the only thing I can think of that would make the lois almost drowning scene worse is aquaman randomly showing upa problem i had with this movie from the get go is why this batman ...dumb??
He's suppose to be the world's greatest detective yet when Clark goes to talk to him to have a conversation about what lex did to his mother, batman goes all ape on him.
the batman i grew up with ( DCAU batman ) would try to have reasonable conversations before starting a stupid fight.
also FUCK i still can't get over the stupid Lois going into the water to get the rod scene, it was the perfect damn spot for aqua man to save her damn itinstead the whole scene felt pretty pointless.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Batman v Superman Ultimate Cut |OT| - Men are still good (out now)
- Thread starter Ahasverus
- Start date
I did catch that, but what I got from that exchange was that Lex was feigning and exaggerating his mental state in order to avoid a larger sentence. He even states himself that he's been found unfit for trial. He even laughs about it.
To quote Dave Mustaine in Mary Jane: "If I know I'm going crazy, I must not be insane."
I think Batman sending Lex to Arkham is his way of making sure Lex will stay behind bars. Remember, he's still a Luther, he must have connections that would get him out of anywhere else.
I actually rolled my eyes at that scene. The man kept women in cages for god knows what. Having a kid doesn't make that alright. But that's just me.
I wouldn't call the bat branding a power trip either, but a warning.
Dude...how many innocent deaths was he responsible for in the movie? That senate building seemed pretty packed. That doesn't strike me as the type of person that's entitled to a second chance.
I grew up with Timm's Batman too, but that isn't the only interpretation of the character.
The #NotMyBatman thing is so silly
I got the opposite impression. His tone of voice implied that he's resentful and considers it absurd that he is considered incapable of standing trial. And it's not like it's implied anywhere that he's faking his manic mannerisms for anyone since he has them consistently through the movie.
This is basically doing a lot of writing for Snyder. We're just assuming that a normal prison is incapable of holding him to justify batman's usurption of the law, even though he all but states he's going to use arkham to inflict harm on him.
"Make an example of him" through cruel and unusual means?
It's completely within this Batman's character, given what we've seen of him, to just say he is a sadist, but even not, that just means he's still maximizing the pain and trauma of people to achieve his own ends. That's not better.
And that's perfectly fine. If such an event were to happen, and you were called for jury duty, it would be both your right and your duty to pass judgement on your fellow citizen.
The point isn't whether you agree with batman, the point is that batman doesn't care what whether you agree with him. The thing Superman was going after Batman for was because he, simply put, being a fascist. He considers his judgement above other peoples so he violates rights to run things how he wants with no oversight. Fascism something that has been a major theme in Frank Miller's work and guess what interpretation Snyder is trying to emulate here? And it's an repugnant quality in anyone, even if you agree with them in some things.
I agree. The point being lost is that this is a very, very poorly written and extremely hatable interpretation of batman. It's no wonder many don't want it.
... Kinda, yes, also because he realized Superman was not a desintized monster.
I don't think his mannerism's are fake, but after his arrest he can certainly be playing up his mental state. When Batman visits him, he's smiling it up when he claims "but who'd believe me, I've been deemed unfit for trial", as if it's a part of his plan. Which is why his expressions switches to "oh fuck" when Batman tells him he's been transferred to Arkham.
He could even claim that interacting with Zod's ship fried his brain
It's a fair assumption to make though. The guy has power and money, there's not much you can't do with those two elements.
I'm all for punishment fitting the crime, but again that's a personal view that I already got tons of flack here for. I won't touch that again lol
See I find myself in agreement with Batman's actions, so I never really pondered the flip side. In my mind, Batman transferring Lex to Arkham ensures that he stays behind bars, something that can't be guaranteed by a jury
I wouldn't go that far.
I could see how many here will decry Batman's actions, but my normie friends (and I use that term jokingly), loved the hell out of Affleck's Batman. Hell even in many negative reviews for the film, Batman is considered the high point.
broncobuster
Banned
But literally the first thing DCAU Batman does when he meets Superman is tossing him into a table.
Serious answer is Batman's super angry. He's not terribly reasonable in that state of mind.
Anyone's expression would change to "oh fuck" upon being told they were being sent to arkham, regardless of whether it was the plan or not.
