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

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK I just got back. I'll need to see what cool stuff I missed from all you guys who know way more about this stuff.

I liked it alright, minus the DCCU bloating, but I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate how batman A) Used guns and B) actually killed dudes. Ugh ugh ughg ughguhguhguhguhguhguhgu. Literally the best bruce wayne and potentially the best batman of all time on screen practically ruined for me by branding (which led to death) and killing dudes.


OK, any posts I should check for cool references/setup stuff? Who were they hinting at being the justice league villain? I caught none of it.


And wait, the dude in the portal/dream thing was the flash? I thought it was like mech-ed up robin.
 
It's absolutely a deconstruction. This is not a movie about Superman, good guy, doing good things and everyone loves him for it. It's about the cost of, and potential shittiness that comes from, Superman trying to do good things.

It's definitely not a deconstruction. It's about how doing the right thing is always the right thing to do, that even though life is hard and frankly not very fair, there is still virtue, there is still goodness. That even though things might not always work out perfectly, it's important to always keep trying. To never succumb to despair or cynicism.

OK I just got back. I'll need to see what cool stuff I missed from all you guys who know way more about this stuff.

I liked it alright, minus the DCCU bloating, but I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate how batman A) Used guns and B) actually killed dudes. Ugh ugh ughg ughguhguhguhguhguhguhgu. Literally the best bruce wayne and potentially the best batman of all time on screen practically ruined for me by branding (which led to death) and killing dudes.


OK, any posts I should check for cool references/setup stuff? Who were they hinting at being the justice league villain? I caught none of it.

That was literally the one and only time he branded anybody. The death sentence thing was speculation. Literally everybody in the movie who bring it up calls him on it. Clark, Alfred, whoever. More likely the guy got killed by Lex as part of his efforts to set up his prize fight.
 
OK I just got back. I'll need to see what cool stuff I missed from all you guys who know way more about this stuff.

I liked it alright, minus the DCCU bloating, but I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate how batman A) Used guns and B) actually killed dudes. Ugh ugh ughg ughguhguhguhguhguhguhgu. Literally the best bruce wayne and potentially the best batman of all time on screen practically ruined for me by branding (which led to death) and killing dudes.


OK, any posts I should check for cool references/setup stuff? Who were they hinting at being the justice league villain? I caught none of it.
Check out the animated movies of Justice League: Flashpoint and Justice League: War. Maybe even Dark Knight Returns.
 
Just came back...WTF happened to this movie??? It's alright, but man, what the hell.

I do like various aspects and was entertained, but man they fuck this up in terms of:

Story
Scenes flowing together
Inconsistencies
Plotholes

And that Batman vs Superman fight...holy shit, that was so one sided I couldn't believe my eyes. I also couldn't believe how Batman killed people, I mean, damn son!!!

I thought the actors were fine, the action was awesome, the music was great and the visual effects were well done. To me those things saved the movie.

Having that said I did like it but it's a mess and not that great of a movie.
 
Check out the animated movies of Justice League: Flashpoint and Justice League: War. Maybe even Dark Knight Returns.

Does he kill in those? I hate that so much. I love a non-killing batman :/

That was literally the one and only time he branded anybody. The death sentence thing was speculation. Literally everybody in the movie who bring it up calls him on it. Clark, Alfred, whoever. More likely the guy got killed by Lex as part of his efforts to set up his prize fight.

They made it sound like he branded a handful, but he had to have known it would have gotten him killed. Batman is smarter than that. I *get* why they did it and why they made him do it in the movie, doesn't mean I liked it.
 
Just came back...WTF happened to this movie??? It's alright, but man, what the hell.

I do like various aspects and was entertained, but man they fuck this up in terms of:

Story
Scenes flowing together
Inconsistencies
Plotholes

And that Batman vs Superman fight...holy shit, that was so one sided I couldn't believe my eyes. I also couldn't believe how Batman killed people, I mean, damn son!!!

