Support NeoGAF

[Marion Cobretti]

Even with all the problems this movie has, it's really starting to grow on me. I just really love it from an aesthetics and design perspective.

Everything is just so spot on. The photography, the tone, all the designs, and as someone else mentioned, even the font in the opening. It's just soooo good from a craftsmanship perspective.

As a movie, there are some issues, some big ones even, but in terms of production and design, it's at the top of its class. Easily. Very beautiful looking film in every aspect. Set design, costumes, props, photography, lighting, all of it.

The soundtrack is out of control good too.

Someone just get Snyder a solid script already, and we'll be in heaven. Seriously. The man has an obscene amount of talent, he just needs a solid script.

Affleck and Irons are such a fantastic team too. They have super good chemistry. Can't wait to see more of them in any capacity.

 

[Penguin]

His actions don't reflect his words. He says there's no time, that Bruce is right, that Lex is behind everything, and then immediately throws him through a building. Yes, he could have killed him immediately if he'd wanted, which is doubly weird because he could have easily accidentally killed him anyway. After that first grenade, he's definitely in the fight, and it becomes really unclear what he's hoping to accomplish by running Batman through several floors and tossing him through walls.



lol, that's hilariously absurd.

I always took it as a defensive ploy

He probably figured that Batman had a lot more traps laid out on the floor and got him away from there.

Even when he tosses him on the roof, he doesn't attack him. He tells him that if he wanted to do harm, the fight would be over. Batman goes back on the offensive after that. Then it's just a fight to try and stay alive.

Actually one of the few additions I dislike in the UC version is that he actually shoves Batman on the ground once before tossing him through the building.

 

[Setsuna]

My main issue iwith this movie is that the last fight scenes have way too many special fx

 

[JB1981]

Watched this and TDKR over the weekend and from an aesthetic, photographic standpoint TDKR just blows it out of the water. Pfister is a god.

 

[IconGrist]

Actually one of the few additions I dislike in the UC version is that he actually shoves Batman on the ground once before tossing him through the building.

It was supposed to mirror the Knightmare sequence where Supes walks up to Bats and puts his hand through his chest.

 

[Marion Cobretti]

Watched this and TDKR over the weekend and from an aesthetic, photographic standpoint TDKR just blows it out of the water.

You're out of your mind

 

[MegaManTrigger]

Lets just ignore the constant barrage of attacks Batman lays at Superman and his refusal to even hear what he has to say. Superman realizes he has to subdue him before he'll even listen to him ("Men like him don't listen to words) There's literally no inconsistency here, unless you're looking to twist the scene to portray something it's not.

Except there are plenty of times where Superman COULD have said anything, and instead continues the fight:

The one where Superman trashes Batman through a building and slams him onto the batlight.

The one where the obvious "Moby Dick" shape was made (aka Superman takes Batman's foot and throws him across a wall).

And the one where Superman slams Batman across tons of walls (happens shortly after Batman is overpowered by a repowered Superman who takes him and slams him in the empty spot where the stairs were, aka the first gif).

 

[Discotheque]

You're out of your mind

Ehhh I think TDK trilogy, superman Returns and BvS are all in the running for best shot superhero movie. They all look real good on the cinematography side of things

Crazy how they're all dc films. It's just a coincidence too since they share different directors and cinematographers and producers etc.

 

[SlimySnake]

Ehhh I think TDK trilogy, superman Returns and BvS are all in the running for best shot superhero movie. They all look real good on the cinematography side of things

Crazy how they're all dc films. It's just a coincidence too since they share different directors and cinematographers and producers etc.

yep. Bvs just might be the best looking comic book movie ever made.

 

[Forsaken82]

Ehhh I think TDK trilogy, superman Returns and BvS are all in the running for best shot superhero movie. They all look real good on the cinematography side of things

Crazy how they're all dc films. It's just a coincidence too since they share different directors and cinematographers and producers etc.

Pretty sure the TDK trilogy and BvS share many of the same producers and cinematographers. Unless of course you mean besides The Nolan Brothers... And Goyer...

