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

Status
Not open for further replies.
The entire Lex/Senator plotline was baffling to me: If you found a rock you want to keep on the ocean floor, would you 1) have it put it on a boat and bring it home, or 2) have meetings with the junior senator from Kentucky to see if she can okay bringing it into the US?

Then she blocks the import license (which I'm pretty sure a senator can't do as it's a federal agency that regulates them), and Lex just...puts it on a boat and brings it home anyway.

I had the same thoughts. The Senate stuff seemed unnecessary even though it leads to a shocking moment. Lex is bankrolling PMCs in Africa, I'm pretty sure he'd be able to smuggle the rock back into the US. I guess Lex does use the rock and it's potential to gain access to the ship and Zod.
 
I don't think so.

*Superman zooms man into wall, turning him into paste*

What "lessons" did Superman learn from Man of Steel? I was promised by the director that Superman would learn the value of life after being put in a position where he ended one.

In THIS film, a lot of people lose their lives to the HEROES, and they don't have the "no choice" excuse anymore. They could easily have subdued many of them without killing but they don't.

And that goes to even that brief scene with the Flash. Did he HAVE to physically harm the guy, when we know his powers lets him restrain him without ease and lack of injury? Of course not. Like everyone else in this film, they could do it without harming or killing... but they don't want to.
Superman literally flies Doomsday into space as soon as he can to take the fight away from earth.

He is seen saving people, nearly goes into exile over the grief of being helpless at the deaths during the courtroom explosion.

Who exactly loses their life to Superman? Aside from Doomsday?
 
What I don't quite get, relatively at the start, when we met Lex the one male politician decides that he'll give Lex everything he wishes for. Why? When Lex proceeds to feed him that cherry candy the guy looks completely disturbed, so why would he grant Lex every kind of access?
 
The entire Lex/Senator plotline was baffling to me: If you found a rock you want to keep on the ocean floor, would you 1) have it put it on a boat and bring it home, or 2) have meetings with the junior senator from Kentucky to see if she can okay bringing it into the US?

Then she blocks the import license (which I'm pretty sure a senator can't do as it's a federal agency that regulates them), and Lex just...puts it on a boat and brings it home anyway.

...after he elaborately uses a man's wheelchair as a bomb to destroy the entire Capitol and kills not only that pesky senator but also literally hundreds of people, including his own assistant.


Joker would be proud.
 
I watched the TV show and I watched the movie but I don't follow what producers or execs have to say about them. Sure, they've made the decision but it's a poor one especially in light of what the MCU is doing with its own properties. It would be a lot better if the TV shows and movies were in the same canon.

Movies are for global audience. Half the world doesn't even know about Flash the TV show, which is 1.5 seasons old.
Marvel is doing it because all their shows though set in universe WILL NOT feature in movies. Daredevil, Luke Cage etc won't make an appearance on silver screen. Because Marvel knows its a bad idea. Hence they made shows based on relatively minor characters who won't
affect movie storylines.
DC otth made Flash TV show. Now no major DC storyline involving justice league can be made without Flash. So they have to keep it separate.
 
Superman literally flies Doomsday into space as soon as he can to take the fight away from earth.

He is seen saving people, nearly goes into exile over the grief of being helpless at the deaths during the courtroom explosion.

Who exactly loses their life to Superman? Aside from Doomsday?

Superman slamming that terrorist through a wall looks an awful lot like a kill, but given that he later says "I didn't kill those people!" I'm assuming we're not supposed to read it as one?
 
What I don't quite get, relatively at the start, when we met Lex the one male politician decides that he'll give Lex everything he wishes for. Why? When Lex proceeds to feed him that cherry candy the guy looks completely disturbed, so why would he grant that dude every kind of access?

It would be a plothole otherwise..."How does Lex get access to Zod's body and the spaceship when you know the government will have that stuff locked down?"

It does create a nice bit of absurdity though. It's easier for Lex to get an alien corpse than it is for him to import a rock.
 
I don't think so.

*Superman zooms man into wall, turning him into paste*

What "lessons" did Superman learn from Man of Steel? I was promised by the director that Superman would learn the value of life after being put in a position where he ended one.

In THIS film, a lot of people lose their lives to the HEROES, and they don't have the "no choice" excuse anymore. They could easily have subdued many of them without killing but they don't.