You're just assuming that he can get out, that he somehow holds influence because 'money and power' and I don't think that's reasonable. He's not a normal criminal.. With Lex's actions, he'll be the single most reviled criminal in America, someone who literally almost destroyed an entire city by unleashing the Kryptonian terrorist again except jacked up on super steroids and caused the death of what the entire nation now recognizes as a hero. The only way what your proposing works if we rely on really extreme comic book logic where prisons are made of cardboard and repeated offenders of mass murders are just allowed out willy nilly, something you'd think we'd be discouraged from in this 'realistic' version of of the DC universe. As it is, Luthor would be buried so deep in some random facility that superman would have difficulty getting in. He's also made contact with some wierd aliens of some kind while fiddling with the alien space craft. There is no WAY they wouldn't be monitoring him 24/7 just because of that alone.
And secondly, if that's true, then why not use his influence to send him to a secure facility that will treat him with compassion like the people of metropolis/gotham want? Instead, he sends him to Arkham, the hell hole facility of a hell hole city, taunting him specifically that he will not be treated well there.
Either way, he's basically looking at society and going "...nah, I know better than you idiots" and violating society's rights to do as he thinks best. It's the kind of misanthropic, benevolent fascism that permeates Frank Miller's work. Batman 'knows better', so he has the right to do what he wants.
Because Afleck is a good actor and he brings the character to life with his talent. In many ways, this batman is the best performed Batman. He's just utterly revolting. People cheer at the action choreography and the grimdark 'badassery' because he kills people and that's dark and therefore cool. But if you don't put a positive spin on things, he's just a fucking monster. A sadistic psychopath on a power trip. The movie doesn't give you a reason to think that Lex Luthor has any influence after he's caught. It might be plausible to infer that he might, sure, but it doesn't actually give you those things. So if you go by the movie itself, and not make up any excuses for Batman's benefit, you realizes that he has none. He's just an evil and vile person.
And if you still like that, whatever. No moral judgements on you. Sometimes, it's just interesting to look at the ugliness of humanity. Tarentino is really good at making those kinds of narratives compelling, I love his films. But he's a phenomonal director. Snyder....isn't. The darkness that Snyder pushes on the audience is oppressive enough, but this is also such a badly made film on top of it. There probably is a way to make an evil batman interesting, butt this wasn't it. I've gone over many times now how it's a movie that utterly fails narratively, regardless of personal like of Batman himself and can link you those if you want.
So all I'm personally left with is a Batman that's badly written as a character and just bad as a person. If you enjoyed the movie, cool, and I think I understand what you see in it and can even sympathize with that....but make a mountain out of a molehill. He's not a deep or well written character. He's just fucking deranged. If that's fun to watch for you, cool, it's just...not something I think is healthy to overly endorse or not reflect on.
I'm talking about Captain America, as an individual, vowing to never kill. That doesn't seem to be the case.
I'm not saying it hasn't been a thing at one point or another, I'm saying that's different to it being a defining characteristic for a character. Captain America is a soldier, he's killed Nazi's in the comics and I don't think that's been retconned.
Mad Season
Banned
So I just watched Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice Ultimate Edition. I did not see the Theater cut so this was my first time taking this movie in. I LOVED it. I don't know what the complaints are for the theatrical version, but I thought this was a solid movie. Now, every movie can have its ups and downs, and Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice Ultimate Edition, is no exception. Here are some of my thoughts...
Pros
Ben Affleck was a great Bruce Wayne
Henry Cavill is a terrific Superman (actor)
Wonder Woman and her theme was great
SFX were very good
Thought the story was tied together very well. At least in this version.
Cons
Lex... Jessee Eisenberg does not cut it for me. He is too over the top and leans more to the side of The Joker/The Riddler
You named the city, Gotham. Since this location and world do not exist, then take away people like Nancy Grace and Anderson Cooper. They don't fit in a made up universe.
Fatman. Not in to the over buffed Batman suit
Batmans fighting. He came off as way to slow in his fights, except at the very end. Batman is QUICK with melee.
