When it comes to Batman using guns because he "lost his way" I think Batman Beyond showed perfectly that when Batman reached the physical point that he had to use a gun to win a fight, he quit being Batman and never went back to it.
Yes, but you and most fans that have never seen the earliest Batman comics seem to not realize is that the “no guns” rule was a later addition to the character. In fact Batman carried a gun, used it, and I believe killed in the early stories. So it’s not this unknown, never before done thing.
So in his perspective an alien is invading and endangering earth. And you think that the ideal "Batman" like thing to do is just go "oh shit I had to use a gun, I should quit and let this threat kill people because of it"? You really have a narrow view of what Batman is
@@olamideawe1553 That was the dumbest video I've ever seen. I feel like I lost IQ points just for watching it. Nowhere in that trash upload does it explain why Superman would nearly KILL the ONE person who he needs to save his mother, OR explain why he ACTUALLY TELLS BRUCE TO "SAVE MARTHA", EVEN THOUGH HE KNOWS BRUCE HAS NO GODDAMN CLUE WHO THE HELL THAT EVEN IS!
The other problem with this movie that I've rarely seen people talk about that's far more egregious is the general public's perception of these characters. This movie, for a lot of people, was likely their first real exposure to Batman as a character, and with Batman's character being as flawed and un-Batman as it was, it's going to lead to those people having misconceptions about the character further down the line. One reason the Marvel movies worked so well is that, despite the stories they come up with being mostly their own and having only a loose basis on the source material, the characters themselves are accurate to the ones we see on the page. They have ALL the qualities that people loved them in the comics for, just dropped into a unique story that fits a movie screen. THAT'S how you adapt these characters. DC is more complex because of all the continuity retcons and the innumerable individual stories, but Batman and Superman have been around since before WW2 kicked off, and despite the different versions of them that exist, there is a wider consensus about who they are in the main continuity and how they're supposed to be and act. Snyder's movies are almost frankenstein in nature with how they mesh different plots with different versions of the characters that don't necessarily fit the chosen story, and naturally the result was a fucking mess.
I don't see how an attentive normie audience would have misconceptions regarding Batman with BvS as their first exposure to the caped crusader considering this film has made it clear that Batman has fallen.
I honestly can't believe that it's already been 6 freaking years since Batman v. Superman came out in theaters. I mean, I know this saying is used a lot, but good mother of Lord, time flies fast.
Anyways, as for the video, what this guy said about Batman in this movie, it all perfectly sums up why I didn't like Ben Affleck as the character. The characterization was just completely off and didn't sit right with me.
The biggest problem with this movie is that it's trying too hard to be "dark" and "serious" and "adult", to the point where everyone just becomes the Punisher in a different costume
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ bruh it's not perfect. I liked the movie but it has issues. You're not changing anyone's mind by attacking them. It's inaccurate just cause you disagree with it.
I was literally about to compare this film's Lex Luthor to Batman Forever's Riddler when Vee said it. It's not the actor doing a bad job of portraying a character, it's the writers writing a character that is fundamentally different from the source material. Jesse Eisenberg and Jim Carrey portrayed the role they were given well, but the role was sh*t and flat out wrong in the first place. It's like blaming a cook for bad food when they're given nothing but spoiled ingredients to work with.
Look, Eisenberg’s portrayal of Lex is totally justified in the movie when it’s revealed he suffered years of abuse st hands of his own father, thus becoming a sociopathic individual (the Lex from the classic comics and the Gene Hackman/Kevin Spacey was “I wanna be rich” but this one is a much mentally ill villain)
@@charlespuruncajas9663 I wasn't criticizing Jesse Eisenberg himself, because I feel like he handled his role well. The problem is that this version of Lex Luthor wasn't written to act like Lex Luthor, he was written to act like the Riddler with f*ck you money. And I don't care that he suffered abuse, or rather I don't see it as a valid excuse for these changes, because there are other versions/retcons of Lex Luthor that have endured that same trauma, but they didn't turn out like a completely different person. My issue isn't that Jesse Eisenberg was a bad Lex Luthor, it was that he played a character that fundamentally wasn't Lex Luthor, and that wasn't his fault, it was the writing and probably directing. I agree that the "I want money" motive for lex just doesn't work anymore, but there have been MANY versions of Lex that have better reasons for picking a fight with Superman, and literally all of those versions are better because they still act like Lex Luthor.
Honestly there are nuggets of brilliance within the idea behind this Lex Luther but Snyder had to put in too many Snyder-isms. Honestly I feel like if you put two specific scenes of Eisenberg’s Lex together you’d have a brilliant Lex, those being his introduction where he’s playing Basketball and his office scene. Having Lex be the type of billionaire who acts like an Everyman cool boss that lets his workers chill out and shoot some hoops with him but behind closed doors he’s a sophisticated and deadly serious man who uses that nice cool and chill guy persona to manipulate the public perception of him to be more favourable would’ve been interesting
To me, Ben Affleck as Batman salvaged some of this movie for me. I liked his portrayal (his initial issues with Superman not with standing).I definitely liked his action sequences, the Warehouse scene being one of them in particular.
You mean the issues with superman killing people while he was the one killing people or you mean the warehouse scene where he killed a bunch of people ? Two things batman would never do ?
@@tehronmoment1367 this version of Batman has been Batman for 20 years and has been through a lot Because of that he has started to loose his way and starts killing people In the Martha scene he realizes that he has become the murderer that killed his parents. By the end of the movie he stops killing and redeems himself. Batman is a villain of most of BvS.
@@nickhutcheson8580 it's not used as an excuse. We never had a comic book a accurate Batman on the big screen. We probably never will. Let's see what Matt Reeves bring to the table.
My biggest problems that were not covered here were two things. 1 Wonder Womans first movie appearance was in a movie without her name on it. One of the big three's first appearance, and she wasn't credited. Disrespectful. 2 How did Lex Know the superhero symbols for the other Justice League members? Or did they look at the symbols and thought, "Sure he may be a homicidal maniac, but the man can design."
The worse part of this movie is like you said how they "killed death". They basically showed us that Superman is unkillable. It is impossible to tease his death now. He can no longer be in that dangerous life or death situation anymore.
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ killing off a character is pointless you want to bring characters back to life cause money it defeats the purpose of killing a character cause only you know comics get away bruh the death of superman inst even emotional he died cause he can't beat a monster not much emotions
@@yarc9 It is emotional because he chose to sacrifice himself for a world that rejected him. That's the point of the death. And in that way his thematic rebirth into the hero the world needs parallels with his literal rebirth
It’s crazy how characters like vision dying holds more weight than Superman. Death of Superman is iconic and should’ve been an insane movie. I couldn’t believe they did it this soon. I feel like DCs problem is like well you already know Superman is important and a good guy. we don’t have to make 5 movies with him. Be sad
Snyder blew his load using multiple key source material comics in just a few movies (Death of Superman, Dark Knight Returns, I'm sure I'm forgetting some because I hate how WB has treated these characters and haven't watched any of the movies twice.)
@@jbbrolic same. I thought the Snyder cut of justice league wasn’t bad though I enjoyed it. Just long as hell. But still not the characters I know and love but it was better
Vision dying is heartbreaking because of Wanda. Seeing her have to kill the love of her life and him just sitting their in pain but telling her to keep doing it whilst she is crying her eyes out is hard to watch, it’s made harder when you see Vision come back being robbed of a death on his own terms and having to see Wanda watch her boyfriend/soon to be husband, get his head caved in
Why this film wasn’t just a live action version of their worlds finest meeting in the animated universe I’ll never know... Just with regards to the Martha moment the aspect of it I always had the biggest issue is that Superman said “Martha” instead of “mother”, it’s still not a well executed moment regardless but that at least would have made it slightly more coherent
I feel like the "Martha" moment carries more weight than if he would've said "mother", because if he did, Batman wouldn't dare save an alien's mother, till he realizes Superman has a human mother too.
Superman: "Save my mom" Batman: (Who earlier showed he have no care about Superman or do not want to listen to him) * stab * Him saying "mother" would make less sense.
The movie was shot here in Michigan and they put out a casting call for extras so I was able to actually be in this. I was one of the paparazzi guys who photographed Bruce Wayne when he stepped out of the sports car when going to the Lex Luthor party. I have to say that it was amazing being on set and I think in that particular scene, the lex party, there was suppose to be a big shootout or fight scene because a lot of "lexcorp security" extras were being used and those guys mentioned that they were being used in a fight from what I recall. I was a bit disappointed when I initially saw it, but I think there are things that were left on the cutting room floor. Maybe it could've been better.
The worst thing about Snyder's DC films is the fanbase. Edgelords who think a non self aware version of Michael Bay is some brilliant filmmaking genius with some of the crazier ones unironically calling Snyder a god. They think a film having a dark tone automatically equals good even if it doesn't fit the story of the characters, they're conspiracy theorists who think Disney had Snyder's daughter assassinated and made it look like a suicide and according to them not liking his films is somehow laughing at his daughter's death. Their hilarious insistence that Snyder's shallow films are "deep works of art" and saying anyone who doesn't like them supposedly doesn't understand them is pathetic.
@@StopCallingMeShirley1180 he produced it with Deborah Snyder I think, or at least he did for Man of Steel and ZSJL. It's more about agreeing with a stupid decision rather than him taking the full blame, David S. Goyer is inconsistent af as a writer and usually goes too dumb, loud and blockbuster-like. While Chris Terrio is talented but gets paired a lot with people that kill the indie vibe (Goyer, J. J. Abrams and Snyder himself).
