal with in Metropolis that he doesn't generally bother going to other major cities unless a larger threat presents itself. You do make a good point, that constant visits to Gotham would have tipped off Batman and Clark most likely thought of that.

Superman DID try talking, Batman refused to listen. Batman was too far gone a that point. There was no reasoning with him. It took being reminded of his mother "Save Martha" to snap him out of it. On top of an explanation that Superman's mother is also named Martha. It brought Batman back to his senses and made him realize how far he had gone as well as Lex's manipulations.

I think kidnapping Martha Kent the one mistake that Lex made. I believe Superman knew that Batman at his core would do the right thing and save people. This is why he tries to get Batman to help him. I wouldn't say that Batman was too far gone. He's not insane here. He sticks to his plan due to mistrusting Superman. He acts out of fear, which contrary to popular believe is something Bruce does experience. He just hides or controls it better than most. This is the central theme behind any story involving the Scarecrow. Batman simply wasn't interested in anything Superman had to say as his mind was made up. It wasn't until he mentioned Martha that Bruce recognized that Superman wasn't just some super powered monster, but rather a person. I think Superman knew he could trust Batman to rescue his mother. I agree that this also clued Bruce in to how he had been manipulated by Lex Luthor.
 
I disagree with this. This version of Lex couldn't hold the story and keep people interested enough to sit through it. I'm not blaming the actor, but this Lex just isn't that much fun to watch.

I don't know, I'd say if the writing would've been more focused on Lex's character and motivations, this Lex would've been better, but, yeah, not sure if an Evil Mark Zuckerberg and his creations could've been made better w more screen time. Give the role to my boy Cranston, then he could've carried the movie.

I've gotta admit, this movie has been a lot more fun to discuss than the Avengers was, and the more I discuss and read about BvS the more I realize that it's far more interesting to me than what the Avengers shaped out to be. While I feel the theatrical release was very bloated with content, it also felt very incomplete. I'm hoping the unrated cut will make the movie more coherent and not just be a recollection of the Killing Joke as another Batman nightmare. I watched the cut scene featuring Lex and Steppenwolf and thought that was pretty cool. No idea why it was cut from the theatrical release when it plays a very important part to the story and Steppenwolf looked awesome. I would've left that scene but cut out Kevin Costener's Ghost on Lonely Mountain from the movie.

I thought Jeremy Irons was great as Alfred. I really liked how they made him much more hands on and involved in Batman's mission than the previous movies (where he played mostly a father figure/moral compass). I'm looking forward to future Batman installments which can expand on Alfred a bit more.

While I have nothing against Superman's sacrifice (it'd make more sense for Batman to assemble the Justice League due to his resources anyway), it did feel cheapened with the teaser at the end. I think a far better way to end that film would've been to cut to Doomsday hinting that he was still alive.

Oh, and Superman would've been so embarrassed by his mom joking with Batman over their capes. "Mom, stop it! You're making me look lame in front of the Batman."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dan_D
like this


Just watch this. The review starts around the 5 min mark.

BvS is a lousy movie. About 15 min of the material is the only thing this film provides in entertainment. His Batman "killing" people didn't bother me too much. It put it on par with Miller's more lethal Batman. I really dug the scenes with Affleck, even if it didn't mean much.

However, the caveat that did bother me is that Superman is still unlikable. He's suppose to be this beacon of goodness. The extreme example of the ideal that people can be good. So, to see his character being completely worthless and unheroic is painful. It's not good. He needs to be the opposite of Batman. Not just a Batman with super powers. A brooding Superman is boring. You can't break a "brooding" character. You can break one that isn't. That's the dynamic that Snyder never understood with Man of Steel or BvS. He doesn't understand motivations. What makes a character do something. He'll never understand that.

If the world is indifferent to Superman, and view him as a threat...then why is their a statue of him? Who commissioned that?

Don't even get me started on Lex Luthor. What a waste that was.
 
Last edited:
I wasn't expecting that much after Man of Steel, but I enjoyed the hell out of BvS. I lost it during the "Grandma's Peach Tea" scene...

