Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice is simultaneously too much and not enough.  It is maddening and bombastic, while at the same time meandering and slow.  Yes, there is stuff to admire here, and the movie has been made with a great amount of care for the most part.  But what a turgid little enterprise this is.  During its two and a half hour running time, the movie starts out kind of smart and almost seems like it's going to be about something for a while.  Then it kind of slows itself to a crawl, and never really explores the ideas that the screenplay brings up.  Finally, it wraps up in an endless barrage of special effects and fight scenes that really just resembles the actors screaming as they fly at the camera, or smash into something, while explosions and fire rise up all around them.  This visual assault is accompanied by a screeching musical score provided by Hans Zimmer and "Junkie XL" that sounds like electric guitars crossed with a screaming choir.  I don't remember when I have disliked the final half hour of a movie more.

But let's take a look at the problem that lies at the root of this movie.  Though it has connections, this is not really intended as a sequel to 2013's Man of Steel.  Instead, this movie is supposed to usher in a series of films based around the D.C. Comics Universe.  Much like how Marvel kicked off their own Cinematic Universe with Iron Man back in 2008, with Samuel L. Jackson showing up at Robert Downey Jr's house, asking if he would like to join The Avengers, this movie is supposed to mark the beginning of a series of films, all connected by the different characters that make up the D.C. roster.  Yes, Batman v. Superman is only the tip of the iceberg, and this movie loves to remind us of that fact as much as possible.  Not only do we get to see these two comic book titans share the silver screen for the first time, but we are also introduced to Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), who barely registers as a cameo, but is getting her own movie Summer 2017.  We also get brief glimpses of characters who no doubt will get their own movies in the future, such as The Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg.  This is supposed to get us excited about the possibilities, but unless you read the comics or are familiar with these characters, I don't think these sequences are going to have the intended impact.

Let's compare how the two companies handled kicking off their Cinematic Universes based on a history of comics that have stretched back for decades.  Marvel's first effort focused solely on Tony Stark, aka Iron Man.  It was his movie, and it gave the audience plenty of time to get to know him and get behind him.  The scene between Downey and Jackson didn't happen till after the end credits.  It was a small little tease at the end that got the fans immediately talking and excited, especially when the film ended up being a smash, and talk of more movies became a reality.  Marvel then spent the following years easing audiences into their world.  Each movie introduced a new character such as Captain America or Thor, and each worked as a stand alone movie.  Sure, there were hints at something bigger to come, or sometimes a character from another movie would pop up in someone else's.  But the movies were smart enough not to try to throw too much at us at once.  By the time The Avengers came along in 2012, which threw everything the movies had been building up to into one big event, it felt like it had been earned.  We knew these characters, we had grown to love them, and we wanted to see how they would interact with one another.  It could be embraced both by those who have read the comics, and those who came to know these characters solely from the movies.

With Batman v. Superman, D.C. seems to have taken an "everything but the kitchen sink" approach.  They throw everything at us all at once, instead of gradually introducing us to the world and the superheroes and villains who inhabit it.  We have no connection to these people, because the movie is too busy setting up a bunch of movies to come.   When Superman and Batman meet each other for the first time, it should be an awesome moment that sends chills through the audience who have been waiting for this team up for decades.  Instead, it can best be described as a throw away scene.  Despite the title, the two heroes actually spend very little time on screen together.  Most of their time spent is during the last 45 minutes of the film.  They spend the first 15 minutes fighting each other, because the evil Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) has manipulated things so that they think they are enemies.  Then they resolve their differences through means that will likely have audiences either laughing, or shaking their heads in disbelief.  They then spend the last half hour fighting an unimpressive CG monster named Doomsday, who often comes across as a pile of mud taking humanoid form.  He shows up right that moment, just so the heroes will have someone to fight.  Wonder Woman shows up suddenly almost out of the blue, and that's when we get the nonstop screaming, snarling, explosions and grating music that drills into your skull. 

Is this really the best match up that director Zack Snyder and his screenwriters can come up with?  Think of the shared histories these historic characters have with one another in the comics.  Think of the plots you could dream up, or the adventures they could share together.  Instead, you hold off on the fateful meeting and save it for an unimpressive showdown.  So, what is the movie actually about, if it's not about these characters interacting with each other?  Well, it turns out that after the events of Man of Steel, the world is not sure what to think of Superman (played once again by Henry Cavill).  His battle with General Zod created untold mass destruction and casualties.  In one of the film's best scenes, we witness this battle through the eyes of Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), who was trying to save a friend who perished in an accident caused by the battle.  This is enough to put Batman and Superman on opposing sides, as Bruce/Batman fears the power that Superman holds, while Superman is bothered by reports he hears of a vigilante dishing out harsh justice to criminals, and even goes so far as to brand their skin with a bat symbol.  A better script would have built upon this, had them argue and debate about the way to dispense justice, and create some really compelling scenes and ideas off of this.

Instead, we have Lex Luthor pulling the strings behind the scenes.  As portrayed by Eisenberg, Lex is no longer the brilliant, manipulative, egotistical and powerful madman that we have known in countless comics, cartoons and movies.  He now is a twitchy little sprite with nervous tics who seems to suffer from a mental disorder, as evidenced by his bizarre and sometimes erratic behavior.  Lex Luthor is a lot of things, but he is not insane, which is how this movie sees him.  He has more in common with Jim Carrey's portrayal of The Riddler in Batman Forever than he does with any previous interpretation of the character we have seen before.  Some may see this as an interesting take, but I couldn't stand him, and I kind of groaned each time the movie went back to him.  His plan mainly revolves around turning the two heroes against each other so that they will destroy each other, and he can take over the world, I guess.  The movie's kind of vague on what he plans to do once the heroes kill each other.  He also gets his hands on technology from Krypton, and creates the Doomsday monster that the heroes fight during the climax.  I want to be clear, I do not think that Eisenberg is a bad actor, or could not play a successful megalomaniac.  I simply think he was following the wishes of the director, and that the movie made the wrong choices with the character.

You know, sitting back and thinking over the film, I don't really know who this movie is supposed to appeal to.  Those who want to see a lot of action will most likely be bored by how the movie drags its feet for a majority of its running time.  We get a lot of potentially interesting plot points, such as Superman going before Congress in order to defend his actions, that either have poor resolutions or no resolution whatsoever.  On the less interesting side of things, the movie wastes its time with some vague dream sequences/visions (which exist solely to tease other movies or future events), or a labored and unnecessary scene where Superman has a conversation with the ghost of his adoptive father (Kevin Costner, making a thankless cameo return from the last movie) that adds nothing while also dragging the movie down.  It's also not a movie for kids, as the film is far too glum, dire, dark and gloomy for them to enjoy.  There's very little humor and next to no joy to be found, so kids are probably going to be bored.  So, who's left?  I guess the faithful fans who read the comics.  They'll be able to pick out the references to the D.C. Universe, and will probably have fun explaining a good part of the movie to their friends, who will no doubt walk out confused. 

Batman v. Superman is not really what I could call unwatchable.  It even kind of works from time to time.  But the whole thing is a mess that never comes together in any way.  It's also one of those movies that doesn't know when to end.  After the final battle is done, we get three or four different scenes that should have been the moment when the movie cuts to the end credits, yet the movie just keeps on going.  It starts to resemble a party guest who doesn't want to leave, and stalls as much as they can.  The jury is still out on how the D.C. Cinematic Universe will unfold, but when it comes to launches, Marvel had the right idea by taking its time and letting us love the characters before all hell broke loose.

See the movie times in your area or buy the DVD at Amazon.com!

0 comments