DC Comics Cinematic Universe (2013 - present)

1179180182184185220

Comments

  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,079
    mtm wrote: »

    I bought the Justice League 2017 twice despite not liking it, Digital Copy and 4K Disk. I buy pretty much any DC content.

    I must admit I'm kind of curious about picking up the Ultimate edition of BvS; I hadn't heard of it but someone mentioned it and apparently it's an improvement. I might grab a second hand copy.

    BvS Ultimate Edition is the only version I watch, in fact I have not watched the theatrical version since watching it at the cinema. I can't even remember the majority of differences. Very much the same as The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit Trilogies, I only watch the extended cuts.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,169
    The BvS Ultimate Cut already managed to right a few wrongs, in my opinion. It is an improvement over the theatrical cut for sure. (The same thing applies to the SS Extended Cut, by the way.)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    I’m not really sure what it did to improve. All it did was just turn a bloated film into an even more bloated film.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,169
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    ZSJL is now one of Snyder's better reviewed films ever. In fact, it's his first film since Watchmen certified fresh on RT with a 75% of fresh reviews... and it's a 4:3 epic 4 hours and 10 minutes long.
    Then, most importantly, people seems to really love it, especially because the film is very good establishing the characters and their relationships. People seems to care this time. Plus, the action is monumental and the score is dynamite.

    It's an unexpected triumph.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,169
    I missed this discussion. Why 4:3? Doesn't seem like the "proper" way to view a spectacle film nowadays, does it?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,359
    matt_u wrote: »
    ZSJL is now one of Snyder's better reviewed films ever. In fact, it's his first film since Watchmen certified fresh on RT with a 75% of fresh reviews... and it's a 4:3 epic 4 hours and 10 minutes long.
    Then, most importantly, people seems to really love it, especially because the film is very good establishing the characters and their relationships. People seems to care this time. Plus, the action is monumental and the score is dynamite.

    It's an unexpected triumph.

    The reviews I've seen say it's an improvement but still not a great film (not a bad one though): triumph might be a bit much! :)
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I missed this discussion. Why 4:3? Doesn't seem like the "proper" way to view a spectacle film nowadays, does it?

    That's they way Snyder filmed it, apparently.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited March 2021 Posts: 8,181
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I missed this discussion. Why 4:3? Doesn't seem like the "proper" way to view a spectacle film nowadays, does it?

    Snyder fell in love with the framing of the sequences shot in IMAX 1:33 for BvS, so he decided to shoot JL entirely in Super 35 so that the whole film could be projected onto IMAX screens rather than just select sequences.

    I can sort of see why. 1:33 framing actually compliments the presentation of the team better than a more horizontal frame. Joss Whedon had the same logic applied to the first Avengers film though he opted for 1:85, but it was a notable switch from all the other MCU films being typically done at 2:35. Had Snyder stayed with JL back in 2017 he likely would have done 1:85 as well for wide release but reserve full frame 1:33 for IMAX screens.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    mtm wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    ZSJL is now one of Snyder's better reviewed films ever. In fact, it's his first film since Watchmen certified fresh on RT with a 75% of fresh reviews... and it's a 4:3 epic 4 hours and 10 minutes long.
    Then, most importantly, people seems to really love it, especially because the film is very good establishing the characters and their relationships. People seems to care this time. Plus, the action is monumental and the score is dynamite.

    It's an unexpected triumph.

    The reviews I've seen say it's an improvement but still not a great film (not a bad one though): triumph might be a bit much! :)

    It's Snyder we are talking about, arguably the MOST divisive blockbuster director of the past two decades. Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy. Anyway a lot of reviews are describing it as a great film (Variety, Telegraph, Guardian, Roger Ebert.com).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2021 Posts: 16,359
    matt_u wrote: »
    Anyway a lot of reviews are describing it as a great film (Variety, Telegraph, Guardian, Roger Ebert.com).