And that goes to even that brief scene with the Flash. Did he HAVE to physically harm the guy, when we know his powers lets him restrain him without ease and lack of injury? Of course not. Like everyone else in this film, they could do it without harming or killing... but they don't want to.

What paste? He knocks the dude through a couple of weak walls. I don't see why he'd be dead, look at what Batman shrugs off.

But anyway, the whole point of the movie is that the world is a hard place, a tough place, and, yes, a violent one, but... that doesn't mean you can't do good. That you shouldn't try.

Who could they have easily subdued without killing, btw? Flash knocks the dude into a standee, hardly graphic. Bruce's only kills (other than KGBeast) are Batmobile/wing related, and, yeah, that sucks, but it's also kind of par for the course. And as for KGBeast... I dunno. I think he's in a real bad place. He's been in one for a while, but now, he's saving this woman, this mother named Martha. And he's feeling things that he hasn't for a while. So I dunno. Baleman killed Ra's and a whole bunch of ninjas, I can't say this is any worse :P
 
What I don't quite get, relatively at the start, when we met Lex the one male politician decides that he'll give Lex everything he wishes for. Why? When Lex proceeds to feed him that cherry candy the guy looks completely disturbed, so why would he grant that dude every kind of access?
I think he was just feeding him whatever Lex wants just so the senator can get a full grasp as to what Lex is doing. In other words he had to put up with his BS.
 
Cons
-I can't vibe with the Batman killing thing. I hear Synder say he doesn't directly kill anybody which is true for the most part. But the guns on the car and batwing just rubbed me the wrong way.




-I really dislike that the added on the bullshit "Nobody is here" to placate the I don't like MOS destruction crowd. Guess who is there security guards and cleaners. But nobody cares about them.


Pros
-I feel the that it is an accurate depiction of how Superman would be treated in modern times. People suck. I felt bad for the guy. The inner struggle was real. It could have been fleshed out more but I like what they were doing.

-Batman is a beast. Straight out of the Arkham games.

-Overall I feel my expectations may have been too high. I really need to see it again to gather my thoughts. Thinking back on it I would say I did like it.


PS -Also Superman doesn't kill anybody. To say he killed that terrorist is just misreading the movie. Did people think Captain America was killing fools when he was drop kicking them over railings?
 
But there's no need to even tell anyone. It's a ~12 inch rock. He could just bring it home and keep it all secret and do his thing. He needed the government to get him access to Zod and the ship, not to bring a rock home. For that matter, why not toss in, "oh and I want to bring this rock home" when he was buying favors from the corrupt senator? Why even talk to Holly Hunter's character about it?

I think she's incidental to this part of the story. The real point of the explosion in the Senate was to further heighten the Batman v Superman story, with Lex being the puppermaster working to get them to fight. The "can I bring this rock home" angle was extraneous and ultimately didn't go anywhere since he just did it anyways. (This is one of the plot threads I'd cut down hard in order to make for a more trim cut of the film.)

Well it can't be imported legally because it's radioactive. And originally he was planning on building anti-Superman weaponry by working alongside the government for the ease of it. Obviously that didn't pan out so he had to go with plan B.
 
It would be a plothole otherwise..."How does Lex get access to Zod's body and the spaceship when you know the government will have that stuff locked down?"
I guess it would just make more sense to me if Lex blackmailed the guy into doing it. Maybe the extended cut will elaborate on it.
It does create a nice bit of absurdity though. It's easier for Lex to get an alien corpse than it is for him to import a rock.
lol, true. Those darn import laws.
 
...after he elaborately uses a man's wheelchair as a bomb to destroy the entire Capitol and kills not only that pesky senator but also literally hundreds of people, including his own assistant.


Joker would be proud.

Thinking this through, they could have cut Holly Hunter's character, focused on the one corrupt senator, and used the explosion to both further Lex's BvS plot, and to cover his tracks by killing the senator that he'd bought off. Instead of Holly Hunter staring at his pee, it would be the other one realizing he'd been played. (Or just make her the corrupt senator that gets played.)
Well it can't be imported legally because it's radioactive.
But he did it anyways just fine.
 
PS -Also Superman doesn't kill anybody. To say he killed that terrorist is just misreading the movie. Did people think Captain America was killing fools when he was drop kicking them over railings?
Well, yes. But Captain America is a soldier. That terrorist just has a shattered spine and internal hemorrhaging, he's fiiiiiiiiine.
 
