As promised, a fairly spoiler free review of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.
As promised, a fairly spoiler free review of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.
Many things have been written about the new Warner Brother's film. Some of them good and many of them, well, not-so-good. Like Techaeris' review by Justin Jelinek, for example: http://goo.gl/69EYLm. Now, I don't know Justin's qualifications for movie reviews or his “geek” cred, but per his own words, “Full disclosure, I have not seen the 2013 Man of Steel movie, so there are some plot points that I am speculating on a bit. I’ve heard enough about the end of that movie though that I don’t feel my speculations are too far of a stretch.”
Batman v Superman is definitely a sequel to Man of Steel, carrying much of the same feel and tones of that movie even though much of this one revolves around Bruce Wayne. The film opens at the end of Man of Steel. The Krptonian terraforming ship is sent to the Phantom Zone while Superman and Zod battle through the city of Metropolis, destroying buildings and killing thousands in the process. No matter what you might have thought of the destruction at the end of Man of Steel, there can be no doubt that when two people of this power level fight they act with destructive force equaled only by nuclear bombs.
During the hand-to-hand fight between the two Kryptonians, Bruce Wayne is dropped off by a helicopter and immediately races to the epicenter of destruction. What can one man do to stop the Kryptonians? Nothing. But when you've spent your entire adult life running towards danger, there's really nothing else you can do, even if you can't do anything.
What we see is the kind of man Bruce Wayne is and that's important going forward. Who is the Batman? He's the man who rushes towards danger even when his suit and gadgets aren't near, even when he knows he's outclassed. We also come to understand why he holds such animosity towards Superman throughout the rest of the film.
And it doesn't stop with Bruce Wayne. Much of the movie is a story of morality and ethics. What does humanity do when a flesh and blood god arrives? What does that god feel about his role in the world? Is he (or she) beholden to help people at the detriment of his own life or should he allow humanity to stay it's own course, not involving himself? We repeatedly see Clark Kent in moments of silence where he's pondering these same thoughts.
What about humanity? Does Man have a moral obligation to resist those with power, whether they be religious leaders, political despots or Homo sapien-like aliens from distant worlds? These are questions that are brought up during the film through congressional hearings and the wheelchair bound man (who's name I can't recall).
What brings Superman and Batman to battle each other? To understand that, we have go back to the beginning when Bruce Wayne watches Metropolis' heights fall around him. What is he feeling but impotent. How can he, a man, do anything to stop such destruction when he's made it his life's mission to stop terror? Then we hear Clark Kent talking about the brutal Gotham vigilante who needs to be stopped because he's terrorizing the people of that city. Tensions rise between the two characters as Bruce Wayne, sees an Earth destroying force with no checks or balances to its power, while Clark Kent sees a criminal terrorizing Gotham's citizens, branding other criminals as a way of marking them for death.
What we have are two people who both believe they're doing the right thing, but coming at the problem from different directions.
Ultimately though, what brings Batman and Superman to a head is the machinations of a genius playing them in a like a masterful orchestra. In true Lex Luthor fashion, there are layers upon layers of deception and manipulation edging these two heroes into a confrontation only one can walk away from.
Many people, especially movie reviewers, were upset that the battle between Batman and Superman didn't last longer, that the movie wasn't two hours of caped heroes battling it out, hand and fist, tooth and claw. The problem is, they failed to understand how important the storytelling is that precedes the fight. Zack Snyder and Chris Terrio had to explain a lot of plot points to make the fight between Batman and Superman even remotely plausible. Nuances such as, how does Batman, with all his money and gadgets, even pretend to last a second or two with a man who catches airplanes and knocks down skyscrapers the way you and I might knock over a chair? Simply put: it's kryptonite.
Where does kryptonite come from? How does Batman get it? These are all points in a much larger story that needed to be shown as not to leave plot holes in the movie. Could they have been explained with a line here or a comment there? Absolutely, but Zack Snyder loves to show, not tell, as all story tellers should.
The movie is called Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. The “versus” isn't about a physical confrontation so much as a moral one. As Clark Kent questions his role on Earth, Bruce Wayne admits the Batman is a criminal and always has been. It's up to the audience to decide who is right and who is wrong. Should a god interfere with humanity's self-determination? Do the ends justify the means? Should we not question art?
