Batman v Superman Spoiler Thread: Don't believe everything you read, Son

Status
Not open for further replies.
In all fairness, the whole "No Kill" ordeal requires an enormous suspension of disbelief. You basically cannot put Batman in a situation where realistically people would die.
Not saying it is applicable everywhere, but some of the criticism regarding this feels unwarranted.
 
So I just came back after watching the Movie.
And i think the reviews are justified. A lot of potential is wasted here.

The best part of the movie is BATMAN and the worst is the Movie itself.
But one thing i hated the most is the introduction of the other justice league
characters, it so bland and forgettable.it's give a bad taste in the mouth, along
the lines of ASM2 .

I also didn't buy the hostage situation of ma kent, as I didn't understand why
superman can't save her , but he came to save lois, may be i missed something,
which make the whole fight situation underwhelming for me .

There is lot of negatives than positives in this movie for me.and lot to talk about
but in the end i will give it 4 out of 10 . Feel free to discuss any thing. :)
 
El Topo said:
In all fairness, the whole "No Kill" ordeal requires an enormous suspension of disbelief. You basically cannot put Batman in a situation where realistically people would die.
Not saying it is applicable everywhere, but some of the criticism regarding this feels unwarranted.
Click to expand...

The no kill rule means Batman isn't going out of his way to indiscriminately murder people. That he has gadgets and techniques that mitigate it as much as possible. If death still happens, so be it but he isn't actively pursuing it, ala putting machine guns with live ammo on his Batmobile...or firing actual guns (in the dream sequence).
 
I think Snyder went too far even with going with Frank Miller Batman. Atleast in TDKR Batman never wanted to straight up murder Superman (and also was pretty aware of the killing rule).

This Batman though he wants to run that Kryptonite spear down his chest even though he has seen countless examples of Superman helping people. Which brings us to the point that what are the likes of Joker, Harley etc etc are even doing drawing breaths then in this universe?
 
El Topo said:
In all fairness, the whole "No Kill" ordeal requires an enormous suspension of disbelief. You basically cannot put Batman in a situation where realistically people would die.
Not saying it is applicable everywhere, but some of the criticism regarding this feels unwarranted.
Click to expand...

Batman fighting and beating SUPERMAN is ok but Batman not killing people is just too big of a leap
 
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku! said:
Batman fighting and beating SUPERMAN is ok but Batman not killing people is just too big of a leap
Click to expand...

Feel free to give me a reasonable scenario that does not require an enormous change of scenery and/or set up (or ridiculously stupid behavior) where he saves Martha without setting the guy on fire.

ryutaro's mama said:
The no kill rule means Batman isn't going out of his way to indiscriminately murder people. That he has gadgets and techniques that mitigate it as much as possible. If death still happens, so be it but he isn't actively pursuing it, ala putting machine guns with live ammo on his Batmobile...or firing actual guns (in the dream sequence).
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with the Knightmare sequence, although it is utterly pointless and should have been cut. The Martha scene? Reasonable. The chase sequence? Not okay.
 
I mean, the whole point of the fight for Bruce isn't to beat Clark, it's to kill him so he can't pull his 9/11 aftermath shit like he did with Zod
 
And some of you folks were lambasting me yesterday for my dour and frustrated take on this movie. I wish I wasn't right, believe me.

I can't believe that DC trusted this hack to create the pivotal movie that would kick off their new vision of the DC universe.

Batman and superman aren't exactly best pals in the comics, and they're usually gruff with each other, but in every story there's usually a moment when they shake hands reconcile and team up for the greater good. We're not getting that here. We're getting two fallen heroes who've been manipulated into trying to kill each other.

Even at the end of millers dark knight returns, there's a moment when Clark realizes that bats is alive after all and he gives robin a wink and a thumbs up. There's nothing like that in this movie. No "bro moment".

Superhero movies should be somewhat heroic for christsakes. Not fueled by rage. Why in the hell would DC make this gigantic movie about two angry superheroes at odds and expect mass audiences to react well to it? It's totally alienating. And for many comic book fans, watching this movie is going to be tantamount to watching ones parents get divorced.

This all reinforces my earlier comment that this movie panders to the lowest denominator very similar to what's playing out in the world of politics right now. The US is dealing with an angry and bloodthirsty culture and this movie is the latest indication of that.
 
Chariot said:
You lost me right here. Batman and Superman arr incredible good friends. They don't always agree, but they have each others back.
Click to expand...

Valid point. They quarrel a bit, but it's mostly for comedic effect. Like an "odd couple" dynamic. Bottom line, there's a certain amount of mutual respect. None of that vibe is even hinted at here in the movie.
 
El Topo said:
In all fairness, the whole "No Kill" ordeal requires an enormous suspension of disbelief. You basically cannot put Batman in a situation where realistically people would die.
Not saying it is applicable everywhere, but some of the criticism regarding this feels unwarranted.
Click to expand...

Batman is at his best when he's dealing with issues affecting the Batfamily or crime in Gotham. When you put him in situations where he deals with world-shattering devastation, things get hairy.
 