Well perhaps Wally Pfister had nothing to do with BvS... but the production staff certainly did.

 

[Discotheque]

Pretty sure the TDK trilogy and BvS share many of the same producers and cinematographers.

I should have said DP my bad. Pfister shot the dark knight trilogy and fong (snyder's boy for watchmen) did BvS

Fong about to put in work on that Kong movie too I bet. Only reason I have a little faith in it maybe recapturing some of the beautiful skull island visuals that Peter Jackson gave us in King Kong

 

[Dead]

Fong and Snyder team up always makes eye catching movies. Dawn of Justice is probably their best work together. You can tell the care that went into nearly each and every shot.

Looking forward to Kong too.

 

[Jonogunn]

Isn't snyder getting a diff cinematographer for justice league?

 

[Shaanyboi]

I get the feeling that Snyder just wanted a car chase with explosions, and didn't really care what getting there would do to the characters.

More like there's probably a Warner Bros mandate that every Batman movie needs to have a Batmobile/vehicle chase. Probably for the purpose of toys. But I mean why wouldn't you want to use the Batmobile?

 

[Gleethor]

Cinematography wise, Justice League is in good hands.

 

[Lord Virgin]

Watched this and TDKR over the weekend and from an aesthetic, photographic standpoint TDKR just blows it out of the water. Pfister is a god.

Nope, not even close. BvS>>>all other cbmovies. Fong and Snyder made magic together in that regard. Thr cinematography is out of this world good.

 

[Arnie7]

Isn't snyder getting a diff cinematographer for justice league?

Yes from the guy that did this episode of Game of thrones.

Imagine Darkside minions charging towards superman/league members.

 

[neojubei]

yep. Bvs just might be the best looking comic book movie ever made.

Oh god no.
I'd give it to the dark knight.

 

[Blade30]

Lets just ignore the constant barrage of attacks Batman lays at Superman and his refusal to even hear what he has to say. Superman realizes he has to subdue him before he'll even listen to him ("Men like him don't listen to words) There's literally no inconsistency here, unless you're looking to twist the scene to portray something it's not.

Superman only tried two times to talk to him and that was at the very beginning where Batman laid out traps (sonic waves or whatever that was and gatling turrets).
There were many opportunities throughout the fight for him, like where Superman throws Batman through the roof of a Building, but no he just stands there and wait for him to stand up.

 

[AxelFoley]

Oh god no.
I'd give it to the dark knight.

Not even close.

BvS walks all over TDK in that regard.

 

[Bleepey]

Superman only tried two times to talk to him and that was at the very beginning where Batman laid out traps (sonic waves or whatever that was and gatling turrets).
There were many opportunities throughout the fight for him, like where Superman throws Batman through the roof of a Building, but no he just stands there and wait for him to stand up.

You also forget the part where the woman said he doesn't listen. Considering how headstrong Bruce was in the movie it seems she was right.

 

[dmshaposv]

ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.


Unfotunately, thats not how it works. Even someone like Roger Deakins believes cinematography isnt about being good or bad - it'd rather be not talked about if anything.

The snyder/fong esque cinematography is too forced - too many portentous shots like super jesus floating. It is also very very derivative. Snyder just recreates iconic scenes from comic frames. And apes gimmick of the time (snap zooms, abrams style anamorphic flares).

On the other hand, TDK cinematography is a class apart. Nolan/pfister cinematography is always trying to deliver crisp clarity in ridiculously dark scenes. They went with the big sensor imax cameras for this reason. The lighting in every shot never feels derivative but natural - but there is so much depth in every scene. The wide shots in most chase scenes have a breathtaking scale none of shaky cam earth terraforming scenes in MoS had. And one is just a bunch of cops after batman vs. alien invasion of an entire city.

The major difference between snyder/fong and nolan/pfister is subtlety. It goes a long way.

 

[ArtHands]

More like there's probably a Warner Bros mandate that every Batman movie needs to have a Batmobile/vehicle chase. Probably for the purpose of toys. But I mean why wouldn't you want to use the Batmobile?