PS -Also Superman doesn't kill anybody. To say he killed that terrorist is just misreading the movie. Did people think Captain America was killing fools when he was drop kicking them over railings?

Well, yes? Cap kills dozens of dudes across his two movies.
 
Cross-post from the non-spoiler thread:

I SEEN'T IT!

No spoilers. Just impressions. The reviews I have skimmed featured words like 'joyless', 'mess', and 'slog' -- and I find all of those descriptors to be apt quite frankly. There are a couple of good, well shot sequences (awe inspiring at times) in this movie but the end product just left me feeling empty. The first half was simply a chore to get through, you could feel it in the audience -- the feeling of them getting impatient. There are some scenes that just flat out made me feel uneasy to the point where I had to wonder if Zack even viewed these characters as something that children might be into. There is a certain mischaracterization of one of these superheroes that I felt betrayed everything that drew me to him in the first place -- it's blatant and happens on multiple occasions. A staple of his creed, the most quintessential aspect of who he is, something I would wager most of the general audience knows about this character. Lastly the references made to the larger DC cinematic universe were so sloppily and haphazardly done, it simply took me out of the movie.

I didn't like Man of Steel, and I enjoyed this movie even less. In fact, this movie has cemented how much Zack Snyder is a mismatch for this franchise for me. I honestly have no desire to watch Justice League after this and this is coming from a DC fan whose gateway into superheroes/comic books as a kid was Batman and Superman in the early 90's. God, I hope Suicide Squad is good, or it's going to be 3 for 3.
 
Also I liked the little touch of Wonder Woman's super-strength when Batman hands Superman's dead corpse for her to hold and lower to the ground.

As for Jimmy Olsen, he's actually listed in the credits of the film.
I can't believe that guy who got shot in the beginning was Jimmy Olsen. What a waste of one of Superman's more-known supporting characters. I still like to think Jenny at the Daily Planet is just a gender-swapped Jimmy incarnation. Also are we ever gonna get live-action Jimmy with red hair?
 
PS -Also Superman doesn't kill anybody. To say he killed that terrorist is just misreading the movie. Did people think Captain America was killing fools when he was drop kicking them over railings?

None of the Avengers have a no kill rule as far as I know. Cap and Iron Man have both killed a bunch of people.
 
Because it's a primary issue. Come on dude. It's not just a little intrusive. The whole plot stops for several minutes for an unexplained and impromptu vision/dream sequence of really bizarre out-of-context shit that is followed by another unexplained and impromptu dream (maybe?) of Bruce being visited by a character who is again completely removed from context. And then none of this is mentioned again.

It's a pointless interjection (and not the only one) that further drags down the pacing in an already overstuffed movie.

Again, it's a little unnecessary content, in a movie with a ton of real editing problems. The bigger problem is that there are systemic issues with a lot of the scenes that do need to be there for the plot.

But there's no need to even tell anyone. It's a ~12 inch rock. He could just bring it home and keep it all secret and do his thing. He needed the government to get him access to Zod and the ship, not to bring a rock home. For that matter, why not toss in, "oh and I want to bring this rock home" when he was buying favors from the corrupt senator? Why even talk to Holly Hunter's character about it?

I think she's incidental to this part of the story. The real point of the explosion in the Senate was to further heighten the Batman v Superman story, with Lex being the puppermaster working to get them to fight. The "can I bring this rock home" angle was extraneous and ultimately didn't go anywhere since he just did it anyways. (This is one of the plot threads I'd cut down hard in order to make for a more trim cut of the film.)

Hmm...

Yeah, I dunno. Best I can come up with is he wanted to set himself up as the official purveyor of Superman "deterrents" as a way to get access to the ship, but then the other, stupider, senator offered that anyway.
 
Thinking this through, they could have cut Holly Hunter's character, focused on the one corrupt senator, and used the explosion to both further Lex's BvS plot, and to cover his tracks by killing the senator that he'd bought off. Instead of Holly Hunter staring at his pee, it would be the other one realizing he'd been played. (Or just make her the corrupt senator that gets played.)

But he did it anyways just fine.

Because the only senator blocking it had died and every other politician seemed happy to play ball?
 
The kids and teenagers in my theater really enjoyed the movie. Even heard a boy saying he was about to cry when Superman died.