I thought the actors were fine, the action was awesome, the music was great and the visual effects were well done. To me those things saved the movie.

Having that said I did like it but it's a mess and not that great of a movie.

It was barely a fight. Superman was clearly trying to just get Batman to stop struggling long enough to convince him to help, he made no effort at all to win the fight in any serious sense.
 
I'll say this much. The opening titles were really cool. I was with Snyder those five minutes. I was all like "wow maybe the critics are being too harsh." Then it goes off the rails soon after.

Oh my God I have not laughed that hard in a long time, just describing the nightmare sequences made most of my friends die laughing after seeing this movie. The level of insanity on display in this film was amazing. Everyone go see this film, I need more Zach Snyder superhero movies. I need to see his Justice League.

During the Knightmare sequence I swear I could feel the people around me in the theater thinking to themselves what the fuck.
 
Let's get the movie's problems out of the way.

Firstly, there's a serious lack of connective tissue. The whole first half is basically one abrupt transition between awesome moments after another. This doesn't really let up until the title fight. I think that the extended cut could solve a ton of these problems. So many scenes are like 30-45 seconds from greatness. There's also one or two scenes that really should be present but aren't; we need a scene where somebody lays out why people are wondering if Superman is responsible for the deaths following the massacre, and one detailing Lex's reaction to his exposure to the archive. If they turn up as well we're looking at a Kingdom of Heaven-esque turnaround. As is, I can see why a lot of people are frustrated. This is a movie that not only refuses to hold your hand, it straight up makes you do a lot of connecting the dots on your own.

Second, the soundtrack. One thing I didn't realize is that it's all very, very dark sounding. There really isn't an uplifting, triumphant sound in there. No lighthearted music. It ended up making scenes that are clearly supposed to be lighter in tone feel much darker, one early one in particular stands out. The thing with the African warlord who had Lois; you're clearly supposed to be going "oh shit it's Superman, here to save the day!", but the music says "oh no things are about to be bad!"

Now, the rest of the movie. There's a major misconception I keep seeing that I need to refute: this is not a cynical piece. It simply isn't. It's a refutation of Batman's speech from the trailer, about how there are no good men. It's a denial of the idea that his behavior, his callousness, the branding thing, that that's acceptable. That we must live as if perched on the edge of Armageddon. This is accomplished through Clark. You see how his doubts and uncertainty surround him, suppress him. Make him wonder if what he's doing is really the right thing, if there is a right thing. But then he comes back. He comes back because god dammit, the world needs heroes. It needs good people. And good people don't need to live charmed lives.

And that's what the movie is about. That life is going to kick you in the teeth, make a mockery of your efforts, but that that's not the end of it. That you can overcome, be more than you are. Be better than you are. And it delivers on those ideas in a big way.

I get why the disjointed front half would put some people off, make them stop paying attention and miss the message, but if you can keep on it, this is one hell of a film.



This is what I'm talking about. Connective tissue. if the Nightmare starts with Bruce spasming a little bit, maybe some weird screen effects, it becomes obvious that it's not a normal dream. Because duh, it's not. But it needs to be made a little more clear.

Outstanding post Poodle, exactly how I feel.

The director's cut could really let some of the choppy editing breathe and help the whole film feel more coherent.

I'm absolutely baffled by the ferocity of some of these reviews. This is a well made film by a team with a coherent and original vision. I loved the way that it refused to give easy answers to questions about Superman's actions and if he should be able to act with impunity across the globe. I actually found the scene with Pa Kent very moving, that relationship lies at the absolute core of who this character is and I was thrilled to see Costner back, however briefly. It would be fantastic if we got to see Jor El in future movies but I'm not sure if that's possible with Zod destroying him in Man of Steel.

The only real issue I have is Batman essentially killing dudes, manslaughter or not. But, I can give it a pass and allow them to make that decision if they feel it best serves the character.
 
Just came back...WTF happened to this movie??? It's alright, but man, what the hell.