    The Telegraph review is 2/5 "This four-hour director’s cut has all the joys of watching meat being pulverised"
    The Guardian's is 4/5 "Snyder’s film may be exhausting but it is engaging"
    They're not negative, but they're not all saying it's 'great', no. I think the Telegraph's review sticks out as a bit of an anomaly in that it's more down on the side of it being bad where most aren't. Don't get me wrong, it sounds alright though and it's something I'm looking forward to at the end of the week.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I missed this discussion. Why 4:3? Doesn't seem like the "proper" way to view a spectacle film nowadays, does it?

    Snyder fell in love with the framing of the sequences shot in IMAX 1:33 for BvS, so he decided to shoot JL entirely in Super 35 so that the whole film could be projected onto IMAX screens rather than just select sequences.

    I can sort of see why. 1:33 framing actually compliments the presentation of the team better than a more horizontal frame. Joss Whedon had the same logic applied to the first Avengers film though he opted for 1:85, but it was a notable switch from all the other MCU films being typically done at 2:35. Had Snyder stayed with JL back in 2017 he likely would have done 1:85 as well for wide release but reserve full frame 1:33 for IMAX screens.

    I don't know much about screen ratios but I like watching IMAX films on my TV screen as it fills the screen more, but 4:3 won't unfortunately. It does seem like a bit of an odd choice to release at home in this format as it won't fit on anyone's screens, will it? Unless you've got an old CRT telly from the 80s still! :)
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    mtm wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Anyway a lot of reviews are describing it as a great film (Variety, Telegraph, Guardian, Roger Ebert.com).

    The Telegraph review is 2/5 "This four-hour director’s cut has all the joys of watching meat being pulverised"
    The Guardian's is 4/5 "Snyder’s film may be exhausting but it is engaging"
    They're not negative, but they're not all saying it's 'great', no. I think the Telegraph's review sticks out as a bit of an anomaly in that it's more down on the side of it being bad where most aren't. Don't get me wrong, it sounds alright though and it's something I'm looking forward to at the end of the week.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/zack-snyders-justice-league-mad-magnificent-four-hour-apocalyptic/

    The Telegraph review is 5/5 and calls the film "mad and magnificent".

    Variety says that ZSJL "accomplishes in four hours what those [Avengers] films did in nine".

  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    There are good, "meh" and bad reviews for it just like most big films of its kind - but yes, it's certainly fair to say that most of the reviews are coming down on the positive side, which is a first for Snyder.

    Good for him.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2021 Posts: 16,359
    matt_u wrote:
    The Telegraph review is 5/5 and calls the film "mad and magnificent".

    Ah sorry, got mixed up with the Independent:
    https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/zack-snyder-s-justice-league-review-b1817294.html

    I guess it covers all the bases!

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.

    I can’t get past the way Eisenberg plays Luthor with his weird little tics. Having just rewatched it two nights ago, it’s hard ignore how utterly dumb both Batman and Superman come off as the script lays out. The confrontation is even absurd because there’s one point where Supes is like “I NEED TO TALK TO YOU” but then pushes Batman several yards down. For every opportunity Superman has to deescalate the situation he just lets them pass by or just willfully escalates the situation. And these are supposed to be the most intelligent people on Earth.

    Considering all that, it shouldn’t be hard for JL to have a better plot/story.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,169
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.

    I can’t get past the way Eisenberg plays Luthor with his weird little tics. Having just rewatched it two nights ago, it’s hard ignore how utterly dumb both Batman and Superman come off as the script lays out. The confrontation is even absurd because there’s one point where Supes is like “I NEED TO TALK TO YOU” but then pushes Batman several yards down. For every opportunity Superman has to deescalate the situation he just lets them pass by or just willfully escalates the situation. And these are supposed to be the most intelligent people on Earth.

    Considering all that, it shouldn’t be hard for JL to have a better plot/story.

    I agree with your assessment, @MakeshiftPython! The way I always take it is that Superman is still young and confused at this point, while Batman initially has no clue where he stands regarding this 'alien'. As for Luthor, he doesn't have it together, that's true. They went for a neurotic idealist rather than a calculated capitalist.
  • Posts: 1,394
    I love BVS ( Especially the ultimate cut ).The warehouse fight is not just the best on screen depiction of Batman in combat ever,its one of the best fight scenes EVER!