I still hate the notion in any Superman film that nobody can tell Clark Kent and Superman look alike
Pros
Ben Affleck was a great Bruce Wayne
Henry Cavill is a terrific Superman (actor)
Wonder Woman and her theme was great
SFX were very good
Thought the story was tied together very well. At least in this version.
Cons
Lex... Jessee Eisenberg does not cut it for me. He is too over the top and leans more to the side of The Joker/The Riddler
You named the city, Gotham. Since this location and world do not exist, then take away people like Nancy Grace and Anderson Cooper. They don't fit in a made up universe.
Fatman. Not in to the over buffed Batman suit
Batmans fighting. He came off as way to slow in his fights, except at the very end. Batman is QUICK with melee.
I still hate the notion in any Superman film that nobody can tell Clark Kent and Superman look alike
THIIIIISS
i was talking with a friend about how better this cut is, and then it HIT ME, the martha scene has so much meaning, at that time, Batman became the thing he hates the most, obviously is not as clear, but watching it a second time, it's just THERE, i dont know if the scene is different between the theatrical and the ultimate, but in the ultimate cut, is so freaking obvious
VARIA
Member
Finally saw it (The Ultimate Cut) and wow, just wow is it a poorly made film. The vibe I got from the few reviews I had read, before I saw it, was that it was too grim and dark, but that's really the least of its issues. This film is just a bore fest filled with expository filler for 80% of its duration. I personally enjoyed Man of Steel and think its a good film, but BvS is just one huge missed opportunity after another. I did enjoy the fight against Doomsday but that was it.
so you enjoyed the worst part of the film?
VARIA
Member
Whoa, I missed the memo, is that a unanimous opinon? Haha.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
I think the assumption is that he realises Superman is a person with a family just like any other and to kill him means taking that away from his mother just like the criminal who killed his own parents forced that upon him.
Kinda have the same opinion too although I didn't even enjoy MoS when I watched it. Thing is, I only enjoyed the Doomsday battle because - something - was happening. The battle itself was bad CGI and corny af but I was at least happy that something was happening. I never watched the Theatrical Cut but the Ultimate Edition still left me somewhat baffled. A lot of important plot elements were breezed over. The plot itself felt very disconnected and I couldn't emphatically pick a side and route for any of them (although I eventually routed for Batman because I just didn't like Superman. Couldn't care if Batman was in the wrong or not). Civil War does a better job at presenting Iron Man's and Captain America's cases and then giving the viewer the difficult choice of picking a side wisely. BvsS just doesn't at all. There's just no real importance to either of their cases. Wonder Woman was a wasted opportunity. Lois Lane should have had a considerably less amount of screen time. Aside from riding the damsel in distress trope hard, she was such an annoyingly pointless character that got into the way. Did like Affleck's batman and even Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor - while miscasted - was hilariously entertaining.
Either way, I cant imagine how confusing the theatrical cut was. BvsS wasn't a great film IMO.
I watched the Ultimate edition yesterday, never saw the Theatrical cut.
The filme was ok, but it felt like a huge missed opportunity after missed opportunity. They tried to juggle too many balls at once and managed to let them all fall during the movie.
Why shoehorne Wonder Woman and the Justice League in the movie? It was already crowded as it was with both Superman and Batman.
The filme was ok, but it felt like a huge missed opportunity after missed opportunity. They tried to juggle too many balls at once and managed to let them all fall during the movie.
Why shoehorne Wonder Woman and the Justice League in the movie? It was already crowded as it was with both Superman and Batman.
Bananajama
Banned
Watched it for the first time yesterday
Reckon whoever cut this thing together could have done a better job.
It just didn't 'flow' right for me.
And a few times I was left baffled for xyz minutes on why that scene merited being in the film at all
Reckon whoever cut this thing together could have done a better job.
It just didn't 'flow' right for me.
And a few times I was left baffled for xyz minutes on why that scene merited being in the film at all
They were both tacked on. Where do you find people saying Spider-Man was integral to Civil War?
Some people are just making the point that Batman v Superman, a film that had too much going on as is, that adding Wonder Woman adds too many elements to the film. I don't agree, I think Wonder Woman worked as an extended cameo, but different opinions for different people, obviously.