I do like various aspects and was entertained, but man they fuck this up in terms of:

Story
Scenes flowing together
Inconsistencies
Plotholes
That is quite a stretch, there was no plot. Just a bunch of scenes cut together to look pretty.
 
Does he kill in those? I hate that so much. I love a non-killing batman :/
The first two are more centered around the Justice League and possible stories to follow, and Dark Knight Returns is what this Batman is based heavily off of (who is just as violent). There's a lot of homages to it throughout BvS so it's at least worth a watch to see where they came from.
 
Does he kill in those? I hate that so much. I love a non-killing batman :/



They made it sound like he branded a handful, but he had to have known it would have gotten him killed. Batman is smarter than that. I *get* why they did it and why they made him do it in the movie, doesn't mean I liked it.

There's only ever one. The papers only show one, Alfred treats it as a totally new development. The only thing that even hints at multiple brandings is an ambiguously worded news broadcat bit.
 
As a DC fan it is really easy to see where Snyder is pulling from; The Dark Knight Returns, Death of Superman, the first arc of the New 52, probably a few others too when it came to the future sequences. Like that episode of Superman TAS where Supes gets brainwashed by Darkseid to be his right hand, I don't remember if that was a comic adaption in itself.
 
It's definitely not a deconstruction. It's about how doing the right thing is always the right thing to do, that even though life is hard and frankly not very fair, there is still virtue, there is still goodness. That even though things might not always work out perfectly, it's important to always keep trying. To never succumb to despair or cynicism.

I don't really think the movie is about any of these things at all or even really addresses these themes of the story, even though I could see how you would read into it that way.
 
I don't really think the movie is about any of these things at all or even really addresses these themes of the story, even though I could see how you would read into it that way.

That's what Bruce's whole final speech is about. It's why Superman keeps coming back for more punishment. Men are still good.
 
So we've got:

Time-traveling Flash

That was the Flash? I had no idea who or what that was.


Not sure how I feel about this movie. It's so freaking sloppy, scenes have little to no connectivity, and the Doomsday fight was a CGI mess, but Affleck was great. There's that at least. I actually like Batman killing people. He comes off as broken and far gone from his original ideals.
 
There's only ever one. The papers only show one, Alfred treats it as a totally new development. The only thing that even hints at multiple brandings is an ambiguously worded news broadcat bit.

Yeah that's what I'm basing it off of, but you're right. It could be just the one. Sigh.

That was the Flash? I had no idea who or what that was.

Yeah I thought it was robin, hinting at a red hood thing.
 
OK I just got back. I'll need to see what cool stuff I missed from all you guys who know way more about this stuff.

I liked it alright, minus the DCCU bloating, but I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate how batman A) Used guns and B) actually killed dudes. Ugh ugh ughg ughguhguhguhguhguhguhgu. Literally the best bruce wayne and potentially the best batman of all time on screen practically ruined for me by branding (which led to death) and killing dudes.


OK, any posts I should check for cool references/setup stuff? Who were they hinting at being the justice league villain? I caught none of it.


And wait, the dude in the portal/dream thing was the flash? I thought it was like mech-ed up robin.

Im ok with the killing but wtf with the branding?

Flash and Aquaman is so lame. I'm not excited for the JLA movie anymore.
 
Yeah, Flash was visually a mess. It was pretty clear they were going for a dreamlike impression on the audience, like how after you wake up you're wondering what on earth you just saw, but if I didn't know that this was most likely a CoIE reference (and hung out in the spoiler thread) I don't know I would have picked him out.

But it works okay not knowing who he is, imo.
 
I guess I never put it together. Is it confirmed it's flash? Is it just speculation that it's time traveling flash? What else would explain that scene.
Well the Lightning bolt symbol means the long-haired guy is probably Flash.
I honestly thought people joked about their cameos being on a flash drive but here we are...
 
Aquaman had a PS1 era introduction too.

I liked the way they showed his powers. Plus his glowing eyes were great.

