Just got home from the theatre. The movie is not that bad. Not sure we needed to retell the Bruce Wayne backstory, that is one that seems to be pretty universally known, could have saved that 30 minutes or so to add a little more dialog between Supes and Batty. The build up to get them to fight each other was pretty well crafted, the turn to friendship was an obvious after thought, either bad writing or bad editing, that moment was bad.


Eisenberg as Luthor was..... Different. Not the super genius hell bent on money and power, but more of a spoiled brat who doesn't like anyone else to be treated as a God.


I never thought I would say these words... Ben Affleck as Batman... BRAVO!


Nice lead up to a Justice League franchise. Hope to see Henry Cavill continue his pursuit of truth justice and the American way.


JMHO.

---

Signature goes here.

Saw it yesterday as well and really enjoyed it. I thought it started a bit slow, but understand why at movies conclusion. 

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Finally saw it last night, I guess my problem is the dark knight trilogy sets the bar to high for anything batman related now. Ben Affleck did a good job as batman but it just didn't feel as "real" as the dark knight trilogy's.

---

Finally saw it last night, I guess my problem is the dark knight trilogy sets the bar to high for anything batman related now. Ben Affleck did a good job as batman but it just didn't feel as "real" as the dark knight trilogy's.

 

That's a very fair observation but there's a reason for that that (I think) goes beyond the individual performances of the respective actors.


Batfleck is supposed to be an older, surlier Batman, having been fundamentally scarred by the death of the second Robin (ala A Death in the Family graphic novel). By rights, Batfleck is somewhere in the neighborhood of 5-10 years older than Bale's Dark Knight. You also have the prevalence of other powerful metahumans in BvS which DKT didn't have (by design). At least that's how it comes across to me...

 

I will say this, Batfleck's combat sequences are/were the best they've ever manage to capture on screen (that isn't animated). That fight sequences in the warehouse with the mooks was the first time I've ever really felt like I was watching Batman fight.

---

<i>Behold man's final mad disgrace.</i>

<i>He chops his nose to spite his face.</i>

 

-Etrigan the Demon

 

This movie was not very good.

---

That's a very fair observation but there's a reason for that that (I think) goes beyond the individual performances of the respective actors.

Batfleck is supposed to be an older, surlier Batman, having been fundamentally scarred by the death of the second Robin (ala A Death in the Family graphic novel). By rights, Batfleck is somewhere in the neighborhood of 5-10 years older than Bale's Dark Knight. You also have the prevalence of other powerful metahumans in BvS which DKT didn't have (by design). At least that's how it comes across to me...


I will say this, Batfleck's combat sequences are/were the best they've ever manage to capture on screen (that isn't animated). That fight sequences in the warehouse with the mooks was the first time I've ever really felt like I was watching Batman fight.

I think it's the metahumans that has me turned off, it just feels cartoonish like most of marvel. What I liked about the dark Knight was its grounding in reality or at least what felt like it.

---

I think it's the metahumans that has me turned off, it just feels cartoonish like most of marvel. What I liked about the dark Knight was its grounding in reality or at least what felt like it.

And that's understandable. What's great to me is the depiction of a realistic result if these people existed. You have the paranoid, determined batman who's not going to take any chances, as well as Lex who feels usurped from his place. Not to mention the everymans reaction.

---

"Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other." Galatians 5:26

2015 NFL Draft - Analyzing Targets www.jungle.jaguars.com/index.php?/topic/7892-2015-nfl-draft-analyzing-targets/

I think it's the metahumans that has me turned off, it just feels cartoonish like most of marvel. What I liked about the dark Knight was its grounding in reality or at least what felt like it.

I think that is what makes it feel true. The stuff is from comics and cartoons. I don't think reality has anything to do with Marvel or DC, and rightfully so.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

I can't reconcile folks raving about how great Luthor was in this flick, while he looks so inept and miscast in the commercials.

 

Guess I'll have to rent it.

 

Some didn't care for Hackman's version, but IMO his charisma made for a great portrayal, and how opposite he was from Reeve's Superman.  Spacey was a letdown, probably mostly because he seemed so perfect on the casting list.  That, and the movie as a whole was so bad.

I hated Hackman's portrayal of Luthor.  Lex is not a character that is funny and one to surround himself with dimwits.  I still don't think Lex has been portrayed correctly in any of the live action films even this one.  Michael Rossenbaum's Lex was the best portrayal I've seen of Lex in the Smallville series. 