I'm actually looking forward to the JLA movie now.
 
I wasn't expecting that much after Man of Steel, but I enjoyed the hell out of BvS. I lost it during the "Grandma's Peach Tea" scene...

I'm actually looking forward to the JLA movie now.

That scene is just about the only thing that's moderately humorous in the entire film. Evidently the movie has been getting flak for being too dark and serious. Frankly, I don't have any issue with that.
 
So yeah, I saw this movie.

I understand why Batman decided to take out superman, but it doesn't make sense. Like someone else here said, hey why not sit down and have a chat?

I guess I am too cynical for these movie though.
My major gripes were:
1.how many times do we have to see Bruce Waynes parents die
2.how many times can you throw someone through a building?
3.Wonder woman had breast reduction surgery.
 
That scene is just about the only thing that's moderately humorous in the entire film. Evidently the movie has been getting flak for being too dark and serious. Frankly, I don't have any issue with that.

Yar, apparently Suicide Squad is having new scenes added to it to make the film more 'comical' due to BvS reaction. Personally, I don't mind a film being grim and dark (which BvS is) just that some of the conversations during it were so longwinded and redundant - I didn't want to listen to Supes repeatedly talk to his family members (alive and deceased) about how conflicted he was feeling. Parts of the movie reminded me of Peter Jackson's King Kong - dragged on and on.

1.how many times do we have to see Bruce Waynes parents die
2.how many times can you throw someone through a building?
3.Wonder woman had breast reduction surgery.

1. That reminds me - they took Bruce to go see Excalibur. If that's the movie I'm thinking (Patrick Steward has a small role), there was some hardcore violence and rough sex in that film. I wonder if that was part of Bruce's extra aggressive approach to grieving his parents (becoming Angrier Batman; shitkicking baddies and rough sex with Russian ballet dancers). They should've stuck with Zorro.
2. I hope I'll be able to be involved in a fight where I'm thrown or I throw somebody through a wall.
3. Personally I thought Wonder Woman looked great. The actress was a lot taller than I thought she was and she had this lean, but muscular vibe to her. And her theme music was great. I'm looking forward to her solo film.
 
Last edited:
Yar, apparently Suicide Squad is having new scenes added to it to make the film more 'comical' due to BvS reaction. Personally, I don't mind a film being grim and dark (which BvS is) just that some of the conversations during it were so longwinded and redundant - I didn't want to listen to Supes repeatedly talk to his family members (alive and deceased) about how conflicted he was feeling. Parts of the movie reminded me of Peter Jackson's King Kong - dragged on and on.



1. That reminds me - they took Bruce to go see Excalibur. If that's the movie I'm thinking (Patrick Steward has a small role), there was some hardcore violence and rough sex in that film. I wonder if that was part of Bruce's aggressive approach to grieving his parents (becoming Batman and shitkicking baddies).
2. I hope I'll be able to be involved in a fight where I'm thrown or I throw somebody through a wall.
3. Personally I thought Wonder Woman looked great. The actress was a lot taller than I thought she was and she had this lean, but muscular vibe to her. And her theme music was great. I'm looking forward to her solo film.

Yeah wonder woman completely stole the show. She was awesome. Still flaming hot as well don't get me wrong.
She was the best part of the film.
 
Yar, apparently Suicide Squad is having new scenes added to it to make the film more 'comical' due to BvS reaction. Personally, I don't mind a film being grim and dark (which BvS is) just that some of the conversations during it were so longwinded and redundant - I didn't want to listen to Supes repeatedly talk to his family members (alive and deceased) about how conflicted he was feeling. Parts of the movie reminded me of Peter Jackson's King Kong - dragged on and on.