As if the movie isnt bad enough, they have to shoehorn something unnecessary into the movie

 

[Jake2by4]

Will never forgive this movie for what they did to Mercy.

 

[Ricky_R]

Is this version worth it? I haven't seen the theatrical cut and I will watch one or the other sooner or later.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

His actions don't reflect his words. He says there's no time, that Bruce is right, that Lex is behind everything, and then immediately throws him through a building. Yes, he could have killed him immediately if he'd wanted, which is doubly weird because he could have easily accidentally killed him anyway. After that first grenade, he's definitely in the fight, and it becomes really unclear what he's hoping to accomplish by running Batman through several floors and tossing him through walls.

Yeah, this bothered me about the fight as well. Supes is completely in control until Batman drops the lead grenade, but he doesn't speak the three or four sentences it would take to diffuse the situation. Instead he thinks pushing Batman along the ground and then throwing him into a building is a good way to get him on-side. And then, the stupidest bit is when Batman reloads with the second Kryptonite grenade, and Superman literally jumps straight into it with no attempt to evade at all. How about, if you know he has a gun with ammo which depletes your power and leaves you completely helpless, run away until your powers have fully recovered, or hide somewhere so you can get the drop on Batman and smash the gun? Or do anything rather than leap into the grenade which is the only thing in the world which can hurt you. It's just so dumb, which is a shame because I think Snyder is good at action scenes.

That aside, I'm interested in watching this film again. I didn't dislike it first time around, and I wonder whether the extra context might make it more enjoyable.

 

[Human Trashcan]

ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.


Unfotunately, thats not how it works. Even someone like Roger Deakins believes cinematography isnt about being good or bad - it'd rather be not talked about if anything.

The snyder/fong esque cinematography is too forced - too many portentous shots like super jesus floating. It is also very very derivative. Snyder just recreates iconic scenes from comic frames. And apes gimmick of the time (snap zooms, abrams style anamorphic flares).

On the other hand, TDK cinematography is a class apart. Nolan/pfister cinematography is always trying to deliver crisp clarity in ridiculously dark scenes. They went with the big sensor imax cameras for this reason. The lighting in every shot never feels derivative but natural - but there is so much depth in every scene. The wide shots in most chase scenes have a breathtaking scale none of shaky cam earth terraforming scenes in MoS had. And one is just a bunch of cops after batman vs. alien invasion of an entire city.

The major difference between snyder/fong and nolan/pfister is subtlety. It goes a long way.

Unfortunately this post will mostly fall on deaf ears but it's very true. Shot composition aside, the digital color grading in BvS is so atrocious it completely dominates the aesthetic for the worse. We get it, you like darkness and grimness and stuff. Doesn't mean everything has to be desaturated and ugly.

 

[natethegreat409]

Skipped out on this in theaters and watched it at home last night.

I can see why people would complain about the pacing, but I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. I dunno if I would watch it again because it has a very long set up period, but I think it is a great introduction into Justice League and I'm really looking forward to it now.

 

[Blader]

ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.


Unfotunately, thats not how it works. Even someone like Roger Deakins believes cinematography isnt about being good or bad - it'd rather be not talked about if anything.

The snyder/fong esque cinematography is too forced - too many portentous shots like super jesus floating. It is also very very derivative. Snyder just recreates iconic scenes from comic frames. And apes gimmick of the time (snap zooms, abrams style anamorphic flares).

On the other hand, TDK cinematography is a class apart. Nolan/pfister cinematography is always trying to deliver crisp clarity in ridiculously dark scenes. They went with the big sensor imax cameras for this reason. The lighting in every shot never feels derivative but natural - but there is so much depth in every scene. The wide shots in most chase scenes have a breathtaking scale none of shaky cam earth terraforming scenes in MoS had. And one is just a bunch of cops after batman vs. alien invasion of an entire city.

The major difference between snyder/fong and nolan/pfister is subtlety. It goes a long way.

I think Snyder can compose some pretty looking shots, but this is spot on.

 

[Ahasverus]

ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.

The major difference between snyder/fong and nolan/pfister is subtlety. It goes a long way.

Nonsense, pure nonsense.

It's an artistic intent, it impresses, it's pleasant, it drives the film forward, it's perfectly valid and a great difference from its piers.

Is it exaggerated? Sure it is! Because it evokes the mythical nature of the stories/characters he's playing with. His "signature" cinematography only comes to play in grandiosd scenes, dialogue ones are still pedestrian

It's one of Snyder's talents and it should be recognized.

Some people will never, ever, give the man some credit, but he's where he is for a reason.

 

[Lokimaru]

It's not explained in the movie but considering how easily Lois figured it out in MoS Lex would have had zero issue putting it together. Especially with Lois constantly hanging around him.

Well that and the facial recognition software.

 

[Blader]

Nonsense, pure nonsense.

It's an artistic intent, it impresses, it's pleasant, it drives the film forward, it's perfectly valid and a great difference from its piers.

Is it exaggerated? Sure it is! Because it evokes the mythical nature of the stories/characters he's playing with. His "signature" cinematography only comes to play in grandiosd scenes, dialogue ones are still pedestrian

It's one of Snyder's talents and it should be recognized.

Some people will never, ever, give the man some credit, but he's where he is for a reason.

Snyder is where he is because he's easy to work with and 300 made a lot of money.

I don't think anyone's arguing his visual style happens by accident; of course it's an intentional artistic decision. dmshapov is just saying that the big difference between Snyder/Fong's eye and Nolan/Pfister's is the subtlety in cinematography - which you agreed as being exaggerated, even though you start off the post calling it "nonsense, pure nonsense."

 

[Ahasverus]

I don't think anyone's arguing his visual style happens by accident; of course it's an intentional artistic decision. dmshapov is just saying that the big difference between Snyder/Fong's eye and Nolan/Pfister's is the subtlety in cinematography - which you agreed as being exaggerated, even though you start off the post calling it "nonsense, pure nonsense."

His post started with "ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.".. Which is nonsense, because the movie uses far more tricks than that, and it still looks great.

300 also didn't make that much money iirc.

 

[Blader]

His post started with "ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.".. Which is nonsense, because the movie uses far more tricks than that, and it still looks great.

300 also didn't make that much money iirc.

$450m worldwide on a $65m budget isn't a lot of money? It's like the most profitable movie he's done.

 

[Ninjimbo]

ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.


Unfotunately, thats not how it works. Even someone like Roger Deakins believes cinematography isnt about being good or bad - it'd rather be not talked about if anything.

The snyder/fong esque cinematography is too forced - too many portentous shots like super jesus floating. It is also very very derivative. Snyder just recreates iconic scenes from comic frames. And apes gimmick of the time (snap zooms, abrams style anamorphic flares).

On the other hand, TDK cinematography is a class apart. Nolan/pfister cinematography is always trying to deliver crisp clarity in ridiculously dark scenes. They went with the big sensor imax cameras for this reason. The lighting in every shot never feels derivative but natural - but there is so much depth in every scene. The wide shots in most chase scenes have a breathtaking scale none of shaky cam earth terraforming scenes in MoS had. And one is just a bunch of cops after batman vs. alien invasion of an entire city.

The major difference between snyder/fong and nolan/pfister is subtlety. It goes a long way.

Subtlety works for a Batman film trying to take place in a world closer to reality. BvS is trying to bring a comic where Batman wears a mech suit to life. It's a fantasy and Fong/Snyder's cinematography lends credibility to that fantasy. Two distinct styles for two very different movies.

 

[Bleepey]

Nonsense, pure nonsense.

It's an artistic intent, it impresses, it's pleasant, it drives the film forward, it's perfectly valid and a great difference from its piers.

Is it exaggerated? Sure it is! Because it evokes the mythical nature of the stories/characters he's playing with. His "signature" cinematography only comes to play in grandiosd scenes, dialogue ones are still pedestrian

It's one of Snyder's talents and it should be recognized.

Some people will never, ever, give the man some credit, but he's where he is for a reason.

I feel kinda sorry for him. He puts together the best Batman fight sequence to film and people are like "Rocksteady deserve all the praise"

 

[JB1981]

ITT: good cinematography = shadowy silhouettes in grim dark scenes.


Unfotunately, thats not how it works. Even someone like Roger Deakins believes cinematography isnt about being good or bad - it'd rather be not talked about if anything.

The snyder/fong esque cinematography is too forced - too many portentous shots like super jesus floating. It is also very very derivative. Snyder just recreates iconic scenes from comic frames. And apes gimmick of the time (snap zooms, abrams style anamorphic flares).

On the other hand, TDK cinematography is a class apart. Nolan/pfister cinematography is always trying to deliver crisp clarity in ridiculously dark scenes. They went with the big sensor imax cameras for this reason. The lighting in every shot never feels derivative but natural - but there is so much depth in every scene. The wide shots in most chase scenes have a breathtaking scale none of shaky cam earth terraforming scenes in MoS had. And one is just a bunch of cops after batman vs. alien invasion of an entire city.

The major difference between snyder/fong and nolan/pfister is subtlety. It goes a long way.

Absolutely 100% spot-on. Thank your for articulating it all in such a way.

 

[Firemind]

Unfortunately this post will mostly fall on deaf ears but it's very true. Shot composition aside, the digital color grading in BvS is so atrocious it completely dominates the aesthetic for the worse. We get it, you like darkness and grimness and stuff. Doesn't mean everything has to be desaturated and ugly.

I'd rather have that than this drab cinematography where you still can't see shit because of all the cuts.

At least with Snyder you can actually see what's going on despite being desaturated and digitally processed. He's actually competent at composition.

 

[JB1981]

Batman's reappearance and chase by the cops in TDKR is among the most amazingly lit sequences in the entire series. The clarity n depth of the image despite being set at night, the deep, inky blacks, the police emergency dash lights casting cool blues n crimson reds. Amazing visual impression.

 

[SlimySnake]

Batman's reappearance and chase by the cops in TDKR is among the most amazingly lit sequences in the entire series. The clarity n depth of the image despite being set at night, the deep, inky blacks, the police emergency dash lights casting cool blues n crimson reds. Amazing visual impression.

I've always loved the shot of 50+ cop cars chasing Batman. Nolan isn't as flashy as Snyder, but he doesn't hold back when it comes to scale. I dont think I have ever seen more police cars on screen at once in a movie before.

 

[SlimySnake]

Pulled up some gifs from earlier in the thread. This movie looks like a comic book brought to life. If Zach hadn't shot every action scene like he was in a hurry to get them over with, they would've been even better. I cant believe I am saying this but some of his signature slow mo shots could've worked really well during some fight scenes. As it stands, the finale is probably the most stunning setpiece I've seen in a comic book movie, but the action left a lot to be desired.

 

[b&jy77VjiKn$#F]

The film could use some more slo-mo, yeah.

 

[IggyChooChoo]

I just want to rent the digital extended version (not interested in the theatrical or in owning), but the only places I can find it, it is for purchase and costs $20. Are there any better options? Hoping to pay less than $10. I live in the US, fwiw. Thanks!

 

[NealMcCauley]

I just want to rent the digital extended version (not interested in the theatrical or in owning), but the only places I can find it, it is for purchase and costs $20. Are there any better options? Hoping to pay less than $10. I live in the US, fwiw. Thanks!

Not available to rent digitally until the dvd/blu is released afaik. That's how it's worked with other early digital releases.

 

[IggyChooChoo]

Not available to rent digitally until the dvd/blu is released afaik. That's how it's worked with other early digital releases.

Ah, thanks. Nice user name btw. I had coffee with McCauley HALF AN HOUR AGO!

 

[NealMcCauley]

Ah, thanks. Nice user name btw. I had coffee with McCauley HALF AN HOUR AGO!

No problem, and thanks as well.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Is this version worth it? I haven't seen the theatrical cut and I will watch one or the other sooner or later.

If you're going to watch any version of the movie, watch the Ultimate Cut. Stay far away from the Theatrical...

 

[brianmcdoogle]

If I saw this in theaters, I would have been asked to leave by an usher. I laughed loudly during the credits (which I were told were good? "lol), but the part that I lost my mind was the indulgent, poorly choreographed and staged quote"ONE SHOT"quote" action scene in the "dream within a dream" sequence where Batman pretends to be Mad Max and beats/shoots people. I think that's the most I've laughed in a movie in a year. What an embarrassment.

This wasn't even a fun bad movie. It was just a boring bad movie. Pan might be more of a disaster, but this was worse to sit through.

Anyway, as a non comic book person. I have two questions.

ONE: Am I supposed to know who the guy was talking to Bruce Wayne in a dream (which, again, his Mad Max sequenced was within this dream? yikes)? He's giving a warning about Lois Lane, but that doesn't pan out because it is "Martha", which is as laughable as I was led to believe, so who was that and what was the point of it? Again, I'm not talking about superfluous crap outside of the movies or in comic book land. AS A PERSON WATCHING ONLY THIS MOVIE: what was that? Was that one of the guys Wonder Woman looks up on the computer during the commercial break for the next sequels? That sequence happens AFTER the dream within a dream, right? So, am I supposed to match the face of this guy to one of the people in the stupid computer screens?

Speaking of as a tangent: I thought Wonder Woman was supposed to be good in this? She's a terrible actress, and her constant posing during her fight scenes were bad. And, the guitar riffs when she's introduced in that, again, laughably bad photoshopped WWI photo... I mean, that's something out of a Schumacher Batman movie (see Uma Thurman and BANE on the tarmac).

TWO: What was going on with Lex and the Alien at the end floating cubes in his hands? Again, where did that come from? Did I miss something in the movie to explain what the hell that was about? He gives a speech at the end about something beyond the stars... but, what?

As a movie... yikes. I could write more, but what's the point.


I DO WANT TO FIND SOMETHING POSITIVE IN THIS MOVIE:

And, I think the thing I liked the most was near the end, Batman starts killing people (why?) and in the fight, one of the bad guys pulls his cape and causes Batman to fall temporarily. It's quick, and there's no attention to it, and I like it. His cape is a liability (thanks, The Incredibles), and I liked that a bad guy just grabbed it and pulled it to screw up Batman. That was a nice little touch.

EDIT: Is there a list of changes from the theatrical? Lots of things I heard people complain about in the theatrical cut, like the killing of Jimmy Olson and other plot points seemed self-evident, even if they are stupid and told poorly. I never felt confused about what was happening in this movie, even if the storytelling was terrible, poorly staged and directed, acted, and whatnot because this is a bad movie. But, was the theatrical that much worse?

 

[Discotheque]

It's the Flash giving a nonsense message from the Future. He has the power of super-speed and thus can also time travel because of it at times.

Lex is learning from that ship's database about other worlds and space threats and all that stuff. The alien with the 3 cubes is a teaser for the bad guy in Justice League.

 

[brianmcdoogle]

It's the Flash giving a nonsense message from the Future. He has the power of super-speed and thus can also time travel because of it at times.

Ok, but I have then a followup question. Bruce Wayne was dreaming, had his Mad Max sequence, wakes up, and then has this vision, and then wakes up again? So, The Flash, who again, am I supposed to know who this is within the confines of the movie from the poorly shot security camera footage and the mask covering most of his face, traveled from the past into the future to speak to Bruce Wayne in a dream? He has a dream, is Mad Max, wakes up, see this vision of The Flash, and wakes up again? Huh? And why speak of Lois Lane and not Martha McGuffin Wayne/Kent?

Lex is learning from that ship's database about other worlds and space threats and all that stuff. The alien with the 3 cubes is a teaser for the bad guy in Justice League.

I guess, but it seems to come out of nowhere. The computer does't assume the shape of any other stuff, so it just happens to form an alien, and I was confused, other than thinking "well, i guess this is setting up a sequel or something stupid".

Side question: who invited Clark Kent to the party? Was it Lex Luthor?