It's funny that for a 2 hour and 30 minute movie, it feels like they cut out hours of scenes. And there wasn't even that much action in the first half.
 
The kids and teenagers in my theater really enjoyed the movie. Even heard a boy saying he was about to cry when Superman died.
On the way out I heard a dude say "Ehhh, that was like an A minus."

WAIT'LL YOU HEAR WHAT AUDIENCES ARE SAYING ABOUT BATMAN VS SUPERMAN

"Ehhh, that was like an A minus."

FRIDAY
 
I dug showing of the murder of Bruce Wayne's parents, and the Metropolis destruction, and the transition between them. The opening 20 minutes or so almost had be convinced I'd be watching a good movie.

Yea the very beginning was quite good. I thought maybe we all got majorly trolled
 
Again, it's a little unnecessary content, in a movie with a ton of real editing problems. The bigger problem is that there are systemic issues with a lot of the scenes that do need to be there for the plot.

I agree. Biggest issue for me was the script. I don't think it's good at all. They went too big for one movie. Too much shit is squeezed into this thing.

I was all for Superman dying and becoming that symbol of hope that the world needs but they botched it. They don't do enough to show the love/hate relationship the world has with him.

Also I didn't buy Batman's motivation for fighting Superman. It was so apparent that Lex was setting everything up, that as the 'world's greatest detective' Batman should've seen that.
The Flash showing up in the speed force messes this up even more as the dream sequence should've have shown why he needs to fight Superman, but instead gets a warning of why he shouldn't. This then payoffs with Batman realizing their mothers have the same name. Lamest end to a fight ever.
 
First off, the size of the wreckage is ENORMOUS. Hell, they can't even get the ship out of Metropolis. Also, would our tools and machinery even be able to salvage what is there? I would assume it has the same level of invulnerability as the actual Kryptonians?

As for Jimmy Olsen, he's actually listed in the credits of the film.

The article is talking about the scene with those folks diving in and taking a piece of the rock from the ocean, not what's left in Metropolis
 
None of the Avengers have a no kill rule as far as I know. Cap and Iron Man have both killed a bunch of people.
Yeah, I thought only Spider-Man did not try to kill. Every other Marvel character do not care.

It is what made DC more interesting because they tried to approach everything diplomatically before resorting to killing.
 
I'm sure Zack Snyder totally gets it. That's why the movie is such a critical success, amirite?

Jesus christ, I know the TV Flash does not fit in BvS universe; that's not hard to figure out at all. My point is, they should have either made TV Flash fit BvS or BvS fit TV Flash. That's how you get people emotionally invested in your properties.

They should tailor a product for 40+ million viewers based off a show with 4 million? And on the other hand, the Flash tv show would not exist if the universes were connected.

This argument is nonsense.
 
I agree. Biggest issue for me was the script. I don't think it's good at all. They went too big for one movie. Too much shit is squeezed into this thing.

I was all for Superman dying and becoming that symbol of hope that the world needs but they botched it. They don't do enough to show the love/hate relationship the world has with him.

Also I didn't buy Batman's motivation for fighting Superman. It was so apparent that Lex was setting everything up, that as the 'world's greatest detective' Batman should've seen that.
The Flash showing up in the speed force messes this up even more as the dream sequence should've have shown why he needs to fight Superman, but instead gets a warning of why he shouldn't. This then payoffs with Batman realizing their mothers have the same name. Lamest end to a fight ever.

Heh, I disagree with this. The script was amazing, it's the editing I take issue with. I think it did an admirable job of conveying the themes it wanted to, everything was very much earned, but the actual scenes themselves were extremely choppy.
 
PS -Also Superman doesn't kill anybody. To say he killed that terrorist is just misreading the movie. Did people think Captain America was killing fools when he was drop kicking them over railings?
Cap is a soldier, of course he has killed. Difference is Superman has the power not to. And it's not like Cap is this godly symbol of human idealism. Both believe in humanity's better angels, but only one of those two has the actual power to show restraint.
 
Heh, I disagree with this. The script was amazing, it's the editing I take issue with. I think it did an admirable job of conveying the themes it wanted to, everything was very much earned, but the actual scenes themselves were extremely choppy.
The script may have been amazing if it were 3 movies instead of 1. The execution was just all over the place though.
 