Cyborg probably got saved for last because of a) the frankly creepy nature of his piece (bread, eggs, milk, squick), and b) the wider-universe implications of the Motherbox.


I think ending with Aquaman would've been fine. End on a hype note. I hope it isn't a Motherbox. I hate that new origin.
 
Yeah, Flash was visually a mess. It was pretty clear they were going for a dreamlike impression on the audience, like how after you wake up you're wondering what on earth you just saw, but if I didn't know that this was most likely a CoIE reference (and hung out in the spoiler thread) I don't know I would have picked him out.

But it works okay not knowing who he is, imo.

Or maybe they were going with "we haven't decided what the Flash's costume will look like and we don't want to commit yet"
 
Oh also, since when can you SEE GOTHAM CITY FROM METROPOLIS!? Have they always been next door neighbors!?

They're marginally closer than usual, but not by much. Metropolis is generally in Delaware, Gotham is generally in NJ. They've always been close.

Or maybe they were going with "we haven't decided what the Flash's costume will look like and we don't want to commit yet"

Naw, it's not just the costume (plus, I really really really doubt they were even planning something that armored and mechanical for his regular look). The whole thing is surreal, it's a fakeout wakeup, it's all very fast, there's a lot of obfuscating effects on the screen. Maybe they weren't going for dreamlike specifically, but clearly conveying the guy's identity was definitely not on the priority list.
 
That's what Bruce's whole final speech is about. It's why Superman keeps coming back for more punishment. Men are still good.

I know that's what Bruce's speech was about, I'm just saying I don't think it connected to the 2hour30min story that preceded it. "Doing good in the face of cynicism and despair" and the better angels of human nature I don't think are really prominent parts of the plot. They don't drive Superman's worldview (who really only returns from his brief exile in the mountains because he loves Lois, not because he wants to help mankind in spite of their shit), and it doesn't have much to do with Batman either unless meant to redeem him in a "Yeah I was a huge asshole to Superman, but I'm basically still good in the end" way.
 
Yes, they're twin cities.

I always got the impression they were like... a decent distance apart. :/ Shows how much I know. It makes a lot less sense to me when superman lives close enough to kinda just take care of gotham single handedly. And how it took nearly 2 years for clark to start giving a damn about batman, even though he could probably hear him beating dudes up every night.

They're marginally closer than usual, but not by much. Metropolis is generally in Delaware, Gotham is generally in NJ. They've always been close.

Alright, that makes sense geographically.

Just got back. This movie is shit and I loved it.

Minus a few nitpicks, I totally agree, haha.
 
I think I'm done with these movies.

Really bummed out about this one.
I was bored during a good chunk of it, but then I remember how silly chunks of it was and I am glad I went. No doubt a RENTAL though, dragged on waaaaay too long.
Better than Man of Steel no doubt, but that is not saying much.

Just got back. This movie is shit and I loved it.
Same, modern day Miami Connection.
I had to hold back laughing at Lois throwing the spear.
 
Oh also, since when can you SEE GOTHAM CITY FROM METROPOLIS!? Have they always been next door neighbors!?

Their location varies wildly. Sometimes they are both on the eastern seaboard really close to each other, sometimes Metropolis is in the midwest near Chicago. I don't think they've ever been literally right across from each other in the comics though. Bludhaven is across from Gotham in the comics.
 
Ok I posted my non spoiler review in the other threads.

The things I was mislead on:

Batman's killing. First off atleast one person said he did the branding with intention to kill, or atleast made it seem that way. Ya'll were lying or not understanding. It's the first time it's he's seen the result of it, Aflred makes a comment about Bruce turning cruel. Batman seems mostly apathetic about it, but it's not like he was actively aware of it killing criminals already, or it didn't give that confirmation.

Yes he did kill, on purpose. It wasn't execution style. It was mostly a part of his fighting style. It sucks, I can only assume he started doing it after the Joker was in jail (assumedly after he killed Jason Todd). We don't really know. at this point. It's kind of goofy because he IS aiming at their tires but for whatever reason that makes the car explode.