1. That reminds me - they took Bruce to go see Excalibur. If that's the movie I'm thinking (Patrick Steward has a small role), there was some hardcore violence and rough sex in that film. I wonder if that was part of Bruce's extra aggressive approach to grieving his parents (becoming Angrier Batman; shitkicking baddies and rough sex with Russian ballet dancers). They should've stuck with Zorro.
2. I hope I'll be able to be involved in a fight where I'm thrown or I throw somebody through a wall.
3. Personally I thought Wonder Woman looked great. The actress was a lot taller than I thought she was and she had this lean, but muscular vibe to her. And her theme music was great. I'm looking forward to her solo film.

1.) Normally it's the Mask of Zorro. It's interesting that Excalibur was the film in this movie.
2.) Does a window count? I've done that.
3.) Then you've never seen a lean, yet muscular woman. Gal Godot sure as fuck doesn't fit that description, nor Wonder Woman's physique at all. She looked better than I thought she would, but not good enough.
 
Nah, Gal's looking fit and strong. I wasn't familiar with her before, and while googling some images of her I see just how scrawny she used to be. But she definitely packed on the muscle for this film.

She's no Kyle Bennett, but check out these guns:
9854077_orig.jpg
 
Just watch this. The review starts around the 5 min mark.

BvS is a lousy movie. About 15 min of the material is the only thing this film provides in entertainment. His Batman "killing" people didn't bother me too much. It put it on par with Miller's more lethal Batman. I really dug the scenes with Affleck, even if it didn't mean much.

Frank Miller's Batman didn't kill people. All his shooting was expressly stated to be with non-lethal ammunition.

However, the caveat that did bother me is that Superman is still unlikable. He's suppose to be this beacon of goodness. The extreme example of the ideal that people can be good. So, to see his character being completely worthless and unheroic is painful. It's not good. He needs to be the opposite of Batman. Not just a Batman with super powers. A brooding Superman is boring. You can't break a "brooding" character. You can break one that isn't. That's the dynamic that Snyder never understood with Man of Steel or BvS. He doesn't understand motivations. What makes a character do something. He'll never understand that.

Originally Superman was a jackass. This goes back to the 1930's and 40's version of the character. He was essentially an asshole jock douchebag. We saw his personality change quite a bit in the 1960's when the comics code came onto the scene. Batman and Superman both were more harsh and violent characters prior to this. While we think of their respective moral stances against killing as being integral to the characters, it wasn't always so. Originally Batman carried a gun, wore purple gloves and his stories were more detective oriented and had fewer science fiction elements than they typically do now. These characters have been around for over 75 years and have had multiple reboots to their history. Some core aspects to the character may stay the same but these characters have been reinterpreted many times over the last three quarters of century. Generally people from my generation (70's and 80's) or newer generations started with the Adam West and Christopher Reeves versions of the characters which were post-comics code versions of those characters. That's why these versions stand out as the "correct" versions to most of us. But if you delve into the history of these characters, their earlier incarnations are quite a bit different than the modern versions.

On one hand it's jarring but on the other hand I find it refreshing that DC and Snyder took a chance on reintroducing the darker versions of these characters into the public consciousness. Unfortunately they didn't do it for the right reasons, but I applaud them anyway. I'd also like to point out that the New 52 versions of these characters contain elements of earlier personality traits in Superman. Like it or not, that's what most newer material using the Superman character is based on.

If the world is indifferent to Superman, and view him as a threat...then why is their a statue of him? Who commissioned that?

The world isn't indifferent to him. This isn't true in any version of the character's stories. In the film he's typically either feared for his Godlike powers or worshipped for them. As for the statue, that's not explicitly stated in the film. There is a wall that shows the name of the dead, so this monument could be taken in two different contexts. It's either representational of the lost lives, or pays tribute to the man who saved the city and possibly the world overall.

Don't even get me started on Lex Luthor. What a waste that was.

I can't imagine the decision making behind such a casting choice or direction for the character. The New 52 seems to try and take some characters back to their earliest origins in some areas, so I get making Lex into a mad scientist, but the rest of the characterization outside of that is unrecognizable and painful to watch.

So yeah, I saw this movie.

I understand why Batman decided to take out superman, but it doesn't make sense. Like someone else here said, hey why not sit down and have a chat?