I felt the movie was so much more abstract in a ridiculous manner, that I didn't really feel any disconnect when the movie wasn't handling its drama very well.

Man of Steel had the context of being a regular superhero movie, and failed.

Batman V Superman had the context of being an alienating and uncompromising story about gods and devils, so complaining about any plot holes, felt like complaining about any plot holes in The Tree of Life.

I'm not in any way saying that the movie is as good or as well made as the The Tree of Life, but it at least went for what it was trying to do; create something no one but Snyder would like.

It gave me happy flashbacks to coming out of Noah with the entire audience hating it, but me who loved it.
 
PS -Also Superman doesn't kill anybody. To say he killed that terrorist is just misreading the movie. Did people think Captain America was killing fools when he was drop kicking them over railings?

2JFxUaX.jpg


Try surviving in a freezing cold ocean with a broken back. Probably broken ribs and sternum too...
 
The script may have been amazing if it were 3 movies instead of 1. The execution was just all over the place though.

Yeah, I'd think it was the victim of studio meddling if Zack Snyder didn't seem so enthusiastic about Justice League. Seems to me like Zack got to make his Batman v Superman movie only if he simultaneously tried to spin it into Warner Bros. Avengers, and it's just too much for one film to handle.

The parts that are setting up Justice League just don't fit in well. They aren't close to organic, and the film was already dealing with enough trying to set-up an aged Batman, a scrutinized Superman and the conflict between the two.
 
Cap is a soldier, of course he has killed. Difference is Superman has the power not to. And it's not like Cap is this godly symbol of human idealism. Both believe in humanity's better angels, but only one of those two has the actual power to show restraint.

Superman never kills any character weaker than himself in these films. He kills Zod and...Zombie-Zod.
 
The article is talking about the scene with those folks diving in and taking a piece of the rock from the ocean, not what's left in Metropolis

No, that's what I'm saying. The wreckage in the Indian Ocean is huge. I don't even know how'd we go about trying to clean it up if they can't even get everything out of the city.
 
The audience at the showing I went to straight up laughed when the Senator saw the jar of piss/peach tea. The movie tried for ominous or threatening during that scene, but it had a different effect for peeps watching with me.

Was it the same for everyone else?

In a way I feel that it's actually kind of more effective that way, in a morbid tonal whiplash sense. Make 'em laugh, then boom, go out for blood.
 
This was certainly a movie.

... I did not enjoy the movie. I don't hate it, but again I did not enjoy it.

I really disliked Eisenberg's Lex Luthor, but I don't blame him for it. No I dislike the way it was written and directed.

During the fight with Doomsday I realized I was not enjoying it. I understand that Doomsday has to be CG, just for what it is, but there was just too much CG for the fight. Coming off of Daredevil s2 where some of those fights I found to be amazing, I just found this to be overindulgence. At points to me it felt like I was watching an animated movie with live action parts cut in.

I don't feel any of the actors did bad jobs, they just did the best that they had to work with. Affleck wasn't a bad Batman, and his fight to save Martha was really enjoyable (it was basically straight out of an Arkham game. Too bad he failed Perfect Freeflow, lol). Aside from that though I do feel that Snyder doesn't really understand the characters he's making the movie about.


One thing I will give kudos for: Acknowledging that both Bruce and Clark's mothers are named Martha. That was something I thought about for years and am glad was not ignored.


Oh, and they frigging killed Mercy! I was so happy to see she was a character in the movie, and then literally BOOM...
goddammit Snyder >_<
 
Superman still is the worst part of DC's Cinematic Universe. I hope they use Justice League as an opportunity to do a soft reboot on the character.
 
The audience at the showing I went to straight up laughed when the Senator saw the jar of piss/peach tea. The movie tried for ominous or threatening during that scene, but it had a different effect for peeps watching with me.

Was it the same for everyone else?

In a way I feel that it's actually kind of more effective that way, in a morbid tonal whiplash sense. Make 'em laugh, then boom, go out for blood.

Yeah. It's supposed to make you laugh, but you're supposed to be nervous while you do it. Because you know something is fucked, but at the same time, it's funny, you know?
 
Yeah. It's supposed to make you laugh, but you're supposed to be nervous while you do it. Because you know something is fucked, but at the same time, it's funny, you know?

But I'm not really sure if that was actually intended. It feels accidental. I'd need to see the scene again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom