Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Oct 05 23:29:59 2022

Utopia Talk / Movie Talk / Batman v Superman (2016)
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Mar 25 00:58:09
...
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Mar 25 00:58:17
Yeah.. wasn't so great :(
It had some of the intensity of Man of Steel, but I think its major issue appeared in its attempts to over-expand the story into Justice League, which caused them to resolve the main story (Batman v Superman) too quickly. Still worth seeing, of course, and it wasn't craptastic garbage like a Marvel Avengers movie, but it just didn't have the potent writing that some of the early concept material hinted.


(( SPOILERS Ahead ))

Kind of have to get right to spoilers to address my complaints. The movie attempted to do a lot of buildup to the superhero showdown, but when Batman stands ready for his master stroke, the fight is diffused by Superman's mentioning "Martha," which happens to be both his own mother's name (she being a hostage at the time) and Batman's mother's name. It's fine that this caught Bruce off guard, but it was a little weird that he then reversed his decision to kill Superman — and far too quickly, I think. I'm not really sure that the movie did the groundwork to make a decision like that possible. Like, yes, maybe he could see this as a second chance to save his own mother, but could he then identify enough with Superman that he would understand that keeping Superman's mother alive would keep Superman from becoming like himself (or other such narratives)? Maybe, but the narrative didn't seem to be in place for that kind of a conclusion. Instead they went very quickly from "Martha?" "Yes, it's his mother's name" to "Oh! It's *my* mother's name too! My dad said it as he died! We have to save her and stop fighting!" ...Oh? How about instead you stab Superman in his face and make this a great movie? ;p

It's possible that the writers took it for granted that people would "just understand" some idea of a "common mother" that unites individuals, but that would be trash and inaccurate, so I hope that that was not the intention. I think instead for that scene they leaned on story work that they had not fully developed, which made the superhero feud seem whimsical by its conclusion (if it can be resolved by an emotional chord so flimsy, then it must not have had the ideological weight necessary for the killing of gods). Very possible that I missed some key details, though, which I'll explain separately :/

Some quick thoughts:
- They attempted more romance with Amy Adams, but I don't think there's much chemistry between them..
- They probably should have cut a few frames from that Aquaman scene..
- Definitely nice visual effects in the movie; despite my complaints, have to give them lots of credit

(( End Spoilers ))

I think I need to sleep on it before adding more thoughts. So now I'll complain about something else!!

-=-=-=-=-
Separate complaint about stupid moviegoers:

Instead of seeing a late showing I decided to see an early showing, and that was a mistake. I sat behind a group of 4 idiots (2 boys, 2 girls — and these were early 20s peeps, I'm just referring to them as children) who could not stop making all of these annoying fanboi/fangurl "participatory" gestures and comments. Every time one of the boys saw something that could be de-contextualized in gif-form and made fun of, he had to laugh and gesture wildly. And after the credits when there was no "Easter Egg" or extra, they had to scream out loudly, "What???" like it's such a betrayal that DC doesn't do the same extras that Marvel does. And the girls, every time Gal Gadot appeared on screen they had to clap or make a "yes!" arm gesture. And then in the scene where the Justice League files were first displayed, they had to do the generic proletariat happy dance of "oh! I recognize those symbols! I'm so fucking special right now because I can recognize symbols and thus know which heroes those symbols indicate!" Wow. Good for you, but also, go fucking die you dumb fucks. Stop whispering loudly to each other and making all of these dumb, deliberate gestures to communicate to the people around you that, yes, you do indeed understand what's going on in the movie. Stop trying to make your hype for the movie greater than the movie itself. How about you actually watch it and internalize your responses to gauge what they might actually be worth, rather than performing a ridiculous and distracting response or otherwise preparing a thought that's so stupid that it can only be abstracted in a meme. I hate these people. They need eugenics so badly.
-=-=-=-=-
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Mar 25 01:01:51
(those peeps distracted me a *lot* during the movie, so I don't think I got as much from the movie as I could have)
The Children
Member
Fri Mar 25 02:45:31
its out alrdy lol?

didnt even notice and dunt plan on seein this either.

" Fri Mar 25 00:58:17
Yeah.. wasn't so great :( "

>> ah, as expected then.

Billah
Member
Fri Mar 25 04:07:41
Craptastic = The Fantastic Four

Avengers > Fantastic Four
Billah
Member
Fri Mar 25 04:10:26
waaa waaa people were gesturing and excited about the movie waaa waaaa.
The Children
Member
Fri Mar 25 09:18:20
im glad i chose not 2 see it. apparently the movie is shit.

30 out 0f 100 rotentomatos right now rofl

The Children
Member
Fri Mar 25 09:22:01
rofl and then i scroll da internet and see this.

this is why internet is awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwXfv25xJUw
The Children
Member
Fri Mar 25 09:38:16
ah yes i remember my total disinterest in this even after the very first trailer like a year or 2 ago. this pos is really just that, a turd. a pos.

i feel vindicated now.

