REVIEW: BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE
It seems like people are always facing off in Zack Snyder films. With 300, it was the Spartans v. the Persians. With Watchmen it was a batch of old superheroes against the effects of time. With Man of Steel, he pitted Kal-El against the insanity of General Zod (though some could argue Michael Shannon didn't realize he was in a Superman movie and the cameras kept rolling). And with Batman v Superman, Snyder is dramatizing the ultimate battle: himself v. the source material v. the studios v. setting up a franchise v. fans' expectations v. making a coherent blockbuster (in March?!) that additionally serves as a sequel to Man of Steel v. establishing a new Batman. Oh and Wonder Woman's in it. And Lex Luthor. And Holly Hunter? Spoiler alert: I'm afraid Snyder lost this fight.
I was initially very disappointed walking out of the film, thinking of the things they could have cut, other heroes they could've introduced (how many times do we have to see Lex Luthor onscreen? How many times do we have to see Batman's parents get killed?). But after discussing it over with people and seeing different perspectives online, you can't not say that BvS lacks something that typically bad movies do: ambition. Even if it was stupid of execs to think that Snyder and his team could juggle ten bowling balls in the air so to speak, it certainly makes choices (not counting the last cop-out at the very end.) We're getting a different Batman here. He's reclusive like Bale's incarnation, but he's bitter. He's depressed. He's been here a long time, and he's got Joker-graffitied suits to prove it (Look for it!). His Alfred (Jeremy Irons) is a little more upgraded: the old butler's fairly high tech. In a clever move that visually still turned out way too 9/11 for me, Bruce Wayne sees the destruction Superman's fight with Zod wreaked, and views him as an alien threat. Clark Kent sees Batman as an impending threat. Lex Luthor Jr. (yeah, he's his son) sees ample opportunity to do damage.
So how does The Avengers franchise handle their superheroes so well and this film seem so bloated? Not only is is almost 10 minutes shorter, but you had Iron Man, Cap and Thor stand-alones before you had the 2012 film. We had Cavill's turn in Man of Steel, and now one movie has to have all this weight on its shoulders? It's unfair. With what we're giving though, I would not call Batman v. Superman a disaster. It does the opposite of Spider-Man 3, which in this case is not a good thing. It crams its running time with too many heroes, and one and a half (but Doomsday is a big half) villains.
Speaking of which: Lex Jr. There's been much talk about Jesse Eisenberg's portrayal of yet another billionaire genius, this one highly more unstable. If people hate him, I understand. He was flittering around all the time, annoying, and his more menacing parts, like when he's intimidating Holly Hunter's Sen. Finch, come out as a little boy puffing out his chest to be a big man. However, I've talked to people who think this portrayal was phenomenal, that Eisenberg played up that psychopath persona, that he had the best dialogue and that the character was meant to frustrate and infuriate. Plus, this isn't Lex Luthor. This is his son. So I'm still on the fence about him, and another viewing a year or two down the road might make me see the light on Luthor. For now, I can concretely say one thing: he annoyed me.
In fact, several things did. Why so many dream sequences? One was explained to me, something that I can't put in a spoiler-free review, but it linked up to something later in the plot. Otherwise, they seemed like visually-appealing jump scares: one worked particularly well because it shocked me out of my hazy almost-sleeping state. But I was awake and aware just in time to see the excellent Batman fight that everyone highlights as one of the strongest points of the film (it's true), and Wonder Woman's entrance into the boy's club is pretty stunning. I have a feeling Gal Gadot and her upcoming stand-alone will continue to blow everyone away. As far as Snyder goes, he's still got two parts of a Justice League movie to film. If Dawn of Justice is any indication, I'm a little worried how he's going to handle even more heroes, and if he's going to have to need an intermission for either of them.
Rating: 2/4 stars
I was initially very disappointed walking out of the film, thinking of the things they could have cut, other heroes they could've introduced (how many times do we have to see Lex Luthor onscreen? How many times do we have to see Batman's parents get killed?). But after discussing it over with people and seeing different perspectives online, you can't not say that BvS lacks something that typically bad movies do: ambition. Even if it was stupid of execs to think that Snyder and his team could juggle ten bowling balls in the air so to speak, it certainly makes choices (not counting the last cop-out at the very end.) We're getting a different Batman here. He's reclusive like Bale's incarnation, but he's bitter. He's depressed. He's been here a long time, and he's got Joker-graffitied suits to prove it (Look for it!). His Alfred (Jeremy Irons) is a little more upgraded: the old butler's fairly high tech. In a clever move that visually still turned out way too 9/11 for me, Bruce Wayne sees the destruction Superman's fight with Zod wreaked, and views him as an alien threat. Clark Kent sees Batman as an impending threat. Lex Luthor Jr. (yeah, he's his son) sees ample opportunity to do damage.So how does The Avengers franchise handle their superheroes so well and this film seem so bloated? Not only is is almost 10 minutes shorter, but you had Iron Man, Cap and Thor stand-alones before you had the 2012 film. We had Cavill's turn in Man of Steel, and now one movie has to have all this weight on its shoulders? It's unfair. With what we're giving though, I would not call Batman v. Superman a disaster. It does the opposite of Spider-Man 3, which in this case is not a good thing. It crams its running time with too many heroes, and one and a half (but Doomsday is a big half) villains.
Speaking of which: Lex Jr. There's been much talk about Jesse Eisenberg's portrayal of yet another billionaire genius, this one highly more unstable. If people hate him, I understand. He was flittering around all the time, annoying, and his more menacing parts, like when he's intimidating Holly Hunter's Sen. Finch, come out as a little boy puffing out his chest to be a big man. However, I've talked to people who think this portrayal was phenomenal, that Eisenberg played up that psychopath persona, that he had the best dialogue and that the character was meant to frustrate and infuriate. Plus, this isn't Lex Luthor. This is his son. So I'm still on the fence about him, and another viewing a year or two down the road might make me see the light on Luthor. For now, I can concretely say one thing: he annoyed me.In fact, several things did. Why so many dream sequences? One was explained to me, something that I can't put in a spoiler-free review, but it linked up to something later in the plot. Otherwise, they seemed like visually-appealing jump scares: one worked particularly well because it shocked me out of my hazy almost-sleeping state. But I was awake and aware just in time to see the excellent Batman fight that everyone highlights as one of the strongest points of the film (it's true), and Wonder Woman's entrance into the boy's club is pretty stunning. I have a feeling Gal Gadot and her upcoming stand-alone will continue to blow everyone away. As far as Snyder goes, he's still got two parts of a Justice League movie to film. If Dawn of Justice is any indication, I'm a little worried how he's going to handle even more heroes, and if he's going to have to need an intermission for either of them.
Rating: 2/4 stars
Comments
Post a Comment