 

With that said I loved the movie.  I love that the took pieces from various story arcs in this movie from Doomsday and The Dark Knight Returns and it looks as though parts from Flashpoint Paradox are included as well.  DC is gearing more towards their fans than trying to please all the crowds and I don't mind that one bit. 

---

<!-- isHtml:1 --><!-- isHtml:1 -->;

;

I hated Hackman's portrayal of Luthor.  Lex is not a character that is funny and one to surround himself with dimwits.  I still don't think Lex has been portrayed correctly in any of the live action films even this one.  Michael Rossenbaum's Lex was the best portrayal I've seen of Lex in the Smallville series. 

 

With that said I loved the movie.  I love that the took pieces from various story arcs in this movie from Doomsday and The Dark Knight Returns and it looks as though parts from Flashpoint Paradox are included as well.  DC is gearing more towards their fans than trying to please all the crowds and I don't mind that one bit. 

 

I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of Luthor. Eisenberg's Luthor was arguably my least favorite thing about this movie but it wasn't his fault. Had his character been more controlled and not impending on a psychotic break, I might have actually liked him...even in spite of the age disparity. I always got the sense that Lex was, relatively speaking, slightly older than Clark Kent in the comics.

 

I'm going to dissent slightly with your second point. I think where a lot of comic book movies trip themselves up comes from trying to amalgamate too many divergent storylines into one 2-hour movie without sufficient build up/explanation. All it does, as in this case, is end up confusing and/or boring Joe Average and pissing off the fans when it's done poorly (see: X3). Doomsday inclusion at the end as a glorified jobber did him a disservice (and don't get it twisted, I HATE Doomsday as a character concept).

 

I will say this, if done properly, the next movie should be more humorous (since critics panned BvS because it wasn't funny) than this one IF Darkseid is the main antagonist. Darkseid himself is NOT funny in any way, shape nor form..although someone eating an Omega Sanction is always a good time. His minions, however, are hilarious. Granny Goodness alone could be worth the price of admission. Too bad we're seemingly stuck with boring Barry Allen (gotta rep the Silver Age...still...after all these years) as the Flash...

---

<i>Behold man's final mad disgrace.</i>

<i>He chops his nose to spite his face.</i>

 

-Etrigan the Demon

 

I think that is what makes it feel true. The stuff is from comics and cartoons. I don't think reality has anything to do with Marvel or DC, and rightfully so.

 

This.

---

80% of what I talk about is nonesense.. the other 25% is made up statistics...


 

I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of Luthor. Eisenberg's Luthor was arguably my least favorite thing about this movie but it wasn't his fault. Had his character been more controlled and not impending on a psychotic break, I might have actually liked him...even in spite of the age disparity. I always got the sense that Lex was, relatively speaking, slightly older than Clark Kent in the comics.

 

I'm going to dissent slightly with your second point. I think where a lot of comic book movies trip themselves up comes from trying to amalgamate too many divergent storylines into one 2-hour movie without sufficient build up/explanation. All it does, as in this case, is end up confusing and/or boring Joe Average and [BAD WORD REMOVED] off the fans when it's done poorly (see: X3). Doomsday inclusion at the end as a glorified jobber did him a disservice (and don't get it twisted, I HATE Doomsday as a character concept).

 

I will say this, if done properly, the next movie should be more humorous (since critics panned BvS because it wasn't funny) than this one IF Darkseid is the main antagonist. Darkseid himself is NOT funny in any way, shape nor form..although someone eating an Omega Sanction is always a good time. His minions, however, are hilarious. Granny Goodness alone could be worth the price of admission. Too bad we're seemingly stuck with boring Barry Allen (gotta rep the Silver Age...still...after all these years) as the Flash...

God I hope they do Darkseid well and don't make him look like a power rangers bad guy as it looks like X-Men is doing with Apocalypse.

---

<!-- isHtml:1 --><!-- isHtml:1 -->;

;

Aside from Batman, DC simply doesn't have as quality source material as Marvel, which makes their job so much tougher.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

I finally saw the movie today. It was better than I thought due to so many negative reviews, but not near as good as it could have been.


I think Affleck did a great job of portraying a jaded and perhaps worn down Batman/Bruce Wayne. Superman was too emo, too dark but I think Cavil does him well. Gadot did well with what she was given. I was not sold on her as Wonder Woman until I saw her in action. Eisenberg's Lex Luthor was not the right age nor was he written as he should have been. I kept thinking of the Joker and Riddler when he was on screen.


Overall I'm glad I saw it at the theater but will not buy the DVD.