The Children
Member
Fri Mar 25 09:39:49
jebus at this point even, freddy vs jason is ranked higher.

a turd is a turd.

The Children
Member
Fri Mar 25 09:53:30
if it looks like a duck, quecks like a duck and moves like a duck, its a duck

Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Mar 26 00:47:20
"Craptastic = The Fantastic Four
Avengers > Fantastic Four"

Yes. I agree that the Avengers was better than Fantastic Four. Unfortunately, that's saying very little. Avengers was also better than "The Room" and "Battlefield Earth" — but does that mean that Avengers was not a garbage movie? Not for me. It was pop cinema with bland messages and visual effects for common and stupid people. It accomplished nothing worthwhile; took no risks, made no statements. "Oh but it did nothing so spectacularly!"

...
"waaa waaa people were gesturing and excited about the movie waaa waaaa."

Excited to the extent that it was "okay" for them to ruin the experience for other viewers by talking and gesturing wildly, sure. So strange that other people in a crowded theater might perhaps be there to be immersed in the movie's experience — as opposed to being distracted by the narcissistic attention seeking of mediocre proles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzRWlT_KjUw
"Only in a world this shitty could you even try to say these were innocent people and keep a straight face."
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Mar 26 00:47:27
Anyways I decided to see the movie again at a different time (less crowded screening), and most of my ideas about the movie stand.. :/

(( SPOILERS Ahead ))

I still don't think that they gave enough motive for Batman to just stop and reverse his decision. Lex' monologue to Superman on the rooftop sort of showed the writerly intention there (aside from Bruce's memory of his parents' murder, I mean), which was something like, "mom is every boy's leading lady." So I think they *were* going for some expectation that people would "just understand" that these heroes would both be their most human when they act in their most generic status as loving a mother figure. So fucking lame, though. Without showing any fond memories of Bruce's mother (who, btw, was played by Lauren Cohan — Maggie from Walking Dead) she just becomes a symbolic mother, which makes her even less interesting. Like, maybe she was an asshole? But no; no details, so it was simply expected that audiences would just connect to some weak-minded, visceral reaction — a mother figure threatened, inspiring some savior response. And this is keeping in mind that Lex' manipulation was only related to Batman *after* he had changed his mind about killing Superman.

It's part of the movie's bigger problem of diluting its writing. Zack Snyder showed some willingness to make a good mainstream movie when he had Superman kill Zod, but in BvS he (or Terrio/Goyer?) apparently could not allow Batman to kill Superman as he should have.. he couldn't even let concrete crush that little girl in the beginning or otherwise expand Bruce's 9/11 rage by showing all the bodies that Superman's fight had piled up in the streets. And none of the ideology of killing gods was realized in the movie — it was even reversed towards the sympathies of common minds. For instance, when Bruce's bureaucrat stands in a building that's falling (destroyed in the Zod/Superman fight), he says a prayer. And later, after Superman is nuked and thought dead, the dumb Captain who thought Superman was "kinda hot" (quote from the end of "Man of Steel") signs the cross on her shoulder. Other people similarly have their religious notions go uncontested, with the random villager saying of Superman, "He answers to no one. Not even, I think, to God." In that kind of a narrative Batman ends up looking like a schoolboy who must champion the restoration of "God" to these primatives — himself as stupid as they. He ends up portraying no wisdom, except in a couple of catch-phrases that managed to survive the apparent re-writes that must have taken place (re-writes, because how do you go from "Do you bleed? You will," and "[my parents] showed me that the world only makes sense when you force it to" to "[oh, let me go save your mom!]"?). So much of the god killing material washed away so that they could introduce Doomsday as a late villain and hype up a franchise. I guess DC wants to make the same stupid mistakes that Marvel has made: just smashing popular action figures together and letting visual effects studios make entire movies. Don't bother writing!

Alternatively, about the Lex painting and symbolism...
Batman's "rising" hallucination and Superman's "falling to Earth" were bounced off Lex' early orientation of his office painting. Batman would then be rising from the Underworld (like Satan) with Superman then being an angelic figure — or more likely just Jesus, given all the Jesus references in "Man of Steel":
http://i.imgur.com/DSEyaIo.png
But while this speaks to the Milton narrative of Satan/Batman as the revolutionary who shows that gods can only be *given* power, it complicates that narrative when Batman essentially gives that power back to the tyrant (Superman). The only saving function there might be that Batman retains control by keeping kryptonite weaponry, advocating for a god's power only if it suits humankind's interests (Batman seems to become a representative of humankind by allowing Superman to live). Then when the painting is flipped, the "[devil from the skies]" would be the impending attacks that the Justice League must face, with Jesus/Superman inverted (fallen) and Batman acting as human intermediary. But if this "Batman as Satan" narrative broke, then the movie may also have broken the "Superman as Jesus" metaphor in some of the news dialogue.. but that seems less certain. I'd guess that the writers want to keep playing up the Superman/Jesus imagery, which would be a shame when this iteration of Superman could have broken that mold. Maybe it will, but the writing seems to be turning traditional.