@@StopCallingMeShirley1180 he produced it with Deborah Snyder I think, or at least he did for Man of Steel and ZSJL. It's more about agreeing with a stupid decision rather than him taking the full blame, David S. Goyer is inconsistent af as a writer and usually goes too dumb, loud and blockbuster-like. While Chris Terrio is talented but gets paired a lot with people that kill the indie vibe (Goyer, J. J. Abrams and Snyder himself).
@@ivanagustinortiz5237 he was a writer on Man of Steel while writing directing Interstellar. He was an executive producer for b v s which is basically a title with no job function because he was working on Dunkirk at the time. Snyder wanted an older batman and weirdo lex luthor.
Batfleck doesn’t even make any sense. If he broke his no kill rule after robin died, then why wouldn’t he kill joker and Harley. They literally killed robin
@@parkerboy795 There is no rule about that in world building. Even marvel done that many times one being where did red skull go at the end of first captain America film, we will get that answer in Infinity war. So you can explain earlier film in another film. It helps the world building to make even more sense.
@@sakethramponnaluri4751 Maybe, but considering how it played out, it would have been better to have it shown earlier or better explained. I think that's different though. Infinity War showed what happened to Red Skull after he dissapeared in First Avenger. We shouldn't need a future movie to show us what happened to this Batman and Robin. They probably should have given him a solo movie first.
@Call Me, BLEGH Me, If You Wanna Reach Me the answer is you have laughable taste. Civil War destroys BvS because it actually tries to give a shit about the main characters.
There is a case to be made for them to face off against one another first. But Bruce should've been wise to Luthor's manipulation, and the narrative could've leaned more heavily into his suicidal tendencies/the concept of legacy as he's lost his way as both a hero and a person a long time ago. Why not employ the idea from a comic (whose title escapes me at the moment) where Batman actively lures Superman into a fight by telling him he's strapped a bomb to somebody only for that somebody to turn out to be himself (hidden under layers of lead Superman can't see through). That way, he'd test Superman's mettle and challenge him philosopically. He could even go so far as to invite Lois to a private island of his with no wifi and leave her stranded there claiming to have kidnapped her (she'd obviously be taken care of by Alfred) just to see whether Clark has a breaking point. To keep him off her scent, he might use voice recordings of hers and project them all over Gotham City (or Metropolis). And so on and so on. Then, treat us to a sequel (World's Finest) that cements their newfound mutual respect and possibly introduces Wonder Woman. They should've really taken their time with this.
I understand people liking this movie for various of reasons. Calling it a masterpiece however is just wrong. Simply wrong. It's not about subjective opinion. It's about being wrong.
The Snyderverse fans who obsessively defend the murderous Batman are so bizarre to me. It’s just impossible for me to see that as Batman and it’s sad cause Ben Affleck is a decent casting choice.
Right? They go but but Christian bales batman did it. Ans I'm like ok? Idc. Comic batman doesn't do it and that's what I base it on. I don't wanna watch the punisher they already have a show for that I wanna watch batman.
Literally every live action Batman has killed (besides George Clooney), so Snyder isn’t the only one who did it. If anything Snyder made it point in his movie that it wasn’t okay for Batman to kill and was starting off his redemption arc in Justice League. That’s why snyderfans like myself defend Batman killing because there was a purpose to it.
I think most of us just didn’t make a big deal out of Batman barley using guns. Most people act this version of Batman is being Thomas Wayne in the movie, using guns and his main weapon. This Batman barley used guns and the movie is go great to complain over little things like Batman using guns in his dream sequence. Batfleck did an amazing job as Batman.
The dumbest thing about Batfleck is that he was letting the Joker lives, murderer of his adopted son Robin, while was willing to kill Superman, who is a hero in the eyes of many people but a POTENTIAL threat in Batman's eyes. Batman makes contingencies for that, not take such drastic actions like directly trying to kill him. If Batman actually crosses the line, his first victim will be the Joker. He will sreach the entire planet to hunt him and he will just burn the clown down. Sndyerverse is just full of LAZY WRITTING.
The worst part of this movie, is they could have taken all these ideas, and made 8-9 iconic movies. It’s a bit ironic they overlooked 2 or 3 franchises by making a movie that was supposed to kick off a cinematic universe…
3:29 I know what Vee means & mostly agree except it worked pretty well in "Justice League the Flashpoint Paradox" I know it's different, but that is a Batman that shoots & it works pretty well!
@@midsectionmark8956 If we got to see how this Batman was and how he loses his way, maybe the way he's potrayed would be at least a bit more understandable
@@silashurd3597 for a true fan of the comics, who else would it be? When Affleck was cast, everyone was saying, Affleck? Nah, he's not Batman. A millionaire playboy who spends the nights with booze and women and looks tired all the time, can't be. Not a good fit, obviously 🙄
That's not true in this case. Both Batman and Superman are well known. And this movie is deconstucting the general ideas behind them not the spesific versions. And those have long been constructed
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ that isn't ane excuse. If you're gonna show us different Interpretations of characters you have to show us why, not just immediately jump to batman being a killer and superman being worshipped after being hated .
I think the conflict between Batman and Superman should've played out more subtly. It should've been Batman using his detective skills to find out who Superman is (because Batman) and then tension building from him confronting Clark with his newfound knowledge. That tension and mistrust remains under the surface while both focus on different problems that eventually lead them to the same villain. The villain somehow manages (most likely mind control) to make Clark fight Batman while actively resisting the control which allows Batman to survive long enough for the control to be broken and the threat defeated while reaching a reluctant (still suspicious on Batman's part) common ground. We get the fight without the nonsensical "plot".
Would you have used Maxwell Lord for this, as a tactic employed by Luthor? Then obviously Luthor turns out to have developed an immunity to Lord's telepathy either through science or meditation to disperse any suspicions of having had a hand in this.
Regarding the Martha scene, everybody who had watched it definitely felt something wrong but find it difficult to identify the problem other than the fact that how ridiculous it is. I'm here to tell you exactly what's wrong with it, the problem is not about the scene itself, it's everything leading up to it - the built-up for the fight. The first and biggest problem with the fight is that there is no true conflict. A good fight scene always comes down to the ideological conflicts between 2 characters. While Batman has a reason to fight, Superman has none, he didn’t even want to fight in the first place. The second problem is that there is no emotional stake. Emotional stake is established when the movie shows how important the goal is to the character and that the character HAVE TO complete that goal or bad things will CERTAINLY happen. This clearly isn't the case in BvS because letting superman live will not lead to anything bad at all and Superman didn't even want to fight. Without a clear conflict and emotional stake, it’s impossible for the audience to get invested in the characters or even care about them. In the end, we got a fight with no underlying conflict, no emotional stake, and no audience investment. By the time the Martha word were spoken, we realized that even Batman’s motivation for starting the fight was just a misunderstanding, a misguided hatred. The Martha scene made us realize that we just sit through 2 hours of a movie to wait for a fight that doesn’t even need to happen in the first place. The Martha scene itself is not the joke, it’s the punchline, everything leading up to it - which is basically the entire movie - is the joke.
What’s funny is the 2nd season of the punisher did the Martha scene better when Frank says to John Pilgrim “what are you some kind of maniac?” and Pilgrim says “they have my kids” and there’s a beat... that was the Martha scene done right
Was it because Warner Bros. thought the names of Superman/Batman would be enough to get butts into seats(it did, the first weekend) With little charm from the comic it was "borrowing" from? Or the discount Doomsday, or touchy Lex? I can't wait to hear why.
Would enjoy seeing you do some of the other DC ones - curious to see how your take changes, particularly wiht some of the more recent ones! Also my take on the 'Martha' bit as well is Batman realizing that he's being the same man that killed his own parents. He's about to take someone else's loved one away from them. So he's become everything that made him what he is. That's part of my take on the scenario, at least. It's something that could have (if it was intended) beplayed up a litlte more so I could be stretching.
So if Joker or any other villains even the goons he killed called Martha he will stopped what he intends to do right? Thats just not enough believable reason to justify to how terrible the narrative of that scene is. Very contradictory to what he said before, and not to mention the aftermath of that supposedly 'realization' scene, where he still not learn anything.
Okhaye!!!!!!! Please don't get me started on this. So, I am not saying that you don't have any understanding of the movie or you are a Snyder fanboy. I am just here to share my POV (You know that's how social media works). the 1st aspect of "THE MARTHA SCENE":- So, the thing is that Batman realizes that Superman can destroy the world any time wanted nd there he goes to "Kill" Superman and on the verge of killing him, Batman comes to know that Superman's name is Martha and immediately befriended Superman. I mean, I understand that Batman found Superman relatable at that moment. Superman was begging Batman to save his mother's life just like Batman did in the first place in his case. But does that mean Superman can't destroy the world any time wanted? Does Superman pose any lesser threat to the world now than he did in the first place? Ask Yourself. the 2nd Aspect of "THE MARTHA SCENE":- So, Just like you said, maybe Batman remembers why he became Batman at the first place place hearing his mother's name. He remembers that he did not dawned the Mantle to kill but to protect . But then he went to the Warehouse and straight up killed a bunch of people and additionally "burning the KG Beast alive" to save Martha. I mean, the name which put Batman back to his old track of "No Kill" rule, is the same name which belongs to a woman for whom Batman had to kill a bunch of people. Hope you got my point. PEACE!!!!!☺☺☺
This movie should have had Superman align himself with the US government to help repair his image after the whole Zod fight leveling Metropolis, and Batman not trusting him not only because he's an all powerful alien, but a government puppet like in TDKR. Throughout the film Superman realizes that being a government stooge isn't what's best for being a superhero, and by the end he and Batman decide that Superheroes need to act independently thus forming an early brand of the justice league.