    To me the film is easily better than anything in the MCU ( Which i enjoy but are a little formulaic,safe,and kiddy friendly ).
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    It’s crazy to me because the movies never really depicted a proper post-Crisis Luthor before and this was the first opportunity to after wiping the slate clean after SUPERMAN RETURNS.

    That’s another thing the DCAU got right. I love the fact that they based that Luthor on Savalas from OHMSS. Just imagine if OHMSS Blofeld was played as Eisenberg’s Luthor from BvS. It would be unforgivable for Bond fans.
  • edited March 2021 Posts: 628
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,169
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    As soon as the suits step in, WB loses. It's always been that way. I'm honestly surprised they gave Nolan carte blanche after BB didn't exactly make a lot of money.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    According to Snyder that’s not the case. The JL film that we are now getting was what was supposed to be part 1, and it ends on a cliffhanger that would have lead up to Part 2 which he never filmed.

    The reason it’s four hours is because he was able to get away with that for HBO Max. This is a version of JL that would have never been in theaters. It likely would have had a similar running length of BvS.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2021 Posts: 16,359
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.

    I can’t get past the way Eisenberg plays Luthor with his weird little tics. Having just rewatched it two nights ago, it’s hard ignore how utterly dumb both Batman and Superman come off as the script lays out. The confrontation is even absurd because there’s one point where Supes is like “I NEED TO TALK TO YOU” but then pushes Batman several yards down. For every opportunity Superman has to deescalate the situation he just lets them pass by or just willfully escalates the situation. And these are supposed to be the most intelligent people on Earth.

    Yes, I watched that last week and it's so hard to think 'why have you stopped trying to talk to him? Your mum is in deadly danger and suddenly you're more interested in beating this guy up?'.
    Also I'm not even sure I understood why Lex wanted him to kill Batman. Batman hasn't really got involved in Lex's affairs (as far as Lex is aware, anyway). I guess maybe it was to make Superman look bad or something, but even then it's not terribly clear (unless I missed something, which I may have).
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    Ah is that right? I didn't know that, thanks.
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    According to Snyder that’s not the case. The JL film that we are now getting was what was supposed to be part 1, and it ends on a cliffhanger that would have lead up to Part 2 which he never filmed.

    The reason it’s four hours is because he was able to get away with that for HBO Max. This is a version of JL that would have never been in theaters. It likely would have had a similar running length of BvS.

    Oh, now I'm confused! :) How come he shot that much? Or did they do an hour's worth of extra material in these reshoots?
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    Nope this is not true. They scrapped the Part 1 and 2 idea only because WB wanted a more standalone JL1 after the BvS debacle. Even back in 2015 Snyder planned JL as a trilogy of films. The original idea back then was filming Part 2 (2019) and Part 3 (2020) back to back, but the JL that was filmed in 2016 has always been intended as one movie. You can find the scrapped 2015 storyboards of Part 2 and 3 online, Snyder put it on display recently for a JL exhibition in Dallas.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,359
    matt_u wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    Nope this is not true. They scrapped the Part 1 and 2 idea only because WB wanted a more standalone JL1 after the BvS debacle. Even back in 2015 Snyder planned JL as a trilogy of films. The original idea back then was filming Part 2 (2019) and Part 3 (2020) back to back, but the JL that was filmed in 2016 has always been intended as one movie. You can find the scrapped 2015 storyboards of Part 2 and 3 online, Snyder put it on display recently for a JL exhibition in Dallas.

    Were the storyboards for a big CGI fight in darkness by any chance? :D
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    mtm wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.

    I can’t get past the way Eisenberg plays Luthor with his weird little tics. Having just rewatched it two nights ago, it’s hard ignore how utterly dumb both Batman and Superman come off as the script lays out. The confrontation is even absurd because there’s one point where Supes is like “I NEED TO TALK TO YOU” but then pushes Batman several yards down. For every opportunity Superman has to deescalate the situation he just lets them pass by or just willfully escalates the situation. And these are supposed to be the most intelligent people on Earth.

    Yes, I watched that last week and it's so hard to think 'why have you stopped trying to talk to him? Your mum is in deadly danger and suddenly you're more interested in beating this guy up?'.
    Also I'm not even sure I understood why Lex wanted him to kill Batman. Batman hasn't really got involved in Lex's affairs (as far as Lex is aware, anyway). I guess maybe it was to make Superman look bad or something, but even then it's not terribly clear (unless I missed something, which I may have).

    Lex as counting on Batman killing Superman with the kryptonite. When that didn’t work, he used Doomsday as his backup (though the way the movie presents it, Doomsday would have been born anyway?)
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited March 2021 Posts: 4,343
    mtm wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    Nope this is not true. They scrapped the Part 1 and 2 idea only because WB wanted a more standalone JL1 after the BvS debacle. Even back in 2015 Snyder planned JL as a trilogy of films. The original idea back then was filming Part 2 (2019) and Part 3 (2020) back to back, but the JL that was filmed in 2016 has always been intended as one movie. You can find the scrapped 2015 storyboards of Part 2 and 3 online, Snyder put it on display recently for a JL exhibition in Dallas.

    Were the storyboards for a big CGI fight in darkness by any chance? :D

    Actually, no... ;)

    Anyway Snyder himself doesn’t even consider those storyboards “spoilers”, since those arcs and plans were scrapped back in 2016...

    Besides, Lex wants Supes to kill Batman to prove to the world that he’s not a God. He literally says it in their confrontation: “They need to see the fraud you are, with their eyes. The blood on your hands”.

    “If God is all powerful he cannot be all good, and if he’s all good, then he cannot be all powerful. And neither can you be“.

    Then @mtm Lex create Doomsday for many reasons: he wants to play God since he’s a psychopath, he needs a backup plan just in case and more importantly because he can’t accept the fact that with all his knowledge he doesn’t have the power Superman has. This is established early in the film, at the library speech: “Books are knowledge and knowledge is power, and I am… no. Hm, no. What am I? What was I saying? The bittersweet pain among men is having knowledge with no power because… because that is PARADOXICAL.”
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2021 Posts: 16,359
    mtm wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.

    I can’t get past the way Eisenberg plays Luthor with his weird little tics. Having just rewatched it two nights ago, it’s hard ignore how utterly dumb both Batman and Superman come off as the script lays out. The confrontation is even absurd because there’s one point where Supes is like “I NEED TO TALK TO YOU” but then pushes Batman several yards down. For every opportunity Superman has to deescalate the situation he just lets them pass by or just willfully escalates the situation. And these are supposed to be the most intelligent people on Earth.

    Yes, I watched that last week and it's so hard to think 'why have you stopped trying to talk to him? Your mum is in deadly danger and suddenly you're more interested in beating this guy up?'.
    Also I'm not even sure I understood why Lex wanted him to kill Batman. Batman hasn't really got involved in Lex's affairs (as far as Lex is aware, anyway). I guess maybe it was to make Superman look bad or something, but even then it's not terribly clear (unless I missed something, which I may have).

    Lex as counting on Batman killing Superman with the kryptonite. When that didn’t work, he used Doomsday as his backup (though the way the movie presents it, Doomsday would have been born anyway?)

    Oh okay. How does he know Batman has Kryptonite? In fact, how does Batman get Kryptonite? I only watched it the other night and I don't remember :D

    He also doesn't act like "my plan is foiled!" when Superman turns up after the fight to meet him in the spaceship- he just mentions how he hasn't got Batman's head and seems more gleeful that he gets to kill Martha. I guess there's a bit of poker face going on, but poker face isn't great storytelling in a movie.

    Why does he create Doomsday? As you can see I didn't really follow most of it :)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited March 2021 Posts: 16,359
    matt_u wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Escalus5 wrote: »
    matt_u wrote: »
    Given his past relationship with the critics, such a result it's a great achievement, especially since this beast is 4 hours long, which is totally crazy.

    The running time doesn't surprise me considering that Warner Bros. actually announced JUSTICE LEAGUE as two films back in 2014 -- Part 1 was set to be released in November 2017 and Part 2 in 2019. Snyder was shooting both films back-to-back before he left. Warner Bros. then stepped in and cut the project down to a standalone film.