But Civil War, in my opinion, doesn't feel nearly as bloated as BvS. So there's no reason to complain about Spider-Man. But cutting Wonder Woman and the Justice League sub-plot would leave BvS as a leaner movie, and it would probably be improved by having some of the fat trimmed.
I agree that they were both tacked on, but I'm thankful they were. Wonder Woman needed exposure and is probably the most likable character in the film, while Spidey's introduction to the MCU was nothing short of great.
You could argue Wonder Woman was fanservice, sure. But this was a service much needed. Wonder Woman is one of my favorite heroes, and she is lagging behind on Batman and Superman in terms of exposure. It's only recently that female superheroes are even being a given a chance. She didn't even end up being the center of the guys conflict, which I half expected and would be have been mad over. So if they want to just throw her in, I have no objections.
They got one of the most awesome, unfairly under-represented superheroes in the movie and they didn't fuck it up. It is possibly the one single and undiluted positive of this film that I see and am willing to defend. They even have her the best (if laughably cheesy) soundtrack of the movie. I call it a win.
The collective circle jerk regarding Spider-man's role. He could have not been there and nothing would have changed.
You're right and I apologise for not pointing that out. For me, Spider-man was quite forgettable in that film. Couldn't care less about him and he does feel tacked on (especially since we all knew that Sony allowed it halfway through the production). Perhaps the reason why I was somewhat annoyed about Wonder Woman was because there was this built up hype towards her prior to the release of the film. She was featured on movie posters and trailers. Figured we'd be getting more out of her but ...nope!
Same could be said about Aquaman. There were posters with him that were released. Figured he'd have reasonable screen time but nope!
People had been anticipating Spider-Man in the MCU for years. It was the kind of anticipation only matched or exceeded by people wanting to see Batman and Superman on the big screen together.
And Spider-Man contributed to Civil War more than Wonder Woman contributed to Batman v Superman. Plot-wise they are both extraneous, but Spider-Man gave the film a sense of much welcomed levity at the mid-point. They both contributed to some cool action.
I think what you're getting at is that there's a bias, and I don't think there is. I've seen a ton of positive talk about Wonder Woman, and you've extrapolated from the negative opinions of a small part of a small minority. The truth is that Batman v Superman has earned its criticisms; I say that as a 'DC fan' who would far prefer to see a good Justice League movie than a good Avengers one.
Dandy Lyin
Member
Jesse Eisenberg is my biggest issue with the movie... His little "mmm" giggle after every sentence is fucking awful. Lex should be charismatic, brilliant, and ruthless. Instead we get a bumbling, giggling, punny-wordplay-slinging douchebag with daddy issues. Even at the end when his hair is shaved, he comes off as an angry child.
If only they could've re-cast Lex Luthor for the ultimate cut.
If only they could've re-cast Lex Luthor for the ultimate cut.
Shambalakan
Member
Finally watched this and it was A LOT BETTER than I expected! after those reviews and complaints, I prepared myself for a disaster, but really liked the movie and give it 8/10.
vasametropolis
Member
It's very possible to still have enough issues that people can fairly not like it, but the reviews and complaints were ridiculously blown out of proportion. If we're talking RT score, for example, IMO even the theatrical cut shouldn't have been rotten.
The biggest issues of the film for most I still see are the casting of Lex, and the deconstruction of the characters to something people aren't used to. They tried to do something different, and while I think it may have been too early for them to attempt this, I think the movie will be looked on more favourably looking back on it in a few years.
It's flawed but it's nowhere close to a shit movie. It's honestly probably one of the better superhero films in the last few years.
I actually wouldn't call the current DCEU grounded in any way, especially when a whole lot of issues in the film can be swept under the rug due to "comic book logic". Lex being able to pull strings behind bars wouldn't strike me as out of place.
That's kind of an assumption, no? I'd personally assume the people of both cities would not call that justice.
Anyways, I respect your opinions on the film, and think our views on the film can be chalked down to different strokes.
a problem i had with this movie from the get go is why this batman ...dumb??
