It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I'm just saying that Snyder has a history of not being able to focus his vision to a reasonable run time, and I fear we'll see a repeat of BvS with JL. Some films I think deserve to be 3 hours if there's a great story to tell, but watching the three hour cut of BvS was one of the worst viewing experiences of my life. It's such a dull film jam-packed with scenes that go on and on that really amount to nothing. And then when the film needs to really focus and devote a lot of screen time to things, like the Batman and Superman fight, the sequences are over in five minutes. I've seldom watched a movie that gave me so much of what I hated and so little that I wanted.
Going into JL's editing I hope Snyder is learning his lesson and will make sure the film is paced far better than his past efforts. If it has to be longer than even BvS, I want the movie to deserve that extended time, and not waste it.
Caity Lotz is a sexy bad ass
Is that an Extended Extended Version? ;) I joke but it wouldn't surprise me.
It was reported that there is a four hour cut, hope it gets released I suspect it will at some point. There is even a petition to release it ;)
https://www.change.org/p/zack-snyder-release-the-4-hour-cut-of-batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice
Speaking of petitions...
Fanboys never cease to amaze me.
I made jokes long before it came out, saying how this thing was going to dominate at the box office, and how there was absolutely NO WAY you could bungle Batman and Superman fighting. Sure enough, I was proved wrong with the release of the film.
I thought the same with all that is involved with the production, all seems relatively plain sailing with Aquaman
@Seven_Point_Six_Five, sorry about the delay.
Yes, it's good! I'm rather a fan of the Swamp Thing and Constantine characters and although this movie has less of one than of the other, it's still a different film than your typical JLA and I applaud them for trying new things on a consistent basis.
I also don't support the notion that BvS is more complex or brainy than other superhero films. Everything about it that could've been taken it to a deeper level, is brushed away. Superman is blamed by parts of the world for what he did to Metropolis, but we never actually see him doing anything about it, or accepting his failures to learn how to do a better job; he just mopes around and wonders why people doesn't support him, not seeing that that's partly why. Bruce is trying to make sure his legacy means something, that all his crime fighting doesn't amount to nothing, but we never see why he feels that way, and on top of that his rationale for killing Superman and how he justifies the act makes him look like he has the intelligence of a potato (sorry to potatoes). Lex's daddy issues drive him to hate the perfect messiah, but the movie never actually strives to build him up in any interesting way and Eisenberg murders any attempts to make the character into anything other than groan-inducing and incessantly annoying. It's a movie that tries to look like it has enough substance to match some style, but at the end of the day it's the equivalent of a kid who copies and pastes random text into an essay to sound smart, but then fails to organize anything in a sensical manner.
Movies like Nolan's Batman films were smart, as are Winter Solider and Spider-Man 1 and 2, to name a few. Films that examine the myths and purpose of their heroes each in moments where they have existential crises that put everything they stand for into jeopardy and test them to rise above it all. Movies that use the characters as symbols of hope, and that explore the effect that people like them can have on society and their views on morality, justice, righteousness and more, as well as what danger they bring by doing the right things.
BvS isn't about any of that. Snyder talks big game but all he did was create one of the most soulless, hollow movies I've ever had the misfortune to sit in front of that wasted the greatest pieces of iconography in contemporary memory and produced a film that is the equivalent of a little boy smashing two action figures together over and over again until one's head pops off. It's like talking to a beautiful girl when you know there's nothing of substance upstairs. You can watch the Batman warehouse fight all you want, but there comes a time where you sit and think, "There's got to be more point to this. This movie has to amount to more than just things exploding and people punching each other." It's not, but it could have been.
There are several points which I happen to disagree with; you say we never see Superman doing anything since parts of the world blamed him for what happened, but what about the montage where he saves the little girl from that building on fire? What about the part where he rescues that space shuttle with the astronauts while the entire rocket exploded behind him. The reason we see Bruce presented this certain way is within the context of this specific incarnation of the character. Prior to the events of BvS, Bruce has been Batman for around 20 years, his entire rogues gallery is already established, he blames himself for the loss of Jason Todd to the Joker sometime before. He's the hard edged veteren who was pushed to his limit. The events in Metropolis made him realize that he has to do whatever he can to survive, espically with all the metahumans around, that's why we saw him presented as this cruel, unforgiving individual. I agree with you about Luthor. The part was entirely miscast, I think Billy Zane should have gotten it. I just wonder who thought casting Eisenberg was a good idea. On the whole, yes it is a flawed film, and you can say what you will about the movie, but it's really not as bad as you say it is.
As for Batman, I fully understand the arc they wanted to present as all the comics Snyder says he was inspired by (he wasn't) for this film are my bibles. The idea of an older and jaded Batman is an interesting one, but again, the presentation was all off. We never actually get Bruce confronting his demons, nor do we get a great enough sense of just why he went from a good man to a murderous and reckless bastard. Even just a small flashback would've given the massive character change some impact, but we don't even get that. We get just one shot of him looking at Robin's armor and we're suddenly supposed to give a shit about his plight, even when the film doesn't want to spend the time actually exploring who he is as a character or show us Jason's death live and how it broke him. It's just sloppy. I don't have a problem with Batman killing if the concept is explored in interesting ways, but Bruce never faces the consequences of his actions, nor does anybody fight him on why it's wrong (though he should realize it anyway). Even when he's supposedly returned to good (a moment we never actually experience with him) by Superman's influence, he still flies off and goes on to murder another two dozen men and nearly incinerates Ma Kent. He's such a tonally disturbed character, and nothing about him makes sense because even when he should change, he doesn't, and his motivations feel like they were written by a kindergartner.
His rationalizes to kill Superman because he thinks that someone like him who has even a 1% chance of harming someone should be killed to protect everyone else. Just this fundamental philosophy alone is logically and morally bankrupt, as everyone has a 1% chance of being dangerous, but we don't use that as an excuse to murder each other, do we? Bruce also seems to think that Superman is just acting all the time as he flies around helping people, as he somehow creates this vilified image of him in his head against all other evidence. For two years plus Superman doesn't cause anyone harm, but Bruce must know deep down in his puny head that he's close to doing something dangerous and must be stopped, with no logical argument to back it up. The sanctimonious nature of his pontificating about what's right and good is also pathetically hilarious coming from a man who brands people for murder, runs people over with his tank-car, smashes people's heads to jam with crates, and disembowels and/or vaporizes them with cannon fire and bat-napalm strikes. People can defend his bullshit killing all they want, but this isn't a Batman who kills because it's the merciless thing to do, nor does he try to do it as painlessly as possible (as he would if he had to do it). Instead he finds the most twisted and straight up horrific ways to end people's lives, using people in cars as makeshift battering rams to kill other guys, running over people with the front of his car and on, and on, and on. He's a nutcase.
Screenwriting 101 is all about showing character motivation and building these people as clearly and interestingly for audiences by showing them develop through presenting moments where we are shown, not told, why they are the way they are and to set the stage for their growth. For this and many more reasons, BvS is one of the worst culprits of bad screenwriting in recent memory.