The Wise Old Man said:
Valid point. They quarrel a bit, but it's mostly for comedic effect. Like an "odd couple" dynamic. Bottom line, there's a certain amount of mutual respect. None of that vibe is even hinted at here in the movie.
Click to expand...

Superman dies like an hour after they kiss and make up. And the only time they see each other in that hour Doomsday is attacking them. What were you expecting to happen in that amount of time?
 
The Icon said:
Superman dies like an hour after they kiss and make up. And the only time they see each other in that hour Doomsday is attacking them. What were you expecting to happen in that amount of time?
Click to expand...

Maybe he was expecting a script that wasn't moving so fast it didn't leave room for true emotional content?
 
Roussow said:
One bit of positivity though, I appreciated the scene with Bruce during the invasion of MoS. The fact that they didn't reuse shots, and showed events from alternate perspectives, it was very effective. That one shot of the alien ship flying straight through buildings without losing momentum was incredible.

What was Flash's dialogue during his appearance? I couldn't quite catch much of it aside from the "Lois is the key to this" bit, or something like that.



That's good. Damn good.
Click to expand...

It was something like: "You were right about him all along, Lois Lane is the key, find us Bruce, you have to find us, am i too soon?"
Total nonsense
 
ryutaro's mama said:
Maybe he was expecting a script that wasn't moving so fast it didn't leave room for true emotional content?
Click to expand...

Isn't that more of an issue with expectation? It's fine to be disappointed they didn't become besties by the end but being upset it wasn't shoehorned where it wouldn't even fit is a little off to me.
 
The Icon said:
Isn't that more of an issue with expectation? It's fine to be disappointed they didn't become besties by the end but being upset it wasn't shoehorned where it wouldn't even fit is a little off to me.
Click to expand...

It depends.

If your goal is to make the relationship between them have an actual arch, so that there is weight behind their hatred of each other, followed by reconciliation and eventual loss, then you pace the film differently.

Apparently, this film wanted the audience to feel the loss at the end but they made very little narrative investment.

In other words, they didn't stick the landing.
 
ryutaro's mama said:
It depends.

If your goal is to make the relationship between them have an actual arch, so that there is weight behind their hatred of each other, followed by reconciliation and eventual loss, then you pace the film differently.

Apparently, this film wanted the audience to feel the loss at the end but they made very little narrative investment.

In other words, they didn't stick the landing.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to disagree.
 
Do you remember how akwardley they had all the time to announce that All of Metropolis was evacuated in like 2 minutes or how nobody lived on that Island, or how nobody lived in the harbor of Gotham?


And plausible Superman never pay a visit in Gotham when the town is just like three meters away from Metropolis?
 
We basically had the essence of Frank Miller's Batman for two decades. DC ran a campaign in the mid 2000 to bring back the "light" in there superheroes. Grant Morrison did a tremendous job in doing so.
I don't mind Grim and Gritty, but we did that for TWO DECADES. Enough Snyder, stop bring us back to the dark ages. People want to cry, laugh, hope.
 
ryutaro's mama said:
Maybe he was expecting a script that wasn't moving so fast it didn't leave room for true emotional content?
Click to expand...

True. The knightmare scene, the wayne resting place dream, pa kent dream etc could have been replaced with kent-wayne interaction scene.
 
GAMEPROFF said:
Do you remember how akwardley they had all the time to announce that All of Metropolis was evacuated in like 2 minutes or how nobody lived on that Island, or how nobody lived in the harbor of Gotham?


And plausible Superman never pay a visit in Gotham when the town is just like three meters away from Metropolis?
Click to expand...

I think stuff like that is just a super weird thing we as an audience will have to put up with in super hero movies.
 
There's a reason All Star Superman was a success, even post 9/11... It's a dreamer's book. It's a return to Donner's Superman, and yet we keep returning to this Monster Alien who's just as responsible for as many deaths as his villains.
 
i can't wait for more people to see this movie, i really want to see the collective reaction to the knowledge that a jar of what may or may not be Lex Luthor's urine has its own plotline
 
GAMEPROFF said:
And plausible Superman never pay a visit in Gotham when the town is just like three meters away from Metropolis?
Click to expand...

I think even more odd is Clark being a reporter and is somehow completely aloof to who Bruce Wayne (probably the most famous person in Gotham) even is. He had to ask some photographer who he was. You mean to tell me a reporter would have no idea who one of the most powerful men in the world is?!?

"That's Bruce Wayne...you know, the guy whose name was on the satellite that Superman and Zod crashed into...that guy."
 
jrh2 said:
i can't wait for more people to see this movie, i really want to see the collective reaction to the knowledge that a jar of what may or may not be Lex Luthor's urine has its own plotline
Click to expand...

I'm gonna see it later, but the descriptions of that sound amazing. A really clever moment.
 
My mini:

Saw Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice IMAX 3D yesterday,

I'll try to keep this as spoiler free as possible, but a lot has been spoiled in the trailers already, so if you truly didn't want spoilers you would've not watched them either ;].

With that out of the way, when I first heard of this movie I rapidly became upset for a number of reasons.
MoS is one of my favourite movies of all time, so hearing that the sequel was just going to be some stupid dark knight returns grudge match, where superman doesn't even get top billing, it left an extremely sour taste in my mouth.
The ensuing discussions and debates about "who would win" fueled the disappointment even further with the prospect of "kryptonite".