Ah yes, the movie that was trying to be like 5 different mcu movies at once. It represents all the problems that the early DCEU had, mainly just that they tried way too hard to catch up to the competition and it shows that this was a big mess up from WB.
@@The80sWolf_ What he meant, I suppose, was that WB wanted to jump to their version of Cap vs Iron Man, without the 8 years of character development. I know they're different tonally and everything, but that's not the point. And to do that they pushed to cram too many stories into one single movie, which hurt it more than anything else. They pretty much went from their equivalent of Iron Man (Man Of Steel) to Civil War (BvS), to then Infinity War (Justice League). All of that without taking the time needed to build the characters up, relationships, conflicts, etc. As Marvel did. WB didn't have the patience and it shows. Anyways, hope that clears it up a bit. Cheers from France! 🍻
@@The80sWolf_ That's not what I said. I just tried to clarify what the initial comment said, which I apparently failed to since that's what you got from my reply. If you want me to clarify some of what I said, I'll gladly do so. If not, have a good day (or night/evening/morning) depending on your time zone.
@@DarthWinterMadness I get attacked daily by comic nerds and marvel fans because of liking BVS and whatever. I dont bother to read so much into every post.
For me the Martha scene isn't the problem, in a film with a different tone it could be good. But not in a movie with moody Superman who you just know listens to My Chemical Romance in his downtime and a Batman who is branding fools and has a body count well into the double digits. Lexerburg was never gonna work, Snyder blended Ledger's Joker with the Jim Carry's Riddler and for some reason called it Lex. Bruce says he thought WW was with Superman when we all saw him literally send her an email. Jesus christ I hate BvS, fucking capped Jimmy Olson, maybe the second or third most important Superman Supporting character in what I can only call anti fan service. Also why does Superman need to fly the kryptonite spear into Doomsday when there is an Amazon warrior who is known to be trained with that weapon and isn't deathly allergic to it. Just have her chuck it at him. Also why does Batman have absolutely no regard for human life. I don't by the lost his way thing, he is straight up, sadistically murdering people left and right. He kills them with guns, he kills them with cars, he kills them with explosions. One time he uses a gun to cause an explosion that kills two people. Why Zack Snyder why? The same Zack Snyder who BTW said in his ideal Batman movie Bruce could get sexually assaulted in prison. Who hurt Zack you? Wow this because a rant lol. Great video BTW.
For context here, I was initially mortified when Ben Affleck was cast as Batman- but he actually turned out to be (what could have been) my favorite on screen version of Batman. Now obviously, I too hated seeing him picking up guns and shooting at people, machine gunning people down in the batwing, all just stupid writing. But he didn’t write that script, he had to work with what he was given, and it’s just truly a shame that we’ll more than likely never see the movie that he DID write (The Batman- before it was handed over to Matt Reeves). I honestly think that could’ve been an amazing Batman movie, but I think at that point, WB had already had it with Zack Snyder and his characters, and around that time started trying to phase them all out, kind of started trying to figure out the new future of the DCEU, for better or worse 🤷♂️ And I agree- the whole, “a Batman that lost his way!” argument is f*****g stupid, I’ve never bought into that horse s**t either. But, Snyder’s gonna Snyder. I actually like Zack Snyder’s JL alright though, even though Batman v Superman was a travesty. It truly is a damn shame the way these characters were handled because, for the most part, the casting was just about all good (hold for a handful of characters; Lex, the Flash, I wasn’t the biggest fan of Lois’s casting either, I’m sure there’s a couple more that I’m probably drawing a blank on here)
How is the batman that lost his way argument bs when its completely explained his behavior in the movie considering that this movie is about why batman shouldn't kill and isn't trying to justify the way he's acting when they are actively trying to show u that its wrong
His character arc through ZSJL and BvS is him learning to become the batman he use to be I bet you're a smart person but if you were to pay attention to the movie you'll realize that its hard to miss
@@parkerboy795 yeah we all know Batman cant get over his parents death but there were better ways for this version of Batman to see Superman's humanity. In comics and other forms of media Batman initially is skeptical of Superman but eventually there's an instance where he sees Superman on humanity's side aibet he has a backup plan in case he went bad. Thats Batman. Not Synder's version who plans to go on the offensive against Superman who had not demonstrated to be bad. Batman is smart enough to have seen him beat Zod and save the world. He wouldn't automatically trust Superman but also wouldn't antagonize him by trying to spend the whole movie trying to kill him until the Martha moment
For my money, The Dark Knight Returns animated movie had the best Batman vs Superman fight. I mean the source material was pure gold, so it was hard to go wrong, but still. That's the best one.
Nah man. The best Batman vs Superman fight is actually Omniman vs Darkwing cuz thats the only fight Batman is in without plot armor backing him up. Powersuit or no Batman fighting with Superman is a joke as Superman has super speed and would be able to punch Batman 1000 times before he can even lift his arms once.
In defense of Superman referring to his mother as “Martha,” he is trying to keep her safe. If he paints her as a human who needs rescued, Batman is more inclined to help. If he had said “Save my mother,” Batman could’ve gone after her too (in Clark’s mind)
Na man They made him say Martha because one of the writers noticed their mothers had the same name. And it was supposed to mirror Bruce's dad saying 'martha..' as he died in the opening. Triggering Batman's memory and making him see superman like his dad - who when about to die his only concern is for his loved ones. And making batman see himself like the criminal who killed his parents That was the idea. The execution was horrendous because no one would refer to their mother in the 3rd person like that. And superman had no idea that's what Bruce's father said so couldn't have been an intentional thing.
If they do make Flashpoint, it needs to be 3 things: An actual good DC movie, fix as many of the DCEU’s problems via retcon, and fix those problems smoothly and cleanly without it being too insane. They could even do the comic version where everyone lost 10 years.
This is not only one of the worse comic book movies I've ever seen it is one of the worse movies I've ever seen. There's just not a single good thing about it. I know everyone talks about the warehouse scene but one good scene doesn't save it. It is like pulling a peanut from a turd.
I think the main problem is there is TOO many characters like with TASM 2 and Spider-man 3 and while I like the latter two film this one was just to rush the Justice League
As much as I agree with most of the points presented, I think, if done properly, this Batman could have STARTED the movie as a jaded asshole who kills people, but his heroic spirit was rekindled by Superman, after their fight I’d like to have seen him ditch the guns and killing for his older approach, even have Superman agree to do the same so Batman as a reason to think it’s a good idea, because even the man of steel says it’s better then killing at this point
But that's what happen in the film. This is about a batman whos more aggressive ever since his adopted son died. he doesnt directly kill but he sees no need to avoid the actions that would led to a criminals death. When he fights hes brutals because he's untamed and the only person who can reign him cant hold him back back. this is a battle that batman though that he would either come out victorious or die trying. Towards the end his eyes is open because now he can relate with superman. hes not the this evil character in his mind, hes not even an alien to him anymore. He's a man who have so much to fight for and willing to sacrifice himself. "I failed him in life but i will not fail him in death"- BVS Bruce
@@2nd_Variable "doesn't directly kill" is a bs excuse Snyder came up with, because in the movie he directly kills even after fighting Superman, then, he kills normal people but not the persons responsable for his adopted son's murder, that's why a Batman that kills doesn't work. In comics he gets more violent after losing Jason, but he never crosses that line. If this Batman was more brutal but never killed and Superman was going to be the first life he's willing to take, that's way more compelling and consistent with the bigger universe.
@@ivanagustinortiz5237 thats is batman arc. He never directly cross the line by directly fighting to kill. But superman is someone he considers too dangerous to live. Its not a bs because plenty of batman villains die by their own doing.
The entire problem with this movie is the plot essentially is that 2 dc characters known for NOT KILLING are mad at eachother for KILLING, and they can't even do it right, having to force superman to fight instead of making it natural
That is your bias talking. The both characters killed people in some way in comics or in other media. it's just that people are butthut seeing that, because they got used to seeing very specific interpretation of those characters. But I have to ask.....what do you mean making it natural?
@@Wlof25 using the plot to guide it fluidly into happening inevitably. Take civil war for example the one that did it right... the two clashed against eachother with the soccovia accords, and fought. But it was not personal yet, but then zeemos plan worked, got them together and showed the video. Now it was personal. He didn't HAVE to fight, but because of his character he did. Superman had no reason to fight. Didn't even want to. Its batman V superman. They should have a reason to fight. They didn't have a good reason to. Then they also become friends too easily. Doomsday was unnecessary and snyder even backed down saying it wasn't actually doomsday. One of the best superman story arcs was wasted.. the death of superman And yes. Let me explain batman real quick. Criminals killed his parents, do you think this traumatized kid will pick up the same weapon used to kill his parents, or say 'no guns'? I can tell you it's much more compelling to not use guns. If he uses them he is no different than the criminal that killed his parents. That is his philosophy. Superman meanwhile has every opportunity to kill people like lex, but never does. He's the boy scout good guy. Have the two killed before? Yes. Does that mean they should? No. Superman was communist once. Doesn't mean he should be on screen. There's a reason batman and superman are famous. Not because they kill people. Because they don't. They have moral codes. Everyone knows batmans ONE rule. His only rule. So why don't you? Because you're too biased to care. Just change this movie to some other characters and nobody would have gave a crap. The biggest problem, is the movie itself... It's BATMAN V SUPERMAN. People want HUGE expectations. They want it to be AMAZING. So when it falls apart and is considered one of the worst superhero films of all time, thats really disappointing to them. They wanted to see their favorite heroes duke it out and all they got was this mess. I don't mind if you personally like it. Anyone can like anything. But do understand, a majority of audiences absolutely hated this movie because of the *potential* it had. We aren't mcu fan boys. We WANTED it to do well. We're just disappointed it didn't.
