Disclaimer! I have not worked for Warner or DC or Marvel, but this is what you hear down the pipeline working in this industry. Most of this could just be speculation from the people I've heard it from, I have no way to verify some of these facts, but I'm hoping it reassures you to just go embrace the film as it is. I'm just relaying what I know about the modern studio system from working in it for so long.
1. Warner, not DC One thing you guys should do is remember that it is Warner Bros., not DC Comics, behind the film. Warner owns DC for those that didn't know, and they are the decision markers, so when we say 'DC's fault', it's not, most of these decisions are from Warner's production side.
Just wanted to open with that, nothing against Warner or DC, love'em both.
2. The RT Rating in relation to the box office You guys have nothing to worry about because Warner has known the movie would take a hit with critics since the assembly edit. BvS has one of the largest production budgets for a film of it's kind, and it has plenty of leeway to it's budget as well. This is because Warner is aware that the film was going to make money. The critic embargo was placed for this purpose. It is standard studio practice for a big movie they are unsure of. Build hype, block critics, let pre-sale tickets explode, and then make sure that early screener review are done by fans, because fans will either be extremely critical or extremely loving. How many times did you hear 'this is the greatest superhero movie ever!' prior to the RT ratings? This is standard studio hype building practice. (EDIT: corrected the number): BvS broke records in pre-sale tickets for a superhero flick according to Fandango. Over the next month it will make a lot more. Hell, I bought my tickets ages ago. This is how the studio locks in guaranteed BO numbers, because from a marketing perspective, the average, non-hero loving movie goer is more likely to avoid a film with bad ratings, so these days the studios need to lock in a certain number of dollars guaranteed, and this is how they do it. The film climate today is not what it was even 10 years back.
It could be argued that this was a sneaky way to secure money, but unfortunately there's nothing that isn't within their rights as a company to do this.
So it's critique essentially means nothing towards the success of the film, so don't worry about the reviews.
This takes me to:
3. Warner Knew Yes, once again, Warner knew. I like Warner, good company, very internal compared to some of the other studios. But they knew. One of the biggest indications of this? They pushed a Batman movie's release date for a Captain America film (we'll get to Marvel in a minute, don't worry). There is no denying Batman is a bigger superhero than Cap. There is no denying Batman will almost always make more money than the competition. They pushed BvS to March (the end of dump month) because BvS is just meant to be a stepping stone. It's problem is it's been over hyped as the film of the century, when in fact Justice League is the big movie in the DCEU we should be hyped about. BvS is going to be a success regard of reviews. And Warner knows this. This film was made to take a hit to introduce new characters. It's just entertaining filler to get from A to B (MoS to JL).
So go out and enjoy it. Worry about the numbers when we get to JL.
4. Zack Snyder Love him or hate him, the studios are aware of what kind of movies he makes. Producer's in the industry never liked the guy. I can tell you from a few meetings I've been to, he was detested during his commercial days. One of those 'we'll never work with him again!' guys. Life saw fit to bring him success, and even though according to RT ratings, critics hate his films, he knows how to do two things which keep him in Warner's pocket: entertain & bring in dollars. He makes good comic adaptations that entertain fans regardless of what the critics say. That is his special something.
Take a look at these numbers:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?id=zacksnyder.htm (EDIT: Also guys, check out Box Office Mojo frequently, they are one of the best BO resources)
Domestically, he's got a decent amount of successes and losses.
So shortly after MoS was announced, Sucker Punch, one of the few original films by Snyder, tanked. And yes, Warner was considering replacing him very briefly. It was discussed, I don't know how throughly, but I know the conversation happened.
Warner has, and as always had, a lot of faith in Snyder. Removing him from the franchise, directing or otherwise, would be a very tough call and ballsy move from the studio.
5. Comparing It To Marvel I love DC. I Love Marvel. Is it wrong to compare this movie to a franchise that has been running for 8 years. Absolutely. But are critics doing it? Yes. Why you ask? Because Warner is as well. The DC vs. Marvel competition is very real. MoS was planned as a Nolan like trilogy, but after the numbers from Avengers, MoS2 was reworked into BvS. Every franchise is now fighting to reach Marvel levels. Star Wars is getting a CU. Hasbro is doing a CU. Even Universal Movie Monsters are doing a CU. All because of Marvel's CU formula, so to deny that this movie wasn't done by Warner in competition of the MCU is absurd. This movie was designed to be compared to Marvel's films. Warner wants people to know that you can see all their heroes in one place too, "so get excited for JL when it happens!"
As a fan, I'm opposed to comparing the two franchise, they aren't anything alike, apples and oranges, and that is probably the mistake that will hurt Warner, because they are comparing them internally. We may not, but the studio is very much so, and that's one of the reasons why critics are too.
Not to say other recent superhero films haven't been disasters (Marvel Studios or otherwise). Iron Man 2, Amazing Spider-Man 2, Fantastic Four...(EDIT: Fixed this because I didn't word it the way I meant the first time.)
6. The Tone Anyone who has read a DC Comic knows the tone of the film seems to have matched the books since the post-crisis era in particular from what we've seen in the trailers. DC has always been about being more serious. Warner may have taken it a bit too far admittedly, but it's not very different from what you see in the comics. This is more personal opinion, but is there an issue with lack of humor? Yes. Now I'm not saying that every scene needs a quip, but even The Bard mixed comedy into his tragedies. A good story should have a balance of comedy and tragedy, it mimics real life. Have you ever laughed so much you cried? Or cried so much you laughed? Even the Nolan films blend in subtle humor quite well (see Batman Begins: spelunking).
So why is the DCEU so bleak? Because of Green Lantern. It scared both DC and Warner for being too campy in an age when more serious stories were being told, and pushed GL to the tail end of the JL franchise so far. So yes, the rumored 'no humor' policy was in fact implemented at Warner. It is very real on the production side, and Warner tries to use it to push themselves away from the very, sometimes overboard, quippy MCU franchise, but by doing this they threw off the balance. You can be more gritty, absolutely, but always remember that humor.
That was a mix of personal insight with some studio info, sorry about that one guys. To conclude, Marvel is lighter, DC is darker, and that's fine.
To conclude, I'll give my own opinion. I love DC & Marvel. I embrace changes in stories. My favorite superhero films are the Donner Superman's and the Burton Batman's. I like the MCU, I hated MoS, and my hopes for this film were very little as the trailers didn't do it for me, but I was still going to see it. For me, the success at the BO of BvS means little to nothing knowing what's going on behind the scenes and why this movie was made. My concern will come with Justice League, Warner's already shifted there once the pre-sale numbers came in for BvS. If JL doesn't do well, then you guys can panic.
But right now forget the critics, go out and enjoy Batman & Superman punching each other.