So, where does Wonder Woman fit into this whole narrative? Like many parts of this particular movie, she's the introduction to a much larger world being built. In Iron Man we had Nick Fury to hint at a broader universe. In BvS we have Diana Prince who not only expands the overall story beyond Superman and Batman, but gives the world a sense of history.
I read something, or heard something, earlier this week about Ronald Reagan. Apparently, during one point in his presidency, he asked Mikhail Gorbechov, “If the Martians attacked us, wouldn't we join forces to fight back?” http://goo.gl/Epvj0L
Dawn of Justice has this same moment. What sort of adversity could cause two enemies to set aside their differences for a common goal? Not Martians (although that would have been a nice nod to Martian Manhunter) but rather a Kryptonian-human hybrid ripping through Metropolis as though the steel and concrete were nothing more than sand in a box.
And here comes Wonder Woman, who can no longer ignore her own sense of ethics, her conscience getting the best of her, to round out the trio.
The battle is short. We're already more than two hours into the movie and CGI isn't cheap. And if you know anything about one of the characters in this movie, then you know how the movie ends.
So, what does the movie get wrong? Well, plenty, actually. No one will play Lex Luthor as well as Michael Rosenbaum in TV's Smallville. Jesse Eisenberg could have been as cold, calculating and chillingly corporate, but instead someone decided to make this Lex into a douchebag millennial narcissist. Maybe they wanted to appeal to douchbag millennials the world over, or maybe it was indictment on the suit and sneakers wearing crowd. Regardless, it wasn't a portrayal that inspired fear or even nervousness. It's only on the helipad that we see the true genius of Luthor spread out before us.
Speaking of Luthor, both he and Bruze Wayne are cut from the same cloth. Both are billionaires, both inherited their money and both are, in their own right, geniuses. Where Bruce suffered his parent's death, psychologically scarring him, Lex was (as is hinted in the movie) abused by his father and grew up only knowing hatred. Both see Superman as a threat the world. We should have seen Lex Luthor played off Bruce Wayne just a bit more, to give us a sense of who Bruce Wayne could have been under other circumstances; but we, apparently, needed more dream sequences to explain Batman's alien anxiety.
And what about the greater universe promised in the subtitle: Dawn of Justice? The Flash makes a brief appearance in the film as a hint of things to come. In the greater DC universe it makes perfect sense, but for those who aren't in the know, the guy in the red suit is a WTF moment of epic proportions. Aquaman also makes a small appearance, as well as the origin of Cyborg.
I've read mostly good reviews of Affleck's Batman, but some people have called into question his temperament. This hints as to who this character is are all over this movie, but perhaps this movie is too deep for some to understand. Maybe they don't teach subtext and metaphor in schools anymore. Perhaps, to some people, the story has to be explained instead of interpreted.
A friend of mine and I always have had this conversation many time. Certain movies, we feel, are dumbed down for audiences; that there is no thinking to be had on the part of the viewer. Perhaps the viewers of Batman v Superman need the simplified 140 character treatment. Okay, let me explain: Ben Affelck's Batman/Bruce Wayne is older. He's spent twenty years running around the rooftops and alleyways of Gotham fighting crime. He's seen criminals off the street and then back on the street. He's seen the ebb and flow of criminal activity come in wave after wave. He's also seen the death of his ward and partner, as is alluded to in one quick glimpse of Robin's costume. Granted, it's an nod to the comics only fans will understand, but it's still there and begs the question: if you don't know your Batman, Superman or comics in general, why are you reviewing a comicbook film?
Bruce Wayne is older. He's jaded and callous. If he ever saw the gray areas of society after his parent's death, those shades of gray are now gone. He's far more Frank Miller's Dark Knight than the misunderstood noble vigilante of Christopher Nolan's film trilogy and it plays out in his brutality and intolerance.
Will this movie win any awards? Probably not the major ones like Best Actor, Best Actress, Supporting… etc. It might win on music or special effects, costumes or something. It will upset fans of Batman and Superman and may alienate people who aren't fans. Superman is not shown as a "boyscout" as he's referred to in the comics, but rather as Jesus-style figure, sent to save humanity from itself.