@@bluefiremarkii Actually....the CW fight was pretty bad. They didn't have to fight. They could have talked instead, because they all know each other and there was some misunderstanding. But Stark didn't want to listen for some unknown reason and he initiated the attack, and other people followed him. That's forced conflict. In BvS, the conflict between the two was building throughout the movie. Batman thinks Superman is a threat and Luthor is fueling that fire. And Superman thinks that Batman is going too far with his vigilantism and he gave him a warning. Then later he was blackmailed into fighting Batman. There are reasons and I would say that it's much much better then the whole conflict in CW. Too easily? They were against each other for almost the whole movie and only by the end they became "friends," because one realized that he went too far and that was manipulated by someone else. That's not too easily. In Civil War....Stark and Rogers were friends (or at least friendly). Then they fought each other, just for Stark to change his mind and be friends with Rogers again....Aaaand to fight Rogers again when he found out for the death of his parents.... just to cover for him by the end of the movie when Rogers broke in that prison in the see. That's too easily. How in the hell was Doomsday not necessary? It was literally necessary for the plot by the end and for the continuation of the story. Why was death of Superman wasted? It was the same crap. Doomsday comes, wrecks, get wrecked, Superman dies and lives again later. What exactly is wasted? Have you ever watched Superman Doomsday animated movie? Watch DC animated movies, which people praise so much and you will see how many double standards people have. You are being dogmatic about Batman. You do realize that there are many versions of Batman, right? Which logically means that the character can vary from story to story, from universe to universe. You are contradicting yourself with your talk about Superman. They killed before, but that doesn't mean that they should. Sure. I agree (read the paragraph above). But the same logic works for no killing rule. They have no kill rule, but that doesn't mean that they should. So that brings me back to what I said in the above paragraph. It all depends on the story. Not every Superman is the same Superman. So the whole criticism falls apart. That criticism isn't valid. Overhyping a movie and then movie not meeting your expectation is not the flaw of the movie. It's your flaw.
@@Wlof25 did you even BOTHER reading your own post before saying it? "Didn't have to fight" then call the same fight "forced?" Are you okay? Lmao! This is exactly the amount of stupidity i expect from people praising this film and hating civil war. You didn't even cover my argument. Just strawmanned it. First off, that's the POINT. It didn't HAVE to happen, but because of CHARACTER and how STARK IS AS A PERSON, he lashes out. I don't expect you to get that because you're used to 1 dimensional depressed people who don't know wtf is going on around them. Secondly, tony and rodgers were friends during the airport scene. Note the casual talk. They just want to bring them in, not hurt eachother. By the end, they fight. Tony feels hurt that rodgers kept a secret from him of his own parents death, and a rage toward the one who did it. Rodgers, doesn't hate tony. He is captain america, he gives tony the phone... but remember, even with half the universe on the line, tony refused to call steve. Refused. That is not friendship. They split their seperate ways and never worked together again. Even in endgame, he still verbally attacks him and tells him to do it himself at first. BvS meanwhile, what did it do? Build *some* motivation albeit flawed. Like seriously, a 1% chance superman is evil? Should we kill dogs because they have a 1% chance to bite you? xD its pretty crazy, thankfully he realizes that at the end Supermans motivation. Tell me, what is it? Because at the end he doesn't want to. In fact he literally doesn't. Lex has to kidnap his mom to force it to happen. That is bad writing. Imagine if in the justice league, the only reason superman fought steppenwolf was because steppenwolf kidnapped his mom. Terrible writing right? And if you're going to compare this crappie nonsense to the death of superman you're clearly not a dc fan. Every dc fan knows the significance and meaning behind it. It was an entire story, not just doomsday fighting superman. It was much more than that. But guess what, snyder said this isn't even doomsday anymore! On top of that, we haven't gotten to know this superman and most of the world currently hated him. There is no good from it. We all knew he'd come back. You need to make it meaningful and it wasn't. And seriously explain to me how doomsday was necessary in a film *about batman fighting superman.* in what way does doomsday need to be included? This is equivalent to if civil war said lmao zeemos plan is true and he releases super soldiers to fight the three and they win and are friends forever yaaay. If snyder had the wheel thats what it would have been. That's not a good ending. Personal v impersonal. Snyder went impersonal, marvel went personal. Emotional fights outweigh big ones. So let me ask again. Why do we need doomsday in this particular movie? And i can also add.. crappie diologue, superman has less lines than spiderman in civil war, way too many setups for other films in one movie, a terrible portrayal of lex everyone agrees should be riddler including the actor himself saying he wouldn't make a good lex.. oh and before yoy say b-b-but birthright- A. Not canon. B. Not popular, and C. Not tbe lex everyone knows and lastly D, it's not lex as people know and love lex. He is smart and commanding and intimidating. Even when not in control he sounds in control. This "lex" is just wierd. Literally crazy actually. That's.. not him. Sorry. Good performance from him, but not lex. An unnecessary doomsday fight, a decent fight lasting 5.. wait, the entire point of the film is only like 5 minutes long and isn't even the climax? AND its ruined by the cheesy martha scene. I get what that scene tried to do but.. the execution not good. Hence the memes of it.. anyway, a terrible plot and motivation mishandling of characters, may i go on? Stop thinking of the movie like a person who enjoyed it, and realize that these are actually literal criticism millions of people had. You can't just debunk one person when millions had the same thoughts. Clearly something is wrong if millions hated it no? If people call it one of the worst superhero films, something has to be wrong. If it was one or two people then nah. But its a majority of the audience. I understand why you like it okay? But can you understand why we do not? Its pointless to argue that its good, when in reality it is not. There are too many flaws in it. That doesn't mean you can't like it. But you have to admit we don't. I don't mind if you hate civil war, but most criticism stems from herp de derp i don't understand this. That's on you not the film, most of us understand it just fine. I can see why people hate captain marvel, even i don't rewatch it. But for some reason you guys call *every* snyder film *perfection* regardless of earnings, criticisms, etc. If we understand that people can hate marvel films why can't you understand people can hate dc films? In fact most people do. My brother in law is a biiiiig comic nerd. His friend loved this movie. Took him to see it and askes how it was. His response was that it was terrible. Hated every second of it. His friend, was not a comic nerd. See the difference here? The fanbase snyder wants isn't the dc audience. Another factor is snyder saying "he doesn't care unless it has sex and violence." And wants batman raped in prison. How is batman going to get raped xD hes batman. Hed beat them up. Aaaaanyway lets see if you can learn to accept criticism or if you'll continue strawmanning like a moron. ;)
@@bluefiremarkii It would be nice if you wouldn't write wall of text. I will try to be short. I also see that you wrote three additional messages to me, but I am not going to respond on this wall of text and potential more walls of text. "Are you okay? " I am, but are you? Yes. They didn't have to fight, which means that the fight was forced and nonsensical. So Stark and all other people who followed him are dumb and can't think rationally? Nothing you said there defeats my point. Stark easily fights Rogers and is friends with Rogers, more than once, in like maybe 40 min of the screen time. I already told you Superman's motivations for fighting. He was blackmailed into it. And no, that isn't bad writing. Bad writing is, for example, if some writing rule has been violated. So you have no idea what you are talking about. You wrote the whole paragraph and not explain me how exactly was death of Superman wasted. Instead you questioned me being a DC fan, which is not answering on the question and explaining anything. Would you like to try again? I already told you. Doomsday was necessary for the plot of the movie, just as you could have seen. You know....just like Winder Soldiers in ice in Civil War (which did nothing and ended up dying off screen) were necessary to move some characters from one place to another. You obviously don't know what the word necessary means and don't understand storytelling. There is just one scene which is a set up for other movies. And the rest of the criticism is subjective nonsense. No, man. Your logic is just terrible. Millions could say that the Earth is flat, but it wouldn't make it so. Millions could say the same fanboyish crap as you did, it wouldn't make it so. Your whole argumentation hinges on your fanboyism and bad logic.
1.) Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne I agree. 2.) Batman kills because he's already been your beloved traditional Batman for over 20 years, and you gotta remember in BvS this isn't your 90s animated Batman, this is Zack Snyder's Batman. In the grand multiverse there are many different interpretations of the character and in this iteration it just so happens that this version kills. BvS is the introduction of this new character of this new Batman, it is a clean slate debut so going in you have to get rid of your comic book/90s animated bias, put them to the side and just take the story as it is and try to understand what the director is telling you. Yes Batman killing is bad and ultimately by the end of the film that's what it is trying to tell the audience, because after his fight with Clark and Batman sees him sacrifice himself, Bruce realizes that "men are still good" his faith in humanity is restored and it took an alien to make him see that. So yes the majority of the movie you don't get your traditional Batman (Ben kills left n right just like Michael Keaton's did, just like the very first comic of Batman did, and yes even Christian Bale's did at the end of The Dark Knight) but eventually by the end of Batman v Superman you do.
I can't thank you enough for pointing out that Bale's Batman has also killed people in each of his movies, and I say that when Batman Begins is my favorite Batman movie. Regarding the video, I love it when people try to awkwardly pass off their subjective opinions as objective facts like "If you don't agree with me, you don't understand the character like I do!" and "If you don't agree with me, you've lost your damn mind!" From what I hear, in the comics after Jason's death, Batman started getting more reckless and brutal (and I might be wrong on this) even threatened someone with a gun. I like to believe that this Affleck's Batman is that same Batman many years in the future, who didn't have any Tim Drake to save him, and eventually got to the point where he started killing for the greater good. The fact that Jim Gordon is not openly hostile to him and is still on speaking terms with him makes me believe that he tolerates Batman's actions to a degree and believes them necessary to a point if you consider the GCPD to be too corrupt. I think the main problem with this movie is that it doesn't develop the universe and give enough of a backstory for Batman to have the audience empathise with him and how he slowly started getting more and more brutal and paranoid over the years. I completely agree with him doubting an alien God like Superman like he does (he has contingency plans to kill all the other members of the Justice League too when he needs them) and steals kryptonite when he realises that he can use it against him. The movie is also guilty of placing the burden of filling the blanks on the audience rather than clearly telling it to them, which is very difficult to do when you're in the theater, watching the movie. For example, I felt that the Martha scene was utter cringe but a video on YT explaining that since 'Martha' was the last word uttered by Thomas before dying, and when Superman said the same, lying helpless on the ground, it made Batman realise that over the years in the name of justice, he had slowly sunk to the same level as the crook who killed his parents, which makes him throw away the spear in disgust. Another example is Batman leaving his face uncovered in his mech suit, which I thought was really stupid, when I had to fill in the blanks myself and theorise that it was possibly a way to taunt Superman to see if he took advantage of a weak spot that Batman dangled in front of him. I also don't like Jeremy Irons' sadronic portrayal of Alfred. The man is like a father to Bruce and him clashing with Bruce regarding Superman should've come from a place of understanding and his tone should have been more sympathetic, considering that he had to have shared Bruce's pain. I did like the small scene of Bruce making coffee for him and saying to the other members of JL that he works for Alfred. Overall, I like how this Batman, despite being in his mid forties, is still a force of nature who can take on armed thugs in a warehouse or aliens from other worlds. This movie could have been really better if they had given Batman a solo movie before BvS. I'm looking forward to the new Batman but I also feel sad that we won't get to see the Batman vs Deathstroke movie that Ben was so passionate to be a part of, at one time. It would have been really interesting to see him being hopeful again after so many years, only for Deathstroke to take it away from him all over again. Edits: Some extra thoughts.
there is no reason for him to be killing and i dont care if its not like the comics or the dcau there is no point for him to be killing almost every other batman that kills has a reason and there all else world storys not the main on screen time line just admit it snyder does not understand batman
@@adultnamedtoe700 "Every other batman that kills has a reason" Really? name a couple, and also Snyder's Batman DOES have a reason, it's been made very clear why he kills.
I really can’t stand the people who argue that the only reason this movie is hated is because it is a “Different kind of superhero movie”… A different kind of superhero movie is James Gunn’s Super from back in 2011. That is a great movie. BvS is a bad movie, cause it doesn’t understand what a superhero movie is. But sure, you can have a superhero in a movie that’s not necessarily a superhero movie, The Dark Knight. But BvS is a badly written, badly directed (Yes, I said it. I hate the direction Snyder took the character’s. Guy’s got a talent for making shit look cool, should be a Cinematographer), overall shit movie.
To me, Batman felt like a side character even though the movie was supposed to be about him fighting Superman. Also having Wonder Woman and Doomsday shoehorned into the plot made the movie feel even more bloated. Batman vs Superman suffered from the same thing Spiderman 3 did where there was too much going on for the viewer to keep track off.
Funny because if anything, Superman felt like a side character to me in this movie. It was more about what people thought about him and his actions and how it impacted the world than actually about Superman.
The Batman-Superman "rivalry' is Frank Miller's brainchild. Miller himself said that he'd happily take credit for breaking up their friendship in the History Channel doc "Superheroes Unmasked." After Batman v. Superman was announced, and they had Harry Lennix read a direct quote from DKR at Comic-Con, I just wondered why Snyder didn't just make DKR instead of this.
The best thing about this movie is it killed the franchise so we weren't subjected to Justice League 2, and 3. Snyder screwed the pooch with DC and I would be THANKFUL if Snyder is NEVER allowed to make a DC movie ever again.
Just came across this review and damn you hit on everything I thought. Zack Snyder is great at shooting scenes, however he is not great at storytelling. Between miscast actors,plotholes and 2 many storylines in one movie. But this is what was given to us, and wo knows how long until we see these characters again on the big screen. I do however skip through all the Lex Luthor scenes, I just cant watch Jesse Eisenberg. ugggh just cringe. Thats not LL.
This movie was 5 movies crammed into one movie and somehow it STILL managed to have Batman's character be completely stagnant for the entire movie. The only points his character is challenged or changes is the first 5 minutes and the last 5 minutes. He decides Superman should die, does 2 and a half hours of busy work, and then realizes he shouldn't be trying to kill Superman
There’s supposed to be a contrast between Batman and Superman. Light and dark. Batman is the dark character and Superman is the one who sort of turns him around, brings him into the light
I was against Pretty Boy Affleck getting the role originally, but he totally proved me wrong. He bulked up, used his facial and hair style to get the look, and got the body language almost perfect. In fact, it's clear he took inspiration for his vocal performance from Kevin Conroy, and body language from his animated work; and that's the benchmark right there. Given better script and direction he could've been the best live action Batman. Sad he won't be getting that opportunity now.
Batman v Superman is a prime example of dark done wrong. Dark by turning off the me , sucking out all the color palette so everything is grey, and making every character an edgelord is the cheap way out and severely lacking in any real substance. Batman v Superman did the same thing Fant4stic did.
Personally I think the biggest problem with the snyder verse is that Everyone assumed we were getting an official live action reboot with these characters as if it were dcs faithful cinematic universe And Zach had no intention to do that. These stories shoulda never been the official mainline representations of these characters. They work fine as elseworld artists interpretation of these characters like a frank miller, Brian azzarello or even Geoff Johns earth one thing and if I view it that way they're just fine but that's not what they were presented as
Yeah Superman was saving lives when he blew up the gas station and broke buildings, all the other damage he was doing fighting Zod, he was saving lives. Aside from the family he saved from Zod at the end, protecting his mom, and Lois Lane, who he has no romantic chemistry with, he put just as many lives endanger as Zod and his army.
Zod would’ve killed everybody by making Earth the new Kypton… Would you kill a million people to save seven billion? Also, it was his first real fight, that being against someone as strong as he is.
This is how the first phase of the DCEU should’ve been mapped out: -Man of Steel -The Caped Crusader: Ben Affleck’s solo outing, without the tired origin. Joker is the villain. -Man of Tomorrow: the sequel to Man of Steel which would highlight the fallout of the first film, with Batman as a peripheral character and Lex Luthor trying to sway public opinion against Superman. -World’s Finest: Superman and Batman finally meet, but it’s more of an ideological conflict of differences where they’ll eventually have to team up to stop Lex Luthor and the Joker. Pretty much a live action of the animated DC film. -Wonder Woman: essentially Patty Jenkins film. -The Flash: solo film, introduction of Barry Allen and his origin. -Justice League: Steppenwolf’s the main villain, setting up Darkseid on the periphery. Have Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and The Flash seek out other metahumans (Green Lantern, Martian Manhunter, etc.) Boom.
Oh, FINALLY some person again, who CORRECTLY pronounces this movie title as Batman V Superman. Ironic somehow, that it had to be VEE Infuso, LOL. I just HATE it, when everyone calls it Batman VS Superman.... 😅😡
Honestly I love how neither of them were what they should be, because they fixed that in ZSJL, which also allowed for more character development. By the end of ZSJL you can see that both Batman and Superman have turned into what they should be.
The one thing that I dislike about this movie is we hardly see Superman interact or say a word to any regular human. Even in Man of Steel we never get to see his people skills. BvS is a great movie if you know nothing about these characters.
My boss saw it as a sneak, and having never read the comics, she said she liked it well enough. And it could be my fault for bringing reading baggage in, but I felt it was a thoroughly miserable viewing experience. Like if someone read Alan Moore and Frank Miller, but still wrote like an early Image Comics title, starring two of my favorite DC heroes. Just didn't click with me at all. And I actually stood up for MoS!
Gotta disagree with you there. This movie is STILL pretty terrible even If u know nothing about the characters. Even if u believe Bruce wants to kill Clark because he sees him as a threat to mankind, then why the hell would that change just because their moms share the same name? What an awful, awful piece of writing.
@@KoolKeithProductions I think the Martha scene is meant to show Bruce that Superman is not just an alien but a guy with a mother that's in danger. Martha being the name of Bruce's mother made that realization deeper but then again 2 minutes before Batman mentions Superman's parents, yeah its a confusing scene. The movie has great action, visuals and acting but its just not a good Batman/Superman story if you already know these characters.
@@SuperSteph5 Batman could have come to that same conclusion without having Clark randomly say his mother's name during a fight to the death. He could have simply said "save her...please save her..." Obviously Batman would ask "save who?" And then Supes could say "my.....mother, Martha....Kent. Save her..." But nooooo, they had to write it in the worse way possible.
16:35 Possibly the best Death of Superman movie was All-Star Superman as it was about him making the most of what remained of his life rather than dwelling on the brutality and gruesomeness of his death. It also served as Superman's ultimate moral victory over Lex Luthor who was similarly facing his own mortality after Lex gets a taste of what it is like to be Superman if only for a mere moment.
What killed this franchise from the start was having Zack Snyder helm it. He makes slow movies with slow motion action scenes that nobody wants to see anymore. He also wants to make his own original stories and not really off the comic adaptations. Kevin Feige loves Marvel so he won't completely betray certain characteristics of the characters. DCEU needs someone like that who Loves DC comics to be the head of whatever they are trying to do. Hearing the flash rumours it doesn't sound like we are ever getting that from DCEU.
It probably because Snyder directed 300 and Watchmen, WB said "hey he's the comic book guy" and thats it. Nolan was never into comicbooks yet made an amazing Batman trilogy
He also can't write to save his life. He's only good at making direct adaptations and remakes, (James Gunn Wrote the Dawn of the Dead remake) When he tries to do his own thing like writing 300: Rise of an Empire, All his dceu movies, and Army of The Dead have some of the worst writing and dialogue imaginable.
Yeah that’s kind of the problem I have with Batman. I can understand him having trauma with guns due to his past so he doesn’t use them. BUT, that part in the Dark Knight Returns where he went on to say that guns are not to be used because they are the enemies’ weapons always make me roll my eyes. I’m sorry but when there’s chaos around me and my life is in danger because of some unhinged lunatics wanting to hurt me, you bet your ass I’m gonna use a gun to defend myself.
I hate that every time Superman saves someone, the movie sucks the humility out of it. You don't need people to literally treat him like God/Jesus. And he hardly talks. Why couldn't he speak for himself in the court scene?
19:40 are you saying that all of those builds destroyed while fighting Zod, no one died? Sure Superman wasn't directly responsible, but, couldn't he take the fight somewhere else? Lead Zod out of the very densely populated Metropolis? I mean shit, even dumb-ass Goku was smart enough to do that. Nah, people had justification to hate and fear Superman. If I lived in that universe, I would have, for sure. It's why I hated Man of Steel. It wasn' the neck snap, it was the wonton destruction, and zero attempt from Superman to lead the fight elsewhere. Why? Because buildings equals explosions. If you told me Man of Steel was directed by Michael Bay, I'd believe you.
My biggest issue with this movie was not only Snyder's abysmally pretentious style and cringy dialogues, and aside from the absolute worst adaptation of Luthor, was the fact the entire fight between Batman and Superman was held on pure bullshit. Luthor got Supes's mother... in a random building... within earshot of Supes's hearing and vision nevertheless, so he should be able to pinpoint her location and save her, or quickly tell batman himself, since there was NOTHING indicating Luthor was actualy keeping an eye on their fight, since he went immediatly ahead to make "doomsday" (which by all means is more like Nuclear Man, which means Snyder unintentionaly ripped off the worst superman movie of all time). If this movie truly wanted to stablish Luthor as this mastermind between their fight, it needed A LOT more time dedicated to clashes between those two set up by Luthor, with the inclusion of impostors of both Batman and Superman trying to make it seem like they were trying to off each other much earlier and reveal it at the movie as the ultimate plot twist. It wasn't batman who threw a Kryptonite Batarang at Superman and it wasn't Superman who fired a laser at Batman, its been Agat-I mean Luthor all along. And the reasoning could've been the events of MoS, with Luthor thinking Superman would just attract more trouble, since in the comics and cartoons, Luthor have a mix of a Hero Complex and Xenophobia, which could've been explored here. With another actor.... and a better script... and director.
@@chetori__ If you really think that you need to watch more movies. Like seriously if you'd give that a 3/10 what would you give to green lantern or Catwoman?
The death of Superman was handled like the death of Brian from Family Guy. It's there for shock value only, but you know he's coming back soon so what's the point of giving a damn
If that worked for comics, then it can work for the movie too. In animated movie Superman Doomsday...Superman like died half way through 70 min movie and was resurrected and healed to fight another villain. That is literally nothing new.
@@Wlof25 no. It worked in the comics because superman hadn't died before and was a loved character in the comic world and in real life. Nobody expected it and it was made to be impactful. People had to cope with what to do without superman. In BvS he dies meaninglessly. Most people hate him. Batman already tried to kill him. Honestly if batman killed him and regretted his actions it would be better. And whats worse is superman revives *in the next movie* , meaning nobody has to deal with not having superman around.
Hear me out. Mark Zuckerberg playing Lex Luthor COULD HAVE worked. If he had different line delivery. Think about some of the words he says, now imagine them being said by the Justice League Animated Series version of Luthor or something. Its awesome
I honestly do not see why so many movies are hated as much as they are. Its a lot easier to shut your brain off and just enjoy it than it is to pick it apart.
@@parkerboy795 i think its taken too far, tho. Ive seen a LOT of movies that are universally hated, but that ive loved. Im not saying not to point out flaws, but people get way too nitpicky, and down to the dirt with it.
@@ZGKIV Hey, I like Batman and Robin unironically, but I know it's bad and it made sense why it ended the franchise. Even when you like a movie, you have to see it as it is.
@parkerboy795 Well in the movie they gave you effort, a clear direction, and a vision but people still complain. So this doesn’t apply to this situation at all.
@@midsectionmark8956 Fair enough. I guess in this case it be more appropriate to say some visions and directions aren't the best to take for certain stories.
I don’t care what anyone says. The ultimate edition is a masterpiece. Also, how is this film still living rent free in people’s heads?? I guess it’s just that good.
This movie is so bad that ive actually watched it like 8 or 9 times just to get my head around how bad it is and marvel at all the wrong decision Like a slow motion car crash. You just cant take your eyes off it! The one scene that sums up why its so bad is rhe car chase Batman fires a tracker onto the truck Only to then follow it Crash into it almost knocking rhe tracker off (when it reaches the conpound it is shown hanging off a piece of metal where batmobile came crashing through it) Only to then lose the truck Only to then go to the batcave and track it Making the entire scene...completely pointless! You could cut from him firing the tracker to checking the location and the story would make as much sense! Now..im not saying that that one scene ruined the film. Its just a perfect microcosm of the lack of clear direction, internal logic, and motivation that the entire film suffers from. Theres this principle in writing that you should tell the plot with 'so then..' whereas this film is entirelt 'and then..' One action doesnt follow from the previous. The plot doesnt develop as a consequence of previous point. Its just a collection of moments. The cinematic equivalent of a 5 year old bashing his action figured together
If I were the decision maker at WB, I'd have done these films the following way: Man of Steel (Zod is still the main villain but doesn't die) Batman (basically Arkham Asylum the movie) Man of Steel 2 (introduces Lex Luthor and Cadmus w/ a Bruce Wayne Cameo cameo) Wonder Woman World's Finest (Batman vs Superman) Flash Justice League 1 Aquaman Wonder Woman 2 Suicide Squad Batman 2 Man of Steel 3 Teen Titans Justice League 2 Aquaman 2 Green Lantern Gotham Knights (Batgirl, Nightwing, Tim Drake Robin) Flash 2 (Flashpoint?) Teen Titans 2 Wonder Woman 3 Justice League 3
@@jcaseyjones2829 A batman who uses guns yeah thats Batman, Afleck had the potential to be the best Batman but writing and especially Zack Snyder let him down, man was also so lame in ZSJL when Batman is supposed to be a big gun for the JL
The thing about the snyderverse movies is they're not inherently bad movies. They just fundamentally misunderstood and misrepresented the characters. Like not even just S and B but everyone.
Nono. We understand how depressed they are lol.. seriously though there's barely any character written to them at all beside maybe batman. But everything about batman is shown. Robin suit, superman fight flashback.. we know them enough to understand them. The problem is they're just bad characters. Especially superman. The dude talks less than spiderman in civil war.. not a joke.
@@andyrsonx2182 I am replying on a comment of someone, not on the claim made on video. So asking me that is dumb. The person who wrote the message might think something different compared to the maker of the video.
Your point in the middle is my biggest issue with this movie. Batman vs Superman is its own movie, and the death of superman is its own movie, but cramming these two movies togther it doesnt work for me.
This movie was what sealed the wrong direction of Warner Bros dceu. All in an attempt to cash out quickly the success that marvel had with the MCU, they squandered a Superman Batman team up, a Wonder woman introduction, a first appearance of lex lutor, and a death of Superman story before the character evolved to what he was known to be. And what did we get? Bath tub romance, eating candy and Martha.
Yes very true people being overdramatic had Warner bros think they couldn’t tackle darker tones in their movie… so we got Justice League released in the condition it was.
The thing about Ben Affleck's Batman is that he's a failure on every level except presentation (like voices, appearance, and action sequences). On a fundamental level, Batman killing is a betrayal of his character. Before you fucking discord mod neckbeards say "WeLl BaTmAn HaS kIiLlEd BeFoRe," that was before people had and understanding of what he stood for and when he was still being developed as a character. By the time of this movie, Batman had been an established figure not only in comics, but in media in general for around 80 years! On top of that, he had established morals for 21 years in the eye of pop culture. He was established to be an aggressive hero, who was pure of heart and DOESN'T KILL OR USE GUNS! He's had that since the 40s in the comics. To ignore that for the sake of a non existent character arc is a betrayal of the character. I know he was SUPPOSED to stop killing at the end of the movie, but the director Zack Snyder overrode that story decisions and even went out of his way to DEFEND the murder. The way Batman is portrayed in this movie isn't the fault of WB, but of Zack Snyder. I rest my case
Ohhh just because it wasn’t your perfect portrayal of Batman, that means it was done all wrong. Sorry but I disagree. I get where you’re coming from with some of the points, but these characters especially in comic books, to movies, to tv shows have always been subjected to change. The changes to his characters worked in the movie and the rest of the movies. The flaws he has were for a good reason and made his growth in the movie that much better.
@@midsectionmark8956 The thing is that even in the story itself, the character doesn't work. In MoS, Superman destroys tons of buildings and causes millions in property damage, so I get why Batman is irritated with him. What I don't get is the how Batman comes to the conclusion that he is a monster who must be killed at all costs. The reason I say this is because despite the immeasurable damage that he caused, Superman was still trying to help, and that was obvious. Even if he didn't realize it in that moment, he should have later in the movie when the events that transpires became public knowledge. So Batman is braindead for not knowing that, and if he did know, he should try to reason with him instead of immediately trying to kill him. At that, why didn't he kill The Joker, Harley Quinn, Deadshot, Killer Croc, or literally any of the psychopathic murderers who resided in Arkham. Also, Batman getting mad at Superman for "killing" is pretty hypocritical when you're literally branding criminals to die and running over cars, and even shooting a car so much to the point it fucking explodes! If the point of his "arc" was to stop killing, then he didn't learn his lesson because at the end of the movie, he kills KG Beast after his supposed "arc." So even in the movie, his reasoning/motivation makes no sense. Also, I wouldn't have compared him to the main DC comics universe interpretation of Batman if Zack didn't go out of his way to do so himself, or if this wasn't the mainstream version of Batman as far as the audience is concerned. Before I go into the first part, I'm going to dive into the second part. It'd be one thing if that was a random side movie that wasn't meant to be the focus of WB, it's another when it's intended to start a whole new cinematic universe. Before the announcement of the Batman 2022 , it was clear that the DCEU's Batman was intended to be the main version of of the Batman for the foreseeable future. Then it bombed in their faces and they realized it wasn't it. And to contradict your idea that I can't handle different takes on Batman, I'll have you know that just isn't true. My favorite Batman show is The Batman (2004), my third favorite is Batman Beyond, and my favorite movie series is The Nolan Trilogy (huge shocker). All of these are radically different takes from the main universe (even the Nolan Trilogy, especially the Nolan Trilogy). But the difference between those and BvS's Batman is that they understood the core of the character while doing their own universe thing with it. Hell, Batman Beyond isn't even Bruce Wayne! It was a new character they made for the show who became a cult classic. Which leads me back to my first point, Zack not understanding the source material. See, even if Zack Snyders main influence on his Batman wasn't the mainline, he said WORD FOR WORD that the inspiration for his Batman is perhaps the most influential piece of fiction on the mythos of Batman. I am referring to the Dark Knight Returns. He has made it no secret that he based his Batman off of that interpretation of the Batman character. He even says that he like that Batman kills in that story. Which.... isn't.... true.... like at all! As a matter of fact, that Batman is most synonymous with this scene: ruclips.net/video/y9lpXAOwLHY/видео.html So my point still stands. This Batman is a terrible character in isolation, and in context to the greater Batman media
As much as I hate the flaws of the movie and completely agree with you, I can't bring myself to hate the movie entirely. The ultimate edition is the only edition I count for and it was good in my opinion. Not great, nor a masterpiece. Just good.
Batman Vee Superman! This has always been my least favorite DCEU movie, and I was so excited for it, but was disappointed when I left the theater. Also! For any future reviews (if you haven't already), I'd love to hear your thoughts on the original Suicide Squad.
I thought I would hate it and Man of Steel. But Batman V Superman is probably the most underrated, underappreciated and underserved disliked movie In the last decade. Perhaps of all time? I have never read and heard so many nitpicks and strawmen attacks against any other movie ever in my whole life
When it comes to Batman using guns because he "lost his way" I think Batman Beyond showed perfectly that when Batman reached the physical point that he had to use a gun to win a fight, he quit being Batman and never went back to it.
Yes, but you and most fans that have never seen the earliest Batman comics seem to not realize is that the “no guns” rule was a later addition to the character. In fact Batman carried a gun, used it, and I believe killed in the early stories. So it’s not this unknown, never before done thing.
@@matthewrosenthal753 only for like the first year and it was because they had no idea what they were doing with the character yet
So in his perspective an alien is invading and endangering earth.
And you think that the ideal "Batman" like thing to do is just go "oh shit I had to use a gun, I should quit and let this threat kill people because of it"?
You really have a narrow view of what Batman is
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ i dont think you read the original comment correctly
@@matthewrosenthal753 superman also didn't love lois because she was black in the old comics doesn't make it accurate or good to put in a movie lol
My favorite part of the movie was in the beginning when Bruce was just trying to save people as Superman and Zod were fighting
Yup. It went all downhill from there
@@KoolKeithProductions I hard disagree but whatever
@@olamideawe1553 Explain why "Martha" wasn't the death of cinema
@@KoolKeithProductions ruclips.net/video/OQT1JyLaHwA/видео.html no need this video explains why the Martha scene is genius
@@olamideawe1553 That was the dumbest video I've ever seen. I feel like I lost IQ points just for watching it. Nowhere in that trash upload does it explain why Superman would nearly KILL the ONE person who he needs to save his mother, OR explain why he ACTUALLY TELLS BRUCE TO "SAVE MARTHA", EVEN THOUGH HE KNOWS BRUCE HAS NO GODDAMN CLUE WHO THE HELL THAT EVEN IS!
The other problem with this movie that I've rarely seen people talk about that's far more egregious is the general public's perception of these characters. This movie, for a lot of people, was likely their first real exposure to Batman as a character, and with Batman's character being as flawed and un-Batman as it was, it's going to lead to those people having misconceptions about the character further down the line.
One reason the Marvel movies worked so well is that, despite the stories they come up with being mostly their own and having only a loose basis on the source material, the characters themselves are accurate to the ones we see on the page. They have ALL the qualities that people loved them in the comics for, just dropped into a unique story that fits a movie screen. THAT'S how you adapt these characters.
DC is more complex because of all the continuity retcons and the innumerable individual stories, but Batman and Superman have been around since before WW2 kicked off, and despite the different versions of them that exist, there is a wider consensus about who they are in the main continuity and how they're supposed to be and act. Snyder's movies are almost frankenstein in nature with how they mesh different plots with different versions of the characters that don't necessarily fit the chosen story, and naturally the result was a fucking mess.
I don't see how an attentive normie audience would have misconceptions regarding Batman with BvS as their first exposure to the caped crusader considering this film has made it clear that Batman has fallen.
I honestly can't believe that it's already been 6 freaking years since Batman v. Superman came out in theaters. I mean, I know this saying is used a lot, but good mother of Lord, time flies fast.
Anyways, as for the video, what this guy said about Batman in this movie, it all perfectly sums up why I didn't like Ben Affleck as the character. The characterization was just completely off and didn't sit right with me.
The biggest problem with this movie is that it's trying too hard to be "dark" and "serious" and "adult", to the point where everyone just becomes the Punisher in a different costume
That's not true. It's a stereotype perpetuated by reviews
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ dude calm down people are allowed to criticize iy.
@@nickhutcheson8580 And I'm allowed to call out innacurate criticism
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ bruh it's not perfect. I liked the movie but it has issues. You're not changing anyone's mind by attacking them. It's inaccurate just cause you disagree with it.
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ It's not a "stereotype", it's an opinion
I was literally about to compare this film's Lex Luthor to Batman Forever's Riddler when Vee said it. It's not the actor doing a bad job of portraying a character, it's the writers writing a character that is fundamentally different from the source material. Jesse Eisenberg and Jim Carrey portrayed the role they were given well, but the role was sh*t and flat out wrong in the first place. It's like blaming a cook for bad food when they're given nothing but spoiled ingredients to work with.
Look, Eisenberg’s portrayal of Lex is totally justified in the movie when it’s revealed he suffered years of abuse st hands of his own father, thus becoming a sociopathic individual (the Lex from the classic comics and the Gene Hackman/Kevin Spacey was “I wanna be rich” but this one is a much mentally ill villain)
@@charlespuruncajas9663 I wasn't criticizing Jesse Eisenberg himself, because I feel like he handled his role well. The problem is that this version of Lex Luthor wasn't written to act like Lex Luthor, he was written to act like the Riddler with f*ck you money. And I don't care that he suffered abuse, or rather I don't see it as a valid excuse for these changes, because there are other versions/retcons of Lex Luthor that have endured that same trauma, but they didn't turn out like a completely different person. My issue isn't that Jesse Eisenberg was a bad Lex Luthor, it was that he played a character that fundamentally wasn't Lex Luthor, and that wasn't his fault, it was the writing and probably directing. I agree that the "I want money" motive for lex just doesn't work anymore, but there have been MANY versions of Lex that have better reasons for picking a fight with Superman, and literally all of those versions are better because they still act like Lex Luthor.
Honestly there are nuggets of brilliance within the idea behind this Lex Luther but Snyder had to put in too many Snyder-isms. Honestly I feel like if you put two specific scenes of Eisenberg’s Lex together you’d have a brilliant Lex, those being his introduction where he’s playing Basketball and his office scene. Having Lex be the type of billionaire who acts like an Everyman cool boss that lets his workers chill out and shoot some hoops with him but behind closed doors he’s a sophisticated and deadly serious man who uses that nice cool and chill guy persona to manipulate the public perception of him to be more favourable would’ve been interesting
Yeah they made Lex act like he had tourette's syndrome in the movie or something
To me, Ben Affleck as Batman salvaged some of this movie for me. I liked his portrayal (his initial issues with Superman not with standing).I definitely liked his action sequences, the Warehouse scene being one of them in particular.
You mean the issues with superman killing people while he was the one killing people or you mean the warehouse scene where he killed a bunch of people ? Two things batman would never do ?
@@tehronmoment1367 this version of Batman has been Batman for 20 years and has been through a lot
Because of that he has started to loose his way and starts killing people
In the Martha scene he realizes that he has become the murderer that killed his parents. By the end of the movie he stops killing and redeems himself.
Batman is a villain of most of BvS.
@@tehronmoment1367 Bale killed a bunch on ninjas. Your point?
@@gohanson27 that's not am excuse. We're talking about comic book batman.
@@nickhutcheson8580 it's not used as an excuse. We never had a comic book a accurate Batman on the big screen. We probably never will. Let's see what Matt Reeves bring to the table.
My biggest problems that were not covered here were two things.
1 Wonder Womans first movie appearance was in a movie without her name on it. One of the big three's first appearance, and she wasn't credited. Disrespectful.
2 How did Lex Know the superhero symbols for the other Justice League members? Or did they look at the symbols and thought, "Sure he may be a homicidal maniac, but the man can design."
1) not an issue. Black panthers first appearance was in a movie without his name and it was amazing (better than Black Panther movie).
They didn't earn the idea of Batman losing his way.
Exactly
To make “Batman loses his way” impactful you need to show him before he lost it
@Erik Kemeey then watch Titans, another perfect example of not earning a Batman that lost his way
I mean doesn't the batmobile have a GPS
@@jonathanche6553Too soon dude... but that was funny
The worse part of this movie is like you said how they "killed death". They basically showed us that Superman is unkillable. It is impossible to tease his death now. He can no longer be in that dangerous life or death situation anymore.
The movie was part 2 of a 5 part story. Superman was never supposed to die again in it
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ killing off a character is pointless you want to bring characters back to life cause money it defeats the purpose of killing a character cause only you know comics get away bruh the death of superman inst even emotional he died cause he can't beat a monster not much emotions
@@yarc9 It is emotional because he chose to sacrifice himself for a world that rejected him. That's the point of the death.
And in that way his thematic rebirth into the hero the world needs parallels with his literal rebirth
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ comes off he dies cause he can't beat doomsday end up beating doomsday later on
And they did it in his SECOND movie.
It’s crazy how characters like vision dying holds more weight than Superman. Death of Superman is iconic and should’ve been an insane movie. I couldn’t believe they did it this soon. I feel like DCs problem is like well you already know Superman is important and a good guy. we don’t have to make 5 movies with him. Be sad
Snyder blew his load using multiple key source material comics in just a few movies (Death of Superman, Dark Knight Returns, I'm sure I'm forgetting some because I hate how WB has treated these characters and haven't watched any of the movies twice.)
@@jbbrolic same. I thought the Snyder cut of justice league wasn’t bad though I enjoyed it. Just long as hell. But still not the characters I know and love but it was better
Vision dying is heartbreaking because of Wanda. Seeing her have to kill the love of her life and him just sitting their in pain but telling her to keep doing it whilst she is crying her eyes out is hard to watch, it’s made harder when you see Vision come back being robbed of a death on his own terms and having to see Wanda watch her boyfriend/soon to be husband, get his head caved in
Why this film wasn’t just a live action version of their worlds finest meeting in the animated universe I’ll never know...
Just with regards to the Martha moment the aspect of it I always had the biggest issue is that Superman said “Martha” instead of “mother”, it’s still not a well executed moment regardless but that at least would have made it slightly more coherent
I feel like the "Martha" moment carries more weight than if he would've said "mother", because if he did, Batman wouldn't dare save an alien's mother, till he realizes Superman has a human mother too.
I would have preferred an adaptation of Superman #76 when they first met on a cruise ship.
Exactly. The fact that Zack needed to explain the scene means something is wrong.
Superman: "Save my mom"
Batman: (Who earlier showed he have no care about Superman or do not want to listen to him) * stab *
Him saying "mother" would make less sense.
Honestly I feel like it should’ve been him seeing the same fear in Lois’ eyes that young Bruce had when he saw his parents die
The movie was shot here in Michigan and they put out a casting call for extras so I was able to actually be in this. I was one of the paparazzi guys who photographed Bruce Wayne when he stepped out of the sports car when going to the Lex Luthor party. I have to say that it was amazing being on set and I think in that particular scene, the lex party, there was suppose to be a big shootout or fight scene because a lot of "lexcorp security" extras were being used and those guys mentioned that they were being used in a fight from what I recall. I was a bit disappointed when I initially saw it, but I think there are things that were left on the cutting room floor. Maybe it could've been better.
The worst thing about Snyder's DC films is the fanbase. Edgelords who think a non self aware version of Michael Bay is some brilliant filmmaking genius with some of the crazier ones unironically calling Snyder a god. They think a film having a dark tone automatically equals good even if it doesn't fit the story of the characters, they're conspiracy theorists who think Disney had Snyder's daughter assassinated and made it look like a suicide and according to them not liking his films is somehow laughing at his daughter's death. Their hilarious insistence that Snyder's shallow films are "deep works of art" and saying anyone who doesn't like them supposedly doesn't understand them is pathetic.
"whoever decided to kill Superman in this movie should not be allowed to make decisions anymore"
well after Tenet, even more people seem to agree LMAO
Snyder made the decision, not Christopher Nolan.
Hell, he wasn’t even involved in BvS.
@@StopCallingMeShirley1180 he produced it with Deborah Snyder I think, or at least he did for Man of Steel and ZSJL. It's more about agreeing with a stupid decision rather than him taking the full blame, David S. Goyer is inconsistent af as a writer and usually goes too dumb, loud and blockbuster-like. While Chris Terrio is talented but gets paired a lot with people that kill the indie vibe (Goyer, J. J. Abrams and Snyder himself).
@@StopCallingMeShirley1180 he produced it with Deborah Snyder I think, or at least he did for Man of Steel and ZSJL. It's more about agreeing with a stupid decision rather than him taking the full blame, David S. Goyer is inconsistent af as a writer and usually goes too dumb, loud and blockbuster-like. While Chris Terrio is talented but gets paired a lot with people that kill the indie vibe (Goyer, J. J. Abrams and Snyder himself).
@@ivanagustinortiz5237 he was a writer on Man of Steel while writing directing Interstellar. He was an executive producer for b v s which is basically a title with no job function because he was working on Dunkirk at the time. Snyder wanted an older batman and weirdo lex luthor.
Batfleck doesn’t even make any sense. If he broke his no kill rule after robin died, then why wouldn’t he kill joker and Harley. They literally killed robin
That's been said a million times and almost every time, some tried to deliver some flimsy defense or explanation.
We have to see future films of Snyder's dceu. Inorder to know and make some sense. Okay 🙏🙏
@@sakethramponnaluri4751 You shouldn't use a another film to explain things from an earlier one.
@@parkerboy795 There is no rule about that in world building. Even marvel done that many times one being where did red skull go at the end of first captain America film, we will get that answer in Infinity war. So you can explain earlier film in another film. It helps the world building to make even more sense.
@@sakethramponnaluri4751 Maybe, but considering how it played out, it would have been better to have it shown earlier or better explained. I think that's different though. Infinity War showed what happened to Red Skull after he dissapeared in First Avenger. We shouldn't need a future movie to show us what happened to this Batman and Robin. They probably should have given him a solo movie first.
6 years later, we still dont understand the magnitude of the damage this movie caused to the DC brand in movies.
The characters are damaged severely. Snyder cults want Snyder to return just to make sure the characters are buried six feet deep and never come back.
We know the damage was so bad that they're still scrambling to figure out where to go.
Haha the damage nah the only damage people trying to portray this movie as bad or less than it was.
Hehe, it didn't really that much damage, what did an Gigantic amounts of damage was Justice League (2017)
@Call Me, BLEGH Me, If You Wanna Reach Me the answer is you have laughable taste. Civil War destroys BvS because it actually tries to give a shit about the main characters.
I feel like Batman v Superman should have been a Worlds Finest movie.
Facts
That wouldn't work with the narrative of MoS
I want my fucking refund 😂😂
Freddy vs Jason was better...
There is a case to be made for them to face off against one another first. But Bruce should've been wise to Luthor's manipulation, and the narrative could've leaned more heavily into his suicidal tendencies/the concept of legacy as he's lost his way as both a hero and a person a long time ago. Why not employ the idea from a comic (whose title escapes me at the moment) where Batman actively lures Superman into a fight by telling him he's strapped a bomb to somebody only for that somebody to turn out to be himself (hidden under layers of lead Superman can't see through). That way, he'd test Superman's mettle and challenge him philosopically. He could even go so far as to invite Lois to a private island of his with no wifi and leave her stranded there claiming to have kidnapped her (she'd obviously be taken care of by Alfred) just to see whether Clark has a breaking point. To keep him off her scent, he might use voice recordings of hers and project them all over Gotham City (or Metropolis). And so on and so on.
Then, treat us to a sequel (World's Finest) that cements their newfound mutual respect and possibly introduces Wonder Woman. They should've really taken their time with this.
I understand people liking this movie for various of reasons. Calling it a masterpiece however is just wrong. Simply wrong. It's not about subjective opinion. It's about being wrong.
That word is thrown around way too freely these days
Well said! Cheers good sir!
The Snyderverse fans who obsessively defend the murderous Batman are so bizarre to me. It’s just impossible for me to see that as Batman and it’s sad cause Ben Affleck is a decent casting choice.
Right? They go but but Christian bales batman did it. Ans I'm like ok? Idc. Comic batman doesn't do it and that's what I base it on. I don't wanna watch the punisher they already have a show for that I wanna watch batman.
Literally every live action Batman has killed (besides George Clooney), so Snyder isn’t the only one who did it. If anything Snyder made it point in his movie that it wasn’t okay for Batman to kill and was starting off his redemption arc in Justice League. That’s why snyderfans like myself defend Batman killing because there was a purpose to it.
I think most of us just didn’t make a big deal out of Batman barley using guns. Most people act this version of Batman is being