As for the 9/11 imagery, that could also be the angle here. Superman would be the government bringing its enemies to the U.S., and Batman would be the twisted morality of torture and mistrust of power that erupted post 9/11. Batman not killing Superman would be like the American people still "believing in democracy" or whatever, and the new "Satan" figure would be some external enemy that reinvigorates the illusion of unity. Whatever.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Sat Mar 26 20:10:07
deadpool was better.
OsamaIsDaWorstPresid
Member
Mon Mar 28 04:42:30
wit makeup http://i.d...-image-a-109_1458513706606.jpg
OsamaIsDaWorstPresid
Member
Mon Mar 28 04:42:37
witout makeup http://i.d...-image-m-108_1458513686410.jpg
OsamaIsDaWorstPresid
Member
Mon Mar 28 04:43:48
so u put a ring on da 1st xpectin 2 bone it in da bedroom and it transformez in2 da 2nd

how iz makeup not frawd
Pillz
Member
Mon Apr 04 13:22:34
Why has no one written about the appropriation of Greek culture by Jews?
Cherub Cow
Member
Wed Apr 27 19:43:11
Interesting fan theory about the Robin suit that Batman walks past in BvS
http://imgur.com/gallery/6DqU4
(Jared Leto's Suicide Squad Joker has a bullet hole that matches up with one in the Robin suit, and he also might have a Robin tattoo...)
Not that it matters.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jul 11 01:24:40
Supposedly the "Ultimate Edition" (Director's cut) of BvS has 30 minutes of extra footage that make up for some of the glaring errors of the theatrical release. It's out on iTunes already...
I'll probably watch it soon, but I can't imagine how they could fix Batman's motivation for not killing Superman. Showing his father dying while saying "Martha", doubling on the Martha name, and attempting some weak theme of sons auto-loving mothers seems a little too trite a counter-spell for a character who was committed to bringing down a would-be god...
The Children
Member
Wed Jul 27 08:23:10
dayum this movie fkin sucks.

i cant believe how fkin stupid most scenes r.
this snyder guy is a movie destroyer. he puts a few random scenes in that r so random and completely unfollowable and then he calls it a movie. a movie!

rite from da getgo it was stupid. like first how many fkin times do we need 2 watch little bruce witnessin his parents gettin shot. how many fkin times. and then he runs away and falls in2 a well and then he flies with da bats? its so fkin stupid, u cant believe u actually saw that. rite there and then u alrdy know it is gonna be a stupid movie.

then it just switches 2 random locations and 10 min u have like 1 line ever being spoken by any actor. its fkin unbelievable!

and then da cast. it was said with da first superman movie, but honestly clark kent and lois lane r extremely bad casts. neither have chemistry on screen and its just stupid seein them 2gether. neither can act btw. they both suck badly.

but i like how random da scenes r. 1 min, lois was interviewin this warlord, next min she gets captured and on da 3rd min, the mercs betray da warlord but somehow ur supposed 2 guess that. and then superman drops down. ofc, the only lines spoken was actually by da support cast.

the whole movie is actually like this. just random scenes with random weirdness. like bruce was dreamin and then he woke up at a mad max set or something. just crazy how random it all is. and then u get flyin creatures (supposedly dark seid minions but we as audience just have 2 guess that shit). just crazy stuff going on.

story is weak as shit. "how 2 remove turd from under ur shoes" is a more interestin story than this crap.

did i say how bad the actors were. lois lane is completely out of her element and dare i say the worst lois i ever seen on screen. btw how did she knew da spear culd kill doomsday. nobody fkin told her and she sure as hell culd not know doomsday was kryptonian. does she have super hearing now and overheard batman and superman talkin. fck these snyder plotholes.

lex motherfkin luthor is a skinny weakass punk, dare i say the worst luthor on screen.

did u also notice how they steal lines from previous superheor/ batman movies.

damn they culdnt even fckin write there own script. whats the budget 4 this movie...300 mill? fck that crap.

fck this movie.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Mar 06 01:22:32
I randomly wanted to re-watch the scene from Batman v Superman where Batman says, "Do you bleed? You will," since that's a super cool moment.. and I ended up responding to a comment under the video.. and ended up giving a lot of credit to the writing that justifies Batman sparing Superman. Above, I think I focused too much on where Snyder was going with the «Übermensch» writing that I didn't give him credit for the full symbolism of the "Martha" scene...

..
Comment by rando-YouTuber Chairul Maulana (11 months ago):
"The way batman stand up from his batmobile shows that he has no fear ."