This shiny radioactive green rock is something I never liked about superman comics, and something I praised in MoS because snyder handled "depowering" supes extremely well.
So when this green garbage does gets introduced in BvS, and fairly early on at that, it curbed my enthousiasm about the scene right before it pretty hard.
Though as learned this movie wasn't so much "MoS 2", but more a bridge between the rest of the DC universe, and the real MoS sequel still being on the table, I understood this movie was just going to be ensemble piece.

Also the "v" (vee) in the title is pretty significant, as you see this mostly only in legal proceedings. So once the full title was revealed I knew they were just going to have a confrontation. Anyone who thought this was a "versus" movie, akin to AVP or FVJ, was...well, succesfully subverted by marketing, to put it mildly ;P.

Ensemble movies are cool from a fandom perspective, but they are generally not as good as solo pieces because they always come across as unfocussed and guided by editorial constraints; Batman V Superman suffers from this as well.

Though it's clear snyder still had some room to take some liberties, which I really enjoyed, and anyone who disliked MoS is going to be fuming with rage after this movie; if not, then you are a goddamn hypocrite.

The movie itself starts fine and then just heads straight into amazing, and then kryptonite shows up which, as mentioned before, was just a massive downer.
Though when it came to the actual use, and quantity, of the green rock, I felt a lot better of having it at all in the MoS universe.

The rest of the movie was fine to great, especially the parts where snyder takes a bunch of liberties again.
Though the hypest moment absolutely belongs to wonder woman; she doesn't reach Faora levels of hype, but definitely takes the spotlight when she shows up.

Movie looked great as expected, the IMAX scenes even more so, and while the music was nice, I expected a bit more from batman's side.
The audio mix itself was great though.

Overall I enjoyed BvS a lot, more than any of the Marvel ensemble pieces for sure, but MoS is a vastly superior movie.
If you disliked MoS, just do yourself a favour and stay away, for everyone else, definitely give it a watch in IMAX 3D.
Click to expand...
 
ryutaro's mama said:
I think even more odd is Clark being a reporter and is somehow completely aloof to who Bruce Wayne (probably the most famous person in Gotham) even is. He had to ask some photographer who he was. You mean to tell me a reporter would have no idea who one of the most powerful men in the world is?!?

"That's Bruce Wayne...you know, the guy whose name was on the satellite that Superman and Zod crashed into...that guy."
Click to expand...

Yeah, it makes no sense


jrh2 said:
When these characters have 75+ years of legacy to live up to, it's kind of hard not to.
Click to expand...
Maybe people just want a good movie, The Dark Knight isnt that old.
 
El Topo said:
In all fairness, the whole "No Kill" ordeal requires an enormous suspension of disbelief. You basically cannot put Batman in a situation where realistically people would die.
Not saying it is applicable everywhere, but some of the criticism regarding this feels unwarranted.
Click to expand...

And yet a billionaire vigilante fighting crime in a batsuit calling himself "Batman" doesn't require an enormous suspension of disbelief?
 
ryutaro's mama said:
I think even more odd is Clark being a reporter and is somehow completely aloof to who Bruce Wayne (probably the most famous person in Gotham) even is. He had to ask some photographer who he was. You mean to tell me a reporter would have no idea who one of the most powerful men in the world is?!?

"That's Bruce Wayne...you know, the guy whose name was on the satellite that Superman and Zod crashed into...that guy."
Click to expand...

Maybe he just doesn't know what he looks like? Clark doesn't seem like he's terribly interested in gossip. He might know the name but not have a face to put it to. Bruce Wayne, playboy billionaire, could simply be outside of his wheelhouse. I couldn't put a name to a lot of celebrity faces, it's just not my area of interest.

jrh2 said:
When these characters have 75+ years of legacy to live up to, it's kind of hard not to.
Click to expand...

Doesn't mean it's not dumb tho. You've got to judge a thing by what it is, not what it's not.

If you go into a restaurant, order a chicken salad sandwich, and they bring you the tuna instead, that first bite is gonna be VILE because you're expecting chicken and get tuna. But that doesn't make it a bad sandwich. Just not what you were expecting.
 
Poodlestrike said:
Maybe he just doesn't know what he looks like? Clark doesn't seem like he's terribly interested in gossip. He might know the name but not have a face to put it to. Bruce Wayne, playboy billionaire, could simply be outside of his wheelhouse. I couldn't put a name to a lot of celebrity faces, it's just not my area of interest.
Click to expand...

You are not a REPORTER. It isn't your job to know people. Like, an average person might not know what Elon Musk or Tim Cook looks like but a reporter sure as shit better know that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
When you read a book and it has a song, do you sing it?
14
128
DGrayson replied
Superman | Full Trailer
2 3
109
965
Alebrije replied
Superman Day - Behind The Scenes Look Of James Gunn's Superman
18
1K
Connificent replied
how do you read the news?
49
2K
0neAnd0nly replied
Superman (2025) 4 minute scene released
2 3 4
163
5K
Hari Seldon replied
Top Bottom