---

God I hope they do Darkseid well and don't make him look like a power rangers bad guy as it looks like X-Men is doing with Apocalypse.

 

I don't think Apocalypse looks that bad but I still laughed. The most irritating thing for me (as a HUGE X-Men fan) thus far is the choices made for his Horsemen. Only two of the four presented were ever actually Horsemen and the other two have always staunchly opposed everything Apocalypse has ever tried to do. That's up there with Cyclops teaming up with Mr. Sinister and Storm willingly agree to marry the Shadow King.  :yucky:

 

Aside from Batman, DC simply doesn't have as quality source material as Marvel, which makes their job so much tougher.

 

That's something of a misconception. DC has amazing source material but a good bit of it lied within their Vertigo imprint or it lies outside the scope of the main/powerhouse characters (The Helena Bertinelli Huntress, The Vic Sage Question, Barbara Gordon as Oracle instead of Batgirl/Birds of Prey, any incarnation of The Spectre and Black Adam...just to name a few). Sandman, just to give you one example, was absolutely amazing. The mainstream/major characters are definitely iconic and there's depth to all of them, however they also tend to wallow in their own idealisms and in many cases end up being cliches (especially Silver Age Superman) even though that's not necessarily the original intent. 

 

I finally saw the movie today. It was better than I thought due to so many negative reviews, but not near as good as it could have been.


I think Affleck did a great job of portraying a jaded and perhaps worn down Batman/Bruce Wayne. Superman was too emo, too dark but I think Cavil does him well. Gadot did well with what she was given. I was not sold on her as Wonder Woman until I saw her in action. Eisenberg's Lex Luthor was not the right age nor was he written as he should have been. I kept thinking of the Joker and Riddler when he was on screen.


Overall I'm glad I saw it at the theater but will not buy the DVD.

 

Definitely.

 

I have to comment again on your second paragraph though, and I can't stress this enough to the casual fan, it's not Henry Cavill's fault that the modern/New 52 Superman is a world-destroying powerhouse trapped in an emo shell. That's how he was written in the comics since the most recent, complete reboot (yet another one is currently underway). DC, in their infinite wisdom (/sarcasm), decided to de-age the characters and alter their personalities to make them seem fresher and more appealing to the general public (a la Marvel). DC is where you generally go for idealism in character. Marvel is where you go for realism. And, in this humble fan's estimation, DC fell flat on its face trying to bullrush it's way into Marvel's wheelhouse (in the most Andre Branch fashion, might I add).

 

I'm also glad someone else saw what I saw in relation to Gadot's Wonder Woman. I was like "ehhh...I don't know. She's hot and all but..." until she started throwing hands then I was like "That's my girl!"

---

<i>Behold man's final mad disgrace.</i>

<i>He chops his nose to spite his face.</i>

 

-Etrigan the Demon

 

 

I have to comment again on your second paragraph though, and I can't stress this enough to the casual fan, it's not Henry Cavill's fault that the modern/New 52 Superman is a world-destroying powerhouse trapped in an emo shell. That's how he was written in the comics since the most recent, complete reboot (yet another one is currently underway). DC, in their infinite wisdom (/sarcasm), decided to de-age the characters and alter their personalities to make them seem fresher and more appealing to the general public (a la Marvel). DC is where you generally go for idealism in character. Marvel is where you go for realism. And, in this humble fan's estimation, DC fell flat on its face trying to bullrush it's way into Marvel's wheelhouse (in the most Andre Branch fashion, might I add).

 

I'm also glad someone else saw what I saw in relation to Gadot's Wonder Woman. I was like "ehhh...I don't know. She's hot and all but..." until she started throwing hands then I was like "That's my girl!"

IMHO this is where they are screwing up the most and why poor decisions are being made. That, and rewriting character personalities. I liked Superman in MoS other than the city-destroying hot mess at the end. I liked how he really didn't want to kill Zod but realized he would have to or Zod would kill everyone he could get his hands on. In BvS he was fit to be tied and there wasn't a real explanation as to why. Or if there was it was subtle and I'm on pain meds due to shoulder surgery so I missed it. 

 

Overall there was way too much going on in this movie trying to cram into it 2 new superheroes, several plotlines and who knows what else, and the story and characters suffered for it. I'm not a DC vs Marvel kind of person. Give me a good movie and I don't care where it comes from, but Marvel is winning this. Other than the Dark Knight Trilogy, which I love, and MoS which had it's issues but I liked it anyway, DC has done little to impress. I hope someone gets a clue and the following movies are better executed.