I guess I am too cynical for these movie though.
My major gripes were:
1.how many times do we have to see Bruce Waynes parents die
2.how many times can you throw someone through a building?
3.Wonder woman had breast reduction surgery.

1.) Why would they? Both characters were manipulated into making up their minds about the other. They were set on a course of action when they met. It's a very human thing to prejudge someone and get violent over ideology. How does that not make sense?
2.) A lot. This is a common theme in comic book fights, animation, TV shows, etc.
3.) Agreed. This is another casting choice that made no sense.
 
On one hand it's jarring but on the other hand I find it refreshing that DC and Snyder took a chance on reintroducing the darker versions of these characters into the public consciousness. Unfortunately they didn't do it for the right reasons, but I applaud them anyway. I'd also like to point out that the New 52 versions of these characters contain elements of earlier personality traits in Superman. Like it or not, that's what most newer material using the Superman character is based on.

Thankfully the New 52 is ending come May. DC is bringing back the pre-Flashpoint Superman and getting rid of the New 52 version.
 
Thankfully the New 52 is ending come May. DC is bringing back the pre-Flashpoint Superman and getting rid of the New 52 version.

I'm glad. Watching the New 52 Superman in some of the recent animated stuff was painful. The one in Man of Steel isn't as annoying as his animated counterpart but I have to admit, I like the cheesy, boyscout of a Superman I grew up with. The only departure from that formula I liked was in Superman the Animated series. Even then it was basically the boyscout version who just lived in a shitty world and adapted where he had to.
 
I dunno, I wasn't feeling it. I'm used to seeing Batman brutal and cruel, but not so easily manipulated. He just happened to receive all those cheques from the bomber right before the bombing occurred? He even questioned the messenger why they just arrived now. "ehh, I dunno" or something was the guy's reply. C'mon Bruce, you're smarter than that.

As for Superman not being able to find Batman, if Superman was obsessed at putting a stop to Batman's vigilante campaign as Clark Kent seemed to be, it wouldn't take Superman long to find Batman. With his super hearing and vision, he could've just perched himself atop Gotham and picked out Batman easily enough. Or why didn't Superman just arrest Batman when he stopped him in his batmobile? "Oh, excuse me, Mr Batman, you just killed a dozen criminals with your tank and blew up some passenger vehicles. Consider this your warning not to do it again." Instead of just picking Batman up, flying him to the authorities, and letting them deal with Batman as they wish.

As for Lex, I kinda liked this characterization more than the recent 'corrupt realtor' he was in the previous movies. More evil scientist (like the original Lex). My only gripe was that it should've been Metallo he was creating (maybe having the Wallace Bomber-guy wearing the suit), and had I not seen the trailer that would've been my first assumption after he unearthed that big chunk o' kryptonite.

I think if they would've focused the story more on the Lex shenanigans and the creation (or at least the baby steps) towards the Justice League and less on setting up the fight scene from The Dark Knight Returns, this movie would've been a lot better.
Sounds like cool movie, now I want to see it. I think when hero movies get deep they get bad reviews... New fantastic 4 was okay to me, had a lot of origin story, I liked that actually.
 
Yeah wonder woman completely stole the show. She was awesome. Still flaming hot as well don't get me wrong.
She was the best part of the film.
I agree. The only thing I was thinking after leaving the film was "I want to see more Wonder Woman."
 
Sounds like cool movie, now I want to see it. I think when hero movies get deep they get bad reviews... New fantastic 4 was okay to me, had a lot of origin story, I liked that actually.

Yeah, my initial reaction to the BvS was very negative, but after discussing it in depth, I've suddenly become very interested and even enthused about the DC cinematic universe. It might turn out be the biggest budget cult movie of all time.
 
I'm glad. Watching the New 52 Superman in some of the recent animated stuff was painful. The one in Man of Steel isn't as annoying as his animated counterpart but I have to admit, I like the cheesy, boyscout of a Superman I grew up with. The only departure from that formula I liked was in Superman the Animated series. Even then it was basically the boyscout version who just lived in a shitty world and adapted where he had to.