Here is what we do know. Batman is inspired by Superman ("there are good men"), it's fairly obvious at the end when Batman chooses not to brand Lex that he's given up on his killing spree. A central theme in this movie was Batman's cynicism. He believes the world is such shit (you can hear it in his speech to Clark about what's he's learned about the world) that no men are good, at the least one with so much power. That was part of Lex's primary motivation as well, he didn't want to acknowledge there was a god that was both powerful and good, which is what Superman was. He wanted to force Superman to kill, to prove that he wasn't good.


The movie is humorless. Maybe in the format you're accustomed to, but there were a few jokes/gags. Granny's Tea was one of them, Bruce/Aflred's exchanges, Gadot's dialogue, there were a few more like Perry as well, but it's far from humorless. There was atleast 5 different occasions where the audience laughed, at least at my screening.


No hope! Ok I'm not going to lie, there are some powerful, dark scenes in the movie, namely the bombing. But it felt like the central theme being pounded into our head was "the world is shit", up until WW I would say the movie is dark. Which she comes in, the movie starts making plays. In what should be the darkest scene with Superman dying is one of the lightest. Showing his sacrifice shows that there are Good Men in the world, there is hope. The reaction to his death pulled a few heart strings for me. The audience was legit surprised. I think the movie ended on a much more positive note with Batman refusing to kill Luthor and a more positive outlook on life. I know some kids were so happy (going by their squeals) to see the dirt move at the end, it was adorable.

The things I don't like:

The knightmare scene. It's a cool stand alone sequence, but in the context of the movie it just screws up patience. Ghost Barry is also dumb, I hate ezra miller's weird mustache. It was dumb, they should have disregarded Flash's part and just left the knightmare sequence as an end credit treat.


Pa's speech.
There's nothing wrong with the speech itself, just there's very little reason for Superman to be hallucinating an imaginary chat with his father. Why not just extend Martha's scene and have her relay the story? Dumb.

Lots of little scenes with important plot elements. The plot was fine, just a little too much too quick, I can see how it would be easy to get lost if not paying attention for even 30 seconds.

Luthor is just a little too dramatic. I like Eisenberg's performance. I like that he's kind of socially inept nerd. It's a fresh take, I'd like to see the character transform into a buffer, more confident Lex after he leaves prison. He builds up a stronger facade. Less allusions would be helpful as well.

The first 90 minutes is a little dry. I can't help but feel another action scene would have been nice. Maybe it's just the bad taste the knightmare scene left in my mouth.



Oh he broke the camera with the trident.

Such edge.

Not as edgy as most of these one line comments you've been throwing around.
 
I know that's what Bruce's speech was about, I'm just saying I don't think it connected to the 2hour30min story that preceded it. "Doing good in the face of cynicism and despair" and the better angels of human nature I don't think are really prominent parts of the plot. They don't drive Superman's worldview (who really only returns from his brief exile in the mountains because he loves Lois, not because he wants to help mankind in spite of their shit), and it doesn't have much to do with Batman either unless meant to redeem him in a "Yeah I was a huge asshole to Superman, but I'm basically still good in the end" way.

Disagree. He comes back because he realizes that his issues are a small thing, in the grand scheme of things. Loving Lois is part of it, but not all. And despite his doubts, the reason he keeps trying to help is because he wants to do the right thing, he says as much on the hotel balcony.

The whole thing is that Bruce spends most of the movie being hugely, egregiously wrong. There's an element of fakeout there, as it seems that Clark starts to come around to his way of thinking, but then he ultimately rejects that. He looks for goodness in the Batman, the man he called a "one man reign of terror" earlier in the movie. He was so devoted to it that he let Batman whale on him, kill him, rather than play Lex's game. It's very clear that Superman could have ended that fight a dozen times over, including a few instances after he got hit with the first Kryptonite 'nade.