    Nope this is not true. They scrapped the Part 1 and 2 idea only because WB wanted a more standalone JL1 after the BvS debacle. Even back in 2015 Snyder planned JL as a trilogy of films. The original idea back then was filming Part 2 (2019) and Part 3 (2020) back to back, but the JL that was filmed in 2016 has always been intended as one movie. You can find the scrapped 2015 storyboards of Part 2 and 3 online, Snyder put it on display recently for a JL exhibition in Dallas.

    Were the storyboards for a big CGI fight in darkness by any chance? :D

    Actually, no... ;)

    Anyway Snyder himself doesn’t even consider those storyboards “spoilers”, since those arcs and plans were scrapped back in 2016...

    Besides, Lex wants Supes to kill Batman to prove to the world that he’s not a God. He literally says it in their confrontation: “They need to see the fraud you are, with their eyes. The blood on your hands”.

    “If God is all powerful he cannot be all good, and if he’s all good, then he cannot be all powerful. And neither can you be“.

    Okay, that makes more sense. I do think he needed to be disappointed or annoyed or angry when Supes turns up after the fight though: we need to understand that his plan hasn't worked there (although why he wouldn't think Superman would just talk to Batman I'm not sure. Maybe the plot should have been Lex actually framing each of them in some way to engineer their confrontation more?).
    matt_u wrote: »
    Then @mtm Lex create Doomsday for many reasons: he wants to play God since he’s a psychopath, he needs a backup plan just in case and more importantly because he can’t accept the fact that with all his knowledge he doesn’t have the power Superman has. This is established early in the film, at the library speech: “Books are knowledge and knowledge is power, and I am… no. Hm, no. What am I? What was I saying? The bittersweet pain among men is having knowledge with no power because… because that is PARADOXICAL.”

    Okay: I don't find a baddie who wants to destroy things just because he's mad to be very satisfying.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    Bad guys being bad guys because of severe ego issues isn't a new thing, really - and it's certainly not new for Lex Luthor. But I must admit, I really do struggle with Eisenberg in the film. I see what they were attempting with the character, but I think it was a hokey performance and very out of step with the rest of the film.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I felt the chaotic network of scenes a bit more cohesive in this version, with more emphasis on Luthor's character too. In the theatrical cut, I felt like I was being ping-ponged between several stand-alone stories in a film that somehow conflated them into big experience, while the Ultimate Cut, for me at least, brought a little more connective tissue. But it still is somewhat bloated, I will agree there.

    I can’t get past the way Eisenberg plays Luthor with his weird little tics. Having just rewatched it two nights ago, it’s hard ignore how utterly dumb both Batman and Superman come off as the script lays out. The confrontation is even absurd because there’s one point where Supes is like “I NEED TO TALK TO YOU” but then pushes Batman several yards down. For every opportunity Superman has to deescalate the situation he just lets them pass by or just willfully escalates the situation. And these are supposed to be the most intelligent people on Earth.

    Yes, I watched that last week and it's so hard to think 'why have you stopped trying to talk to him? Your mum is in deadly danger and suddenly you're more interested in beating this guy up?'.
    Also I'm not even sure I understood why Lex wanted him to kill Batman. Batman hasn't really got involved in Lex's affairs (as far as Lex is aware, anyway). I guess maybe it was to make Superman look bad or something, but even then it's not terribly clear (unless I missed something, which I may have).

    Lex as counting on Batman killing Superman with the kryptonite. When that didn’t work, he used Doomsday as his backup (though the way the movie presents it, Doomsday would have been born anyway?)

    Oh okay. How does he know Batman has Kryptonite? In fact, how does Batman get Kryptonite? I only watched it the other night and I don't remember :D

    He also doesn't act like "my plan is foiled!" when Superman turns up after the fight to meet him in the spaceship- he just mentions how he hasn't got Batman's head and seems more gleeful that he gets to kill Martha. I guess there's a bit of poker face going on, but poker face isn't great storytelling in a movie.

    Why does he create Doomsday? As you can see I didn't really follow most of it :)

    Batman stole the kryptonite from Lex’s lab.

    As for Doomsday, I THINK it was meant to kill Superman if Batman failed, but I could be doing more work for the film. It certainly didn’t look like Lex could even control Doomsday, so that plan was dumb.
Sign In or Register to comment.