My response:
I'm surprised no one has pointed this out:
Batman *was* afraid. That's the point. He stood up to a would-be god despite having every reason to be totally afraid of Superman's powers. In this scene, he believed Superman to be evil and a killer, but he stood up to him nonetheless.
They explain this. In the near-end fight scene between Batman and Superman, Batman pointed out that Superman breathing in Kryptonite was Superman breathing in "fear". This was meant to parallel Batman in "Batman Begins" breathing in Ra's al Ghul's blue-flower fear toxin.

Compare:
• "Batman Begins", [Ra's al Ghul to Batman, after giving Batman a smoking dish of fear toxin]:
"Breathe. Breathe in your fears. Face them. To conquer fear you must become fear. You must bask in the fear of other men. And men fear most what they cannot see ... Feel terror cloud your senses. Feel its power to distort — to control — and know that this power can be yours. Embrace your worst fear. Become one with the darkness." (Batman opens a symbolic box containing his greatest fear: bats. He rises to defeat Ra's al Ghul despite still feeling this fear.)
• "Batman v Superman", [Batman to Superman, after giving Superman a smoking grenade of Kryptonite]:
"Breathe it in. That's fear. You're not brave. Men are brave ... You were never a god. You were never even a man." (Superman panics and is initially defeated in this fight; only after regaining his strength as the Kryptonite wears off does he face Batman again. But, he fails again when he loses his powers.)

This theme of fear was also in "Dark Knight Rises". Where Batman becomes suicidal (without fear but going into a fight), he becomes ineffective against Bane and is defeated initially. It is only after he spends time in the pit that he re-learns this crucial lesson from the blind prisoner-doctor:
[Blind prisoner]: "Fear is why you fail."
[Batman]: "No, I'm not afraid — I'm angry." (Batman proceeds to fail the jump. He believes that it is only his "body" that makes the jump — his physical strength.)
[Blind prisoner]: "You do not fear death. You think this makes you strong. It makes you weak."
[Batman]: "Why?"
[Blind prisoner]: "How can you move faster than possible, fight longer than possible, without the most powerful impulse of the [living] experience? The fear of death."
[Batman]: "I do fear death..." (Batman says this, but it's clearly academic; he has no real fear here.)
[Blind prisoner]: "Then... make the climb as the child did — without the rope. Then, fear will find you again."
(Batman's face changes; he realizes that he did not truly fear, and that's why he failed. He makes the climb again. Bats are there at the precipice of the jump to call back to his greatest fear and his embracing of that fear. He again "rises" within his fear; he succeeds.)

The point is that Batman is afraid. He lives in constant terror. But, by standing up in impossible situations where his mortality is on the line, he shows his bravery. Bravery is doing the impossible despite fear — it is not the absence of fear altogether. This is the logic of heroism: pushing through fear, knowing the risks and costs, and yet acting virtuously.

Batman believes that Superman lacks this bravery; he believes Superman cannot possess bravery since Superman is effectively immortal by comparison. Superman merely puts difficulties directly onto his powers, acting only when his powers remove risk and fear. Batman wishes to project his own fear and mortality onto Superman to test Superman's character and defeat him. By standing up to Superman here, Batman hopes to seed fear in Superman and see how Superman behaves (per Ra's al Ghul, "You must become more than a man in the mind of your opponent."). It becomes a strategy of the later fight: to make Superman believe that Superman's body can soak-up all of Batman's weapons (it's all heavy-weapon frontal assaults at first), but then removing Superman's powers from the equation with kryptonite and beating Superman with human punches — a psychological tactic. This shows Superman true fear, and Superman must find his own bravery.

When Batman holds the Kryptonite spear over Superman, Superman knows that he could well die in this moment. This is Superman's true self emerging, but Superman — through the fear — only wants to save his mother. This puts Batman at the bottom of the pit again (both the one on Wayne Manor and the one in the desert) — afraid but helpless like he and his father were before the gunman. Batman had become the gunman in someone else's story. But, he now realizes Superman's own character and heroism. Superman can act virtuously while powerless and fearful, so Superman's subsequent fight with Doomsday has weight. Superman knows that he can and will likely die, but he rises. He faces Doomsday like Arthur and Mordred faced each other, even pulling himself along Doomsday's spear — assuring his own death — to strike the killing blow.

TLDR: Batman has fear, but he embraced it and used it to make life more present and crucial — to become greater than the life that fear's common cautions and risk-aversion alone would give him. He rose from the scared boy at the bottom of the well to someone so in control of his own fear that he could make Superman fear him. He could not have risen if he had no fear of his own.
TheChildren
Member
Fri Aug 12 15:30:52
just watchin justice league...
still cant get over that crazy scene where they start singin for aquaman like crazy cult groupies and da woman start smellin his clothes...
wtf.

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share