He's suppose to be the world's greatest detective yet when Clark goes to talk to him to have a conversation about what lex did to his mother, batman goes all ape on him.
the batman i grew up with ( DCAU batman ) would try to have reasonable conversations before starting a stupid fight.
also FUCK i still can't get over the stupid Lois going into the water to get the rod scene, it was the perfect damn spot for aqua man to save her damn it
This is a batman that has lost his way and is blinded by an irrational fear of superman. I mean, the fact that they don't talk to each other is precisely the point of the movie. I understand that this depiction is "not your batman" but the movie aimed to tell a different story.
You seem to be really hung up on people liking Civil War, you mention it quite often in various threads about BvS.
This is such lazy deflection. It's not about this being a different interpretation of Batman or one that strays from the more popular renditions. Batman was an imbecile in BvS. Blinded by rage, sure, but still incredibly stupid.
Deflection? No it's a proper reading of the movie, like it or not
"Proper reading"?
You're attacking someone's ability to evaluate the movie because of their biases in order to defend the movie. Batman acts pretty dumb in BvS, to the point where he doesn't even thoroughly investigate the source of his anger before lashing out with execution brandings and embarking on a murder quest. The idiocy behind the character is one of the major reasons his heel turn over "Martha!" is so ridiculous.
Discotheque
Banned
a heel turn is when you go bad btw. batman made a face turn.
and credit to Snyder for showing Batman as the mentally unstable nut he can be. My favorite superhero by far but somebody was bound to do it on film at some point.
and credit to Snyder for showing Batman as the mentally unstable nut he can be. My favorite superhero by far but somebody was bound to do it on film at some point.
Hey, I don't watch wrestling!
And Burton did psycho Batman first anyway (and much better, too)
Discotheque
Banned
Yeah no doubt he was a loon in the burton stuff too, but this is the first form of media (tv/film) that i've seen where batman could be framed as one of the villains within most of the plot. It's not "which side is right" like civil war, no batman is just a misguided and xenophobic angry guy.
Do we agree that this movie depicts a Batman that is not thinking straight and is consumed by rage? If not, your criticism that he is not using logic and deductive reasoning is irrelevant since the film clearly establishes his frame of mind and what's driving it
Ah, I see. Credit where credit is due, BvS was certainly a unique take on Batman.
There's definitely a precedent for Batman being blinded by an emotional event or it causing him to nearly be pushed over the edge. Jason Todd comes to mind. However those types of events usually have a build up with proper character development. Here we have Bruce freak out over a building full of people we don't know and can't really gauge his relationship with. Even if you look past that, it's in service of an arc that isn't very good. If you're going to shit on Batman's intellect in service of a story, you have to make sure the ends justify the means. They don't in BvS.
That's not how criticism works. The complaint isn't suddenly invalidated because there's a flimsy reason behind it. It doesn't make his sudden reversal any less unsatisfying just because he was angry, especially considering he was holding on to that rage for over 2 years only for it to suddenly vanish in an instant. Rage fueling his vendetta makes perfect sense but it shouldn't prevent him from doing some basic detective work. It's ridiculous that we're supposed to accept that Bruce would hold on to his anger for that long without actually investigating the person he's planning to murder. You're hand waving it away because you want to, not because it's a reasonable explanation.
Exactly.
I just don't like a shitty argument. I don't like the fact stuff is criticised in one movie and given a pass in another. I liked Civil War, it was BVS with a simpler story.
WrenchNinja
Member
What does that have to do with not even bothering to investigate your target
It's the response of people trying to make this film deeper than it is. People need to get that this isn't an art house film, it's Snyder. I doubt he even knows what existentialism is.
The movie makes it pretty clear that he doesn't care. He doesn't care to know him or investigate him. He views him as a threat to humanity who has caused massive destruction and murdered a lot of people he cared about. Just because Batman is intelligent doesn't mean he's not given to bouts of disillusionment or blind rage.
1) the long time employee at his company who died shepherding people out
2) the girl who will grow up without a mother
3) the employee who became a cripple.
4) the many people who were still in the building that didn't get out.
The film also makes it clear he never saw Superman as human and only as an Alien. "You were never even a man". His first introduction to Superman was probably the Kryptonian transmission, then the black zero event. He saw a being of incredible power that was introduced as an alien, and only saw him as a man when he was on his deathbed pleading for the life of his mother a woman named Martha.
It didn't have his name in the files?