Is it a great movie? No. The Nolan Batman films are far better in their story telling. Was it entertaining? Yes, in that it is a character study, not an overt action film.
http://goo.gl/69EYLm
Many things have been written about the new Warner Brother's film. Some of them good and many of them, well, not-so-good. Like Techaeris' review by Justin Jelinek, for example: http://goo.gl/69EYLm. Now, I don't know Justin's qualifications for movie reviews or his “geek” cred, but per his own words, “Full disclosure, I have not seen the 2013 Man of Steel movie, so there are some plot points that I am speculating on a bit. I’ve heard enough about the end of that movie though that I don’t feel my speculations are too far of a stretch.”
Batman v Superman is definitely a sequel to Man of Steel, carrying much of the same feel and tones of that movie even though much of this one revolves around Bruce Wayne. The film opens at the end of Man of Steel. The Krptonian terraforming ship is sent to the Phantom Zone while Superman and Zod battle through the city of Metropolis, destroying buildings and killing thousands in the process. No matter what you might have thought of the destruction at the end of Man of Steel, there can be no doubt that when two people of this power level fight they act with destructive force equaled only by nuclear bombs.
During the hand-to-hand fight between the two Kryptonians, Bruce Wayne is dropped off by a helicopter and immediately races to the epicenter of destruction. What can one man do to stop the Kryptonians? Nothing. But when you've spent your entire adult life running towards danger, there's really nothing else you can do, even if you can't do anything.
What we see is the kind of man Bruce Wayne is and that's important going forward. Who is the Batman? He's the man who rushes towards danger even when his suit and gadgets aren't near, even when he knows he's outclassed. We also come to understand why he holds such animosity towards Superman throughout the rest of the film.
And it doesn't stop with Bruce Wayne. Much of the movie is a story of morality and ethics. What does humanity do when a flesh and blood god arrives? What does that god feel about his role in the world? Is he (or she) beholden to help people at the detriment of his own life or should he allow humanity to stay it's own course, not involving himself? We repeatedly see Clark Kent in moments of silence where he's pondering these same thoughts.
What about humanity? Does Man have a moral obligation to resist those with power, whether they be religious leaders, political despots or Homo sapien-like aliens from distant worlds? These are questions that are brought up during the film through congressional hearings and the wheelchair bound man (who's name I can't recall).
What brings Superman and Batman to battle each other? To understand that, we have go back to the beginning when Bruce Wayne watches Metropolis' heights fall around him. What is he feeling but impotent. How can he, a man, do anything to stop such destruction when he's made it his life's mission to stop terror? Then we hear Clark Kent talking about the brutal Gotham vigilante who needs to be stopped because he's terrorizing the people of that city. Tensions rise between the two characters as Bruce Wayne, sees an Earth destroying force with no checks or balances to its power, while Clark Kent sees a criminal terrorizing Gotham's citizens, branding other criminals as a way of marking them for death.
What we have are two people who both believe they're doing the right thing, but coming at the problem from different directions.
Ultimately though, what brings Batman and Superman to a head is the machinations of a genius playing them in a like a masterful orchestra. In true Lex Luthor fashion, there are layers upon layers of deception and manipulation edging these two heroes into a confrontation only one can walk away from.
Many people, especially movie reviewers, were upset that the battle between Batman and Superman didn't last longer, that the movie wasn't two hours of caped heroes battling it out, hand and fist, tooth and claw. The problem is, they failed to understand how important the storytelling is that precedes the fight. Zack Snyder and Chris Terrio had to explain a lot of plot points to make the fight between Batman and Superman even remotely plausible. Nuances such as, how does Batman, with all his money and gadgets, even pretend to last a second or two with a man who catches airplanes and knocks down skyscrapers the way you and I might knock over a chair? Simply put: it's kryptonite.
Where does kryptonite come from? How does Batman get it? These are all points in a much larger story that needed to be shown as not to leave plot holes in the movie. Could they have been explained with a line here or a comment there? Absolutely, but Zack Snyder loves to show, not tell, as all story tellers should.
The movie is called Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. The “versus” isn't about a physical confrontation so much as a moral one. As Clark Kent questions his role on Earth, Bruce Wayne admits the Batman is a criminal and always has been. It's up to the audience to decide who is right and who is wrong. Should a god interfere with humanity's self-determination? Do the ends justify the means? Should we not question art?
So, where does Wonder Woman fit into this whole narrative? Like many parts of this particular movie, she's the introduction to a much larger world being built. In Iron Man we had Nick Fury to hint at a broader universe. In BvS we have Diana Prince who not only expands the overall story beyond Superman and Batman, but gives the world a sense of history.
I read something, or heard something, earlier this week about Ronald Reagan. Apparently, during one point in his presidency, he asked Mikhail Gorbechov, “If the Martians attacked us, wouldn't we join forces to fight back?” http://goo.gl/Epvj0L
Dawn of Justice has this same moment. What sort of adversity could cause two enemies to set aside their differences for a common goal? Not Martians (although that would have been a nice nod to Martian Manhunter) but rather a Kryptonian-human hybrid ripping through Metropolis as though the steel and concrete were nothing more than sand in a box.
And here comes Wonder Woman, who can no longer ignore her own sense of ethics, her conscience getting the best of her, to round out the trio.
The battle is short. We're already more than two hours into the movie and CGI isn't cheap. And if you know anything about one of the characters in this movie, then you know how the movie ends.
So, what does the movie get wrong? Well, plenty, actually. No one will play Lex Luthor as well as Michael Rosenbaum in TV's Smallville. Jesse Eisenberg could have been as cold, calculating and chillingly corporate, but instead someone decided to make this Lex into a douchebag millennial narcissist. Maybe they wanted to appeal to douchbag millennials the world over, or maybe it was indictment on the suit and sneakers wearing crowd. Regardless, it wasn't a portrayal that inspired fear or even nervousness. It's only on the helipad that we see the true genius of Luthor spread out before us.
Speaking of Luthor, both he and Bruze Wayne are cut from the same cloth. Both are billionaires, both inherited their money and both are, in their own right, geniuses. Where Bruce suffered his parent's death, psychologically scarring him, Lex was (as is hinted in the movie) abused by his father and grew up only knowing hatred. Both see Superman as a threat the world. We should have seen Lex Luthor played off Bruce Wayne just a bit more, to give us a sense of who Bruce Wayne could have been under other circumstances; but we, apparently, needed more dream sequences to explain Batman's alien anxiety.
And what about the greater universe promised in the subtitle: Dawn of Justice? The Flash makes a brief appearance in the film as a hint of things to come. In the greater DC universe it makes perfect sense, but for those who aren't in the know, the guy in the red suit is a WTF moment of epic proportions. Aquaman also makes a small appearance, as well as the origin of Cyborg.
I've read mostly good reviews of Affleck's Batman, but some people have called into question his temperament. This hints as to who this character is are all over this movie, but perhaps this movie is too deep for some to understand. Maybe they don't teach subtext and metaphor in schools anymore. Perhaps, to some people, the story has to be explained instead of interpreted.
A friend of mine and I always have had this conversation many time. Certain movies, we feel, are dumbed down for audiences; that there is no thinking to be had on the part of the viewer. Perhaps the viewers of Batman v Superman need the simplified 140 character treatment. Okay, let me explain: Ben Affelck's Batman/Bruce Wayne is older. He's spent twenty years running around the rooftops and alleyways of Gotham fighting crime. He's seen criminals off the street and then back on the street. He's seen the ebb and flow of criminal activity come in wave after wave. He's also seen the death of his ward and partner, as is alluded to in one quick glimpse of Robin's costume. Granted, it's an nod to the comics only fans will understand, but it's still there and begs the question: if you don't know your Batman, Superman or comics in general, why are you reviewing a comicbook film?
Bruce Wayne is older. He's jaded and callous. If he ever saw the gray areas of society after his parent's death, those shades of gray are now gone. He's far more Frank Miller's Dark Knight than the misunderstood noble vigilante of Christopher Nolan's film trilogy and it plays out in his brutality and intolerance.
Will this movie win any awards? Probably not the major ones like Best Actor, Best Actress, Supporting… etc. It might win on music or special effects, costumes or something. It will upset fans of Batman and Superman and may alienate people who aren't fans. Superman is not shown as a "boyscout" as he's referred to in the comics, but rather as Jesus-style figure, sent to save humanity from itself.
Is it a great movie? No. The Nolan Batman films are far better in their story telling. Was it entertaining? Yes, in that it is a character study, not an overt action film.
http://goo.gl/69EYLm
Comments
He obviously has more experience reviewing movies than I do, but the sentiment is the same.