I've never been a huge fan of Superman in the comics. I always have trouble connecting with essentially "perfect" characters. It makes them very hard to write for and creators struggle to give them depth or development. Before New 52 I was kind of coming around to him a little more, at least is ensemble books like Justice League. Reading Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman is what gave me a bit more of an appreciation for the character. Morrison was able to make him feel more "human" and add more depth to the character. Even though it's an Elseworlds title it still let me look at the character a little differently. I'm actually really interested in seeing what they do with the pre-Flashpoint character now. Especially since this one will be married to Lois still and they've got a kid. As an aside: I think the book I'm looking forward to most in this new non-52 continuity is one called Super Sons with both Bruce and Clark's kids having adventures.
 
I've never been a huge fan of Superman in the comics. I always have trouble connecting with essentially "perfect" characters. It makes them very hard to write for and creators struggle to give them depth or development. Before New 52 I was kind of coming around to him a little more, at least is ensemble books like Justice League. Reading Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman is what gave me a bit more of an appreciation for the character. Morrison was able to make him feel more "human" and add more depth to the character. Even though it's an Elseworlds title it still let me look at the character a little differently. I'm actually really interested in seeing what they do with the pre-Flashpoint character now. Especially since this one will be married to Lois still and they've got a kid. As an aside: I think the book I'm looking forward to most in this new non-52 continuity is one called Super Sons with both Bruce and Clark's kids having adventures.

My point was primarily that some of the complaints about killing, or disparities in personalities compared to previous films and comics in the last 30 years are not without some reason when you look at the character's total history. I think Zach Snyder made the characters this way, not to reinvigorate the characters with elements of their original versions, but rather because it's "edgy" and dark. People often got really pissed at the end of Man of Steel because it showed Superman snapping Zod's neck. The fact is that Superman killed Zod in the comics as well. He also killed Zod in the much loved Superman II film. Yet people gave those things a pass. You also have to consider the influences that these films have on them. These pull from nearly all DC sources to some degree. Furthermore these are translated to film which need to have a certain amount of realism to aid in the suspension of disbelief that the comics don't require. Film translations that are practically live action comics do not translate very well in most cases. At times versions of the characters that radically depart from the comics are well received. As long as the spirit of what makes those characters work is maintained, it usually does.

The Incredible Hulk TV series is primitive and far more realistic than it's comic book counterpart. This series was well received because it made the Hulk more human in a sense. It made it relatable and the character being too powerful wasn't really an issue. Its the same thing you cite as a reason for preferring Grant Morrison's run of Superman.

While DC hasn't exactly been "killing it" when it comes to the movies, I think this film, properly examined is far deeper than anything Marvel has done in film to date. The Marvel movies are fun, but as many people point out they often lack substance. This movie has the substance even if it's hard to see. This movie has too much going on. I think I need to see it again just to catch everything I might have missed. Already, I can see what they are trying to do with it. I'm just hopeful it does well enough financially for additional installments to get made. I'm not happy with all aspects of the film, but hopefully DC takes the feedback they've received and applies appropriate fixes we can live with.
 
They should have tried to cast Gina Carano or even Olivia Wilde if we want to stay with a slender, fit Wonder Woman.

As much as I like Olivia Wilde, she's wrong for the part for many of the same reasons Gal Gadot is. She's a stick figure and wouldn't remotely look convincing in the role. Gina Carano on the other hand would have made a great choice. Another upside to that choice would have been that Gina Carano has acting experience where Gal Gadot doesn't.
 
Last edited:
I agree. The only thing I was thinking after leaving the film was "I want to see more Wonder Woman."

Yeah, is it just me or was there a kind of "kung fury" feel to when she went into action? Like she was a kind of Barbarianna?
 
