Skip to main content

Warning: Batman v. Superman May Cause Severe Disappointment


          In a few months time Captain America: Civil War promises to pit two superheroes against each other. The stakes are huge, in part because the Marvel Cinematic Universe has built up well the characters of Captain America and Iron Man and their relationship with each other, but also because their conflict is directly related to their opposing principles. No doubt if Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice applied either of these, it would be a much stronger film.
          Batman v. Superman was one of the most hyped films of 2016 for good reason. Seeing the two most famous superheroes in pop culture battle each other is not something to be missed. But the movie itself doesn’t quite understand that, and by biting off more than it can chew, it fails to satisfy its most important demographic.
          After the events of Man of Steel, Superman (Henry Cavill) is seen by some as a godlike hero and by others as an omnipotent menace for the tantamount destruction he caused the city of Metropolis in the former film’s climax. When he controversially rescues Lois Lane (Amy Adams) from a hostage situation in the Middle East, he is called to answer for his actions. Meanwhile in Gotham City, a hardened and cynical Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) distrusts Superman whom he holds accountable for the deaths of many innocent civilians. When Kryptonite is found by people working for Lex Luthor (Jesse Eiseneberg), Wayne as Batman intends to steal it and use it against the Man of Steel.
          The performances in this film is good for the most part. Cavill once again does a good job as Superman; returning cast-members Laurence Fishburne, Diane Lane, and Amy Adams are okay (though Lois still suffers from an absence of interesting personality). As for the new additions, Ben Affleck is fine as Batman. He plays the character very differently to what most of us are used to, but he physically suits the role and is fairly believable. Jeremy Irons is perfect as Alfred, an ideal middle ground between Michael Gough and Michael Caine. And despite everything, Gal Gadot is really good as Wonder Woman. She’s not developed much which is fine (she has her own movie coming up for that), but I thought she did a great job. Many of the action sequences were also really well done and creative.
          But when it comes to the plot, this film is very messy. It opens with another retread of Batman’s origin story which isn’t necessary, and from there on we bounce back between Batman, Superman, and Lex Luthor. And the one exception to the good casting is Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor. Lex Luthor has often been portrayed as an interesting adversary to Superman, a business magnate with aspirations for world domination, but Eisenberg plays him as a genius psychotic more akin to say the Riddler which really doesn’t work. And he never feels natural in any of his scenes. Every time we shift to him the plot becomes less focussed and a little convoluted with everything that’s going on. This film’s priority needs to be on the title face off between its two titans.
          But the biggest crime of the film is regarding the ultimate fight. Suffice it to say, it’s not what was promised. It’s much shorter than we were led to believe, but also the provocation and motivation driving each hero is completely undermined by another character and plot development. Wonder Woman gets involved and it quickly becomes less Batman v. Superman and much more Dawn of Justice. Which is annoying because it feels like a disservice to the characters as well as the potential the idea that Batman v. Superman has. While the story direction was very haphazard throughout, there was still a sense it was building to something, and you can’t help but feel gypped when it fails to deliver.
          There’s also a Batman dream sequence that makes no sense, and the film proves a timely Easter release as the Christ symbolism that was already overdone in Man of Steel is played up even more here, especially by films’ end. The script is full of gimmicky lines about Batman and Superman being together or fighting which are really cringeworthy.
         Though not necessarily an awful movie, for a film called Batman v. Superman, it’s far too underwhelming. I feel like it’s trying to be an Avengers or Dark Knight calibre film without having earned it. In the end, it’s intentions to build the universe and set up future films gets in the way of its own plot and it feels like just a pointless bridge for other movies and characters to spin off from. And I’d have more faith in those future projects if DC devoted half the time to crafting better coherent stories that it does trying to catch up with Marvel.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing
Post a Comment
Read more

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv
Post a Comment
Read more

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day
1 comment
Read more