---

IMHO this is where they are screwing up the most and why poor decisions are being made. That, and rewriting character personalities. I liked Superman in MoS other than the city-destroying hot mess at the end. I liked how he really didn't want to kill Zod but realized he would have to or Zod would kill everyone he could get his hands on. In BvS he was fit to be tied and there wasn't a real explanation as to why. Or if there was it was subtle and I'm on pain meds due to shoulder surgery so I missed it. 

 

Overall there was way too much going on in this movie trying to cram into it 2 new superheroes, several plotlines and who knows what else, and the story and characters suffered for it. I'm not a DC vs Marvel kind of person. Give me a good movie and I don't care where it comes from, but Marvel is winning this. Other than the Dark Knight Trilogy, which I love, and MoS which had it's issues but I liked it anyway, DC has done little to impress. I hope someone gets a clue and the following movies are better executed.

 

Well put, my dear.

 

I think the one thing everyone can agree on is that Marvel is curb-stomping DC on the big screen but that's DC's own fault.

 

For one, they have proven themselves utterly incapable of giving us a quality movie that isn't centered on Batman. They're falling into the same trap Marvel did in the 90s with Wolverine. Part of that is the massive appeal of Batman as a character and icon, but an equally massive part is they seem to get people writing these other characters that don't have a clue what they're doing. Take Green Lantern, for example, that movie was a travesty and single-handedly slaughtered the reputation of one of DCs most iconic heroes outside of the Big Three. Who green lit this? What kind of dirt did they have on Geoff Johns to get him to sign off on that hot mess? Like you, I liked Man of Steel, but I have a huge man-crush on Henry Cavill and he's definitely made as much as he could out of what he was given.

 

DC's single biggest failing is not trusting in their (other) characters to hold up...so they keep tinkering with who they are fundamentally and that almost never works as we've seen. Honestly, I was infinitely more excited about the rumored Justice League Dark movie than I was BvS. DC punishes Marvel when it comes to telling a good supernaturally-inclined story in the comics and it isn't even remotely close (see Vertigo) but I think that's been tabled (again) since Guillermo del Toro backed out of directing it.

---

<i>Behold man's final mad disgrace.</i>

<i>He chops his nose to spite his face.</i>

 

-Etrigan the Demon

 

Like you, I liked Man of Steel, but I have a huge man-crush on Henry Cavill and he's definitely made as much as he could out of what he was given.

 

 

I loved Henry Cavill in The Tudors so I wasn't sure what to expect when it came to Superman but IMO he knocked it out of the park in MoS. In fact, I came home from BvS and watched MoS again just to get the somewhat bad taste out of my mouth of how he was portrayed in BvS. 

 

Oh, and I also think he's hot. Like- HAWT. For a Brit. Hahaha. My husband has a man crush on Chris Evans/Captain America. He's my favorite character in that 'verse but I like them with dark hair and brown eyes. The only thing about Henry I don't "like" per se is his blue eyes but I'll get over it.  

---

That's something of a misconception. DC has amazing source material but a good bit of it lied within their Vertigo imprint or it lies outside the scope of the main/powerhouse characters (The Helena Bertinelli Huntress, The Vic Sage Question, Barbara Gordon as Oracle instead of Batgirl/Birds of Prey, any incarnation of The Spectre and Black Adam...just to name a few). Sandman, just to give you one example, was absolutely amazing. The mainstream/major characters are definitely iconic and there's depth to all of them, however they also tend to wallow in their own idealisms and in many cases end up being cliches (especially Silver Age Superman) even though that's not necessarily the original intent. 

 

I go back to their conceptions, their core.  The original source, not modern inventions/reinventions and offshoots.  Stan Lee took the entire genre to a different level in the 60s, which DC also benefited from after owning the 50s themselves.

 

DC heroes were born idealistic and rigid. Something readers would aspire to be like, but were not like.  What people connected to with Marvel is that while their heroes also had powers like DC, they were also as flawed and had a human side much like the reader.  I also believe that's why Batman was so accessible and more easily able to break from the idealism of the early DC icons and be extremely human compared to his DC peers.  You can also see that in all the Bat-spinoffs it created.  DC just has the feel of spinoffs instead of the uniquely different characters born from Marvel in the 60s.  And the ones that are uniquely different don't feel to be as strong standing on their own.

 

I'll say when I was young, I liked DC more, but as I've grown older I've been able to appreciate Marvel's depth more.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."