My point was primarily that some of the complaints about killing, or disparities in personalities compared to previous films and comics in the last 30 years are not without some reason when you look at the character's total history. I think Zach Snyder made the characters this way, not to reinvigorate the characters with elements of their original versions, but rather because it's "edgy" and dark. People often got really pissed at the end of Man of Steel because it showed Superman snapping Zod's neck. The fact is that Superman killed Zod in the comics as well. He also killed Zod in the much loved Superman II film. Yet people gave those things a pass. You also have to consider the influences that these films have on them. These pull from nearly all DC sources to some degree. Furthermore these are translated to film which need to have a certain amount of realism to aid in the suspension of disbelief that the comics don't require. Film translations that are practically live action comics do not translate very well in most cases. At times versions of the characters that radically depart from the comics are well received. As long as the spirit of what makes those characters work is maintained, it usually does.

The Incredible Hulk TV series is primitive and far more realistic than it's comic book counterpart. This series was well received because it made the Hulk more human in a sense. It made it relatable and the character being too powerful wasn't really an issue. Its the same thing you cite as a reason for preferring Grant Morrison's run of Superman.

While DC hasn't exactly been "killing it" when it comes to the movies, I think this film, properly examined is far deeper than anything Marvel has done in film to date. The Marvel movies are fun, but as many people point out they often lack substance. This movie has the substance even if it's hard to see. This movie has too much going on. I think I need to see it again just to catch everything I might have missed. Already, I can see what they are trying to do with it. I'm just hopeful it does well enough financially for additional installments to get made. I'm not happy with all aspects of the film, but hopefully DC takes the feedback they've received and applies appropriate fixes we can live with.

I'm not sure how much substance you can add to a superhero movie, though. I'm typically not a George Clooney fan, but Syriana was a good movie that most people couldn't keep up with. I had more than a few family members that didn't like it because it was too involved. I'm just not sure how many folks want to invest into these movies like that enough to keep them afloat. Marvel does keeps it's plots pretty shallow, but there have been some nice nuances to follow I think. I think most people need to be spoon fed subtle events though. They're too obtuse to follow most of the time.
 
I'm not sure how much substance you can add to a superhero movie, though. I'm typically not a George Clooney fan, but Syriana was a good movie that most people couldn't keep up with. I had more than a few family members that didn't like it because it was too involved. I'm just not sure how many folks want to invest into these movies like that enough to keep them afloat. Marvel does keeps it's plots pretty shallow, but there have been some nice nuances to follow I think. I think most people need to be spoon fed events subtle events though. They're too obtuse to follow most of the time.

I think you can still keep it simple but still have some depth to it. I don't enjoy films that are too preachy, too deep, or realistic. Generally those things equate to being pretty fucking boring. I think that Batman v. Superman is still relatively shallow, but it gives some hint as to the story telling ability some of the DC writers show in the comics. A story needn't be complex to be compelling or interesting. Generally speaking comics aren't too strong on story alone. They work because they are character driven and those characters are entertaining enough to grab and hold people's interest. I found it entertaining which is all I can ask for in a movie.
 
As much as I like Olivia Wilde, she's wrong for the part for many of the same reasons Gal Gadot is. She's a stick figure and wouldn't remotely look convincing in the role. Gina Carano on the other hand would have made a great choice since the studio was obviously fine casting someone without any acting experience in the role.

Look at the girl's pipes! Look! As for Carano, while she's super fit and muscular, she's also two inches shorter than Gadot. Gadot's height compared to Affleck and Cavill was pretty impressive, and I'd take that extra two inches in height over four inches in shoulder width.

gal-gadot-muscles.jpg
 
Batman's a bit of a douche - good chance he won't kill you, but very good chance he'll cripple or severely maim you for the rest of your life.
 
As much as I like Olivia Wilde, she's wrong for the part for many of the same reasons Gal Gadot is. She's a stick figure and wouldn't remotely look convincing in the role. Gina Carano on the other hand would have made a great choice. Another upside to that choice would have been that Gina Carano has acting experience where Gal Gadot doesn't.
Gal Gadot has more experience in acting than Gina Carano, if you want to go by how many big budget movies they have been in (8 vs. 6). Or you could say they have equivalent experience including all fictional movies and TV shows (9 vs. 8).
 
With less-lethal ammunition. Which generally isn't lethal.

With a machine gun. A criminals machine gun. I doubt he used "rubber bullets." The point is, the Batman's that exist outside of that comic world are interpretations. I don't really have that much of a problem with it so long as they abide by the logic THEY set forth. My issue with something like Nolan's Batman Begins is that he stressed the importance of not crossing a line, and has his Batman murder Ras Al Ghul, thus failing that films own internal logic. This Batman in BvS is more broken and older. Been doing it for 20 years+. So, I don't exactly have a problem with him or Snyder's approach with "collateral damage." Even Dark Knight Returns did collateral damage. So, I can't criticize any of those points based on that. Now, it'd be different if Batfleck was going in guns blazing or whatever. But, he isn't.

I don't like BvS but most of the failures of that film reside in the complete lack of understanding for Superman and how to adapt his world/universe into the modern era. Oh, and not understanding the importance of structure and motivation.
 
With a machine gun. A criminals machine gun. I doubt he used "rubber bullets." The point is, the Batman's that exist outside of that comic world are interpretations. I don't really have that much of a problem with it so long as they abide by the logic THEY set forth. My issue with something like Nolan's Batman Begins is that he stressed the importance of not crossing a line, and has his Batman murder Ras Al Ghul, thus failing that films own internal logic. This Batman in BvS is more broken and older. Been doing it for 20 years+. So, I don't exactly have a problem with him or Snyder's approach with "collateral damage." Even Dark Knight Returns did collateral damage. So, I can't criticize any of those points based on that. Now, it'd be different if Batfleck was going in guns blazing or whatever. But, he isn't.

I don't recall him actually shooting someone with a gun, much less a criminal'ss gun. I know he used rubber bullets fired from the "Batmobile." Batman in the Batman Begins movie didn't murder Ras Al Ghul. He simply chose not to save him. That's an important line. Whatever happened in that movie has nothing to do with Batman v. Superman, so I'm not sure how it's relevant anyway.
 
Gal Gadot has more experience in acting than Gina Carano, if you want to go by how many big budget movies they have been in (8 vs. 6). Or you could say they have equivalent experience including all fictional movies and TV shows (9 vs. 8).

I didn't think Gal Gadot had done any acting prior to this.
 
I didn't think Gal Gadot had done any acting prior to this.
I take it you've never seen the Fast & Furious franchise, at least from #4 onward. Fast & Furious (#4 in the series... poor title choices abound) was her very first movie and was a recurring character through Fast & Furious 6.
 
I take it you've never seen the Fast & Furious franchise, at least from #4 onward. Fast & Furious (#4 in the series... poor title choices abound) was her very first movie and was a recurring character through Fast & Furious 6.

I watched the first one. It was a pile of shit with hideous cars that all needed to get "unpimped VW style." I saw part of the second one and it was even worse. I didn't bother after that.
 
I don't recall him actually shooting someone with a gun, much less a criminal'ss gun. I know he used rubber bullets fired from the "Batmobile." Batman in the Batman Begins movie didn't murder Ras Al Ghul. He simply chose not to save him. That's an important line. Whatever happened in that movie has nothing to do with Batman v. Superman, so I'm not sure how it's relevant anyway.

I'm sure he's referring to the "baby hostage" scene w a mutant member. Which was also heavily borrowed from during the KGBeast fight at the end of BvS.

"I believe you."


ibelieveyou1.gif
 
Last edited:
Yar, apparently Suicide Squad is having new scenes added to it to make the film more 'comical' due to BvS reaction.

The new scenes are being added to suicide squad based on the success of Deadpool and the fan reaction to more mature and darker humor. At least this is what i read somewhere.

They started adding the scenes well before BvS was released. Anyways, haven't seen BvS yet and not sure if I'm going to wait or go see it in the theater.
 
Back
Top