I always got the impression they were like... a decent distance apart. :/ Shows how much I know. It makes a lot less sense to me when superman lives close enough to kinda just take care of gotham single handedly. And how it took nearly 2 years for clark to start giving a damn about batman, even though he could probably hear him beating dudes up every night.

Traditionally, Superman trying to help out in Gotham ends really poorly for everyone. Place is reactive.
 
Okay, so: I award this movie my prestigious "not that bad" award.

It's far from a great movie. Everything to do with setting up the Justice League movie make Iron Man 2 look like an exemplar of smoothly integrating worldbuilding into the story by comparison. It's like the plot stops occasionally so that Batman and Wonder Woman can look at YouTube videos for a few minutes at a time, or receive cryptic visions of the future (also, if Lex had all this information, why wasn't he doing anything with it?). There's some wonky editing in places. I don't understand why Superman can hear whenever Lois is in danger but can't find his mom even though she's in the same city, nor why Lex's minions don't kill Martha the second it becomes clear that somebody is here to rescue her (why keep her alive?). I expect the film's version of Lex will be very divisive; Eisenberg's tic-heavy performance is a bit much in places, and doesn't remind me much of the version of Lex I tend to prefer. For much of the film I was wondering why he was even trying to kill Superman, since the movie never really offered much of an explanation for that, but from his final scene he's apparently just Darkseid's witting(?) lacky -- though that it turn is kind of a questionable choice for Superman's main villain.

The rest of the movie is, on the whole, a fairly competent execution of what it's trying to do. A lot of people will take a dislike on principle to a story about thuggish douchebag Batman becoming obsessed with killing Superman, which I can understand; that said, it tells that story fairly well, though them immediately becoming allies feels a bit like a turn on a dime. I like Superman and Lois' relationship, and Wonder Woman, while she doesn't get much to do here, looks cool.

How much time did they have to spend rehearsing the blocking in that Lois bathtub scene to keep from showing her nipples, I wonder?

Also, while the trailers made it clear that the film would in a sense be taking on the criticisms people had about civilian casualties in Man of Steel, at the climax the film overcompensates to a degree that verges on being Snyder parodying his critics, as a stream of newscasters, military dudes, etc. are asserting that wherever the heroes happen to be fighting is deserted.
 
I just came home from watching the movie and it was okay. That's it just an okay movie that did more wrong then right. It falls short of what it's trying to represent.


I would be first person tell you I think Superman is boring and MoS sucked. In this movie I found Superman to be the most interesting part of the film. Anytime Clark and Lois was on screen that’s when I was the most invested. This movie brought many good questions about Superman that sadly will never be answered because now he is “dead”. If you ask me this was Superman film that Batman was forced into to speed up the Justice League. Lets talk about Batman Vs. Superman, which I felt was forced. I don’t think Batman had enough reason to fight Superman let alone kill him. The editing in this movie was horrible, and sadly this movie had a lot of good themes that weren’t fleshed out. I enjoyed Ben’s Batman; some of his lines were really corny. Worst part of this movie to me was Lex he had no dominating presence. He didn’t feel like a threat. The first half of the movie felt like it was switching between Superman movie and Batman movie. The movie was okay it was, but Batman Vs. Superman is suppose to be more then okay. What was up with that weird Flash scene? Is Superman going to side with Darkseid? The pieces are there and hopefully they can get it back on track. If you ask me they are really fucking over Superman if you ask me.
 
Luthor is just a little too dramatic. I like Eisenberg's performance. I like that he's kind of socially inept nerd. It's a fresh take, I'd like to see the character transform into a buffer, more confident Lex after he leaves prison. He builds up a stronger facade. Less allusions would be helpful as well.

My favorite part of his performance is when the senator tells him she's not giving him the kryptonite. His face goes from fake lex to real lex. It's a pretty great moment.

And they're def going to reveal that he killed his dad to inherit the company right? It seems like a given.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom