Saw the movie yesterday and it was OK. I was entertained but not overwhelmed. I thought they handled Wonder Woman better than I had expected and Gal Gadot is a great for the role. She has the both the build and the look while also really seeming to enjoy it. I didn't like how much they forced this to be a lead in to the Justice League and a lot of it seemed ham handed. This movie had some good ingredients but didn't quite seem to come together. I think if Snyder and the writers had just toned some things down and looked at it more as a standalone movie it might've been much better. Don't know if we're still spoilering but in case we still are: Spoiler The stolen video files with Aquaman, Flash and Cyborg just seemed unnecessary. Those parts would've been handled with some subtleness through Easter eggs for fan boys or through after credits scenes. For that matter did the Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern kill that franchise? Green Lantern is an integral part of the Justice League so it seems odd that they wouldn't include him in the Justice League movie. I didn't hate the Jesse Eisenberg Lex Luthor but I'm not really sure what to make of him either. As others noted there seemed to be more Joker about him. I liked the parallels of him, Batman and Superman all having father issues but this could've been handled better by having Luthor acting less crazy. It seems to me if Eisenberg could've dialed it down a bit and played it more like he did Zuckenberg in Social Network he might've come off as a much better villain. As for Zach Snyder he seems to suffer from Lucas Syndrome. He has some big interesting ideas and can shoot a beautiful scene (I thought the scene of the two Superman funerals was done very well) but can't handle dialogue or subtle acting.
Just got back and thought it was incredibly enjoyable as popcorn spectacle. Very happy, but glad y'all got my expectations so low.
I didn't even mind Eisenberg. You guys had me ready to hate him, but his and Snyder's take was just different. I didn't see him so much like the Joker as just some kind of genius starting to break down mentally. Spoiler And when he downloads a galaxy worth of wisdom late in the movie, that accelerates the process, which makes sense. I love the set up for the next movies, and yeah, probably Darkseid. Overall, I think I am within the target audience: enjoy the occasional blockbuster, have always liked batman, but not really a devoted comic fiend. So a lot of the details and lore won't bother me much. I wasn't bored in the plot driven part of the movie, at all. I don't want non-stop explosions and jokes (remember I'm the one person in America who walked out on GotG, still one of the most unfunny and pointless CGI spectacles I've ever seen, for my tastes. Why people loved that "plot" but hated this "plot" is just beyond me. If green aliens tell jokes and play lame old songs they can have a nonsensical plot, but if you're on earth and have hans zimmer doing the soundtrack, the plot has to be pristine? Why?) As others have said, this is the best film batman by a longshot. And I liked Bale's Batman just fine, especially in Begins where he had a little acting to do. But Snyder and Batfleck nailed it so much that it covers up other flaws for me. This was Batman's movie, which is the correct choice, and when he kicks ass in this movie, it is marvelous. Spoiler 1. The Batman vs. Superman setup was about as sensical as it was going to get. Superman never wanted to kill Batman, even after the whole mother as hostage thing. He walked into the big fight wanting to talk, never trying to rip the bat's head off. I even enjoyed and went for Batman's near victory, given his preparation and the kryptonite gas, etc. But the reconciliation with "Martha! Why did you say that name!" was super lame. Meh, I didn't let it bother me. They needed to get on the same team, and that could have been a lot smoother, sure. 2. I loved Doomsday but had never read a comic about him/it. That was CGI that worked well for me, and there are several just beautiful scenes of him doing his thing, growing, beaming, smashing, exploding and whatever else he does. I thought they handled him just right, give or take the gratuitous nuclear explosion in orbit thing, LOL. Whoops. I didn't really understand how he was, within one minute of a fight, weaker than Superman for a few seconds, and then a lot stronger in the next few seconds, and then back to being weak. I guess that's just how comic struggles role, or it would otherwise look just like grappling. 3. I thought the batmobile and the batjet or whatever were pretty meh. I like Nolan's versions of those things better. So overall, much better than I expected. It was gorgeous to look at. Loved the arty scenes framing the whole film with ceremonies at the start and finish. Loved Batfleck. Fine with the serious tone. Great monster thing. Great Wonder Woman. Sure, it was amazingly ambitious, but I never would have sat through THREE of these setup movies. So overall kudos to Snyder, at least from B-Bob. (Also helps that I had excellent popcorn and a boulevardier at the Alamo in SF.)
You and I seem to be the only ones on the same page about this. It was an incredibly ambitious film that took a very serious tone. Most objections seem to be "boring" "hard to follow" etc. I keep hearing people complain about Superman not winning the fight with Batman and it makes me wonder if they were even watching the movie.
I guess it's just a sign that the marketing campaign outkicked the coverage a little bit. This was a very entertaining movie, much better than Man of Steel I thought, and it did a lot of setting up for other movies. Fine. A comic book movie, by its very nature, should be like the old serials. That's what comics are. Anyway, glad you enjoyed it.
Did anyone else feel like the start of the movie felt BIG, but the ending felt SMALL? You had Bruce Wayne running through the destruction in Metropolis as Superman and Zod battled high above, coming into frame sporadically. Huge backdrop. Massive scale. Then the weight/size of a single building crumbling near a tiny man - Bruce Wayne. Then you get what feels like a Godzilla set during the final battle. The characters all (not just Doomsday) seemed to be as tall as buildings. Huge chunks of the city just disappearing. Buildings crumbling from a punch or kick. It felt tiny, like 5in action figures fighting in a tiny Lego city.
I didn't experience it exactly like that, but I noted the changing scale as the movie went on. It felt intentional, and I liked it, visually. The early sequence of Wayne's experience of the Supermen battle was an excellent one, I thought. I remember thinking, 30 minutes into the movie, it was already worth the price of admission based on that batman background stuff.
All great points B-Bob, I'll never claim it's a perfect movie because it's not but I thought it wasn't even close to as bad as people claim it is. I thought it was a thoroughly enjoyable blockbuster, I've seen much worse and worse from Synder as well......
...I'm a big comic book nerd myself... ...and even having not seen this movie yet (I plan to, just on DVD like I did with Man of Steel)... ...I imagine that most of the negatives and inconsistencies with it are probably almost exclusively studio based. I'm sure everybody knows or has mentioned that the largest reason why the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been so successful is that it is, in effect, actually an extension of the comic book universe it is based on. Marvel having its own studio for film production was the actual masterstroke in its universe cinema approach. In the case of Superman and Batman (who have long since been licensed properties of Warner Bros.), they are (at almost every pop culture turn) beholden to a lot more than "core" fans and comic book mythology. I always believed that the success of Christopher Nolan's "Dark Knight" Batman trilogy had as much to do with the strength of the Batman archetype as anything else he contributed tonally. Batman has been around in one form or another for close to 80 years now... ...but one thing I have to admit to being anxious to see is Ben Affleck. I'd guess I'm not alone when I say I hated the way he seemed forced on people as an "actor" early in his career (common enough in and of itself in Hollywood terms, but just with Affleck, it seemed even more contrived)... ...but his time behind the camera has certainly seemed to better his performances in front of it. That doesn't happen all that often, and if he's anything like what he has been recently (Argo was excellent)... ...it goes to show that sometimes having a plan is much better than having an idea... ...just off the top of my head--had Affleck been presented as more-or-less the "face" of the proposed DC movieverse--in the same way that Robert Downey, Jr. was for Marvel...especially considering the mixed reception of Henry Cavil as Superman (not a big problem for me, personally)... ...which, of course, would have meant being patient and building continuity instead of just trying to squeeze in a bump in the quarterly reports... ...there might have been a chance to not ruin this enterprise before it begins. ...the characters are strong enough to survive (as they have for the better part of the last 50 years or so, in one form of media or another)...but if there is this "conscious" effort to inject "realism" into the DC portrayal of their characters...they're going to have to NOT go at it in the tried-and-true Hollywood-summer-blockbuster route. Warner Bros. will make its money. But then, they thought the same way about that horrific Batman and Robin movie with Arnold Schwarzenegger that set the Batman license back DECADES... ...I suppose watching what happens is part of the fun too, though...right?
Spoiler I think the set up for the next movie is Braniac. I haven't been watching the Supergirl shows but saw an ad that looked like it had a Braniac type creature / cyborg on it. I agree with you that Guardians of the Galaxy seemed kind of silly. It was far more entertaining though than this movie. Overall though didn't think this movie was bad but I still think this pales to the Nolan Batman movies as far as plot. Affleck did a good job. I wasn't happy with the initial casting but he lived up to this role and did a great job of capturing the torment of Batman. I agree it was a very ambitious film but that was partly it's problem. In some ways I feel this movie was like Star Wars Episode 1. Not in the horrible little kid Anakin and offensive characters but that it was too much a set up to future movies and a lot of things were forced with little subtlety. I agree that Zach Snyder can shoot some beautiful scenes he doesn't have as much success with acting and like too many directors these days doesn't really understand how to be subtle.
Snap...an episode 1 reference. The movie wasn't hard to follow, it was just a disjointed mess where Spoiler some scenes were rendered ridiculously pointless by the next or few scenes after it. The car chase scene where batman goes on a killing spree and uses a car as a chain mace...while it does set up a confrontation with Superman...is completely rendered moot when batman steals the kryptonite off camera...how luthor revealed he was a huge Breaking Bad fanatic to the point where it doesn't even frame superman for blowing up congress. And isn't Clark/superman a hypocrite when he's criticizing Wayne/batman for being a murderous vigilante? The original bond and trust between them was that they didn't murder or did their utmost not to. Not out of convenience anyways. Turns out the movie was disjointed because Snyder had four hours of movie he had to trim down. His "preferred" version still ran three and a half hours long. Luthor was supposed to be introduced much later, so that car chase scene probably had an hour between the actual theft. Whatever I watched was still an enjoyable yet ridiculous mess where I'd probably be pissed if I was a bigger DC fan.
I feel that Nolan's batman universe (which I enjoyed) is just as full of ridiculous plot snafus that just keep the circus show going, especially the 3rd one. Not that I'm disagreeing with you about the problems here. I just didn't have that part of my brain activated that would care so much. Can you think of a superhero movie that has a more pristine plot, with no senseless scenes, or scenes rendered senseless by subsequent scenes or reveals? I actually can't, but there are a ton I haven't seen.
uhmmm yeah <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rNlmRId2FVQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yeah, but Dark Knight Rises had plot holes for days. Example 1: Bruce gets his back broken, and has all of his assets seized. Yet, once he escapes the prison he's back in Gotham in no time at all. Or the world's greatest detective somehow not noticing the League of Shadows tattoo on the girl he's boning. (Dark Knight is one of my favorite movies ever, Dark Knight Rises however shows that they sorely missed Ledger)
I don't disagree. It transcends the whole genre of comic book movies to me. It's among my very favorite movies, ever, regardless of type.
The whole detective angle never felt like it was part of Nolan's Bruce Wayne. I felt like he opened a window for a detective Batman with the Robin Blake character, who Gordon quickly promoted to Detective. He was also detective-y enough to uncover Batman's true identity. Nolan laid the foundation for a new, fresh spin on Batman within his existing Batman universe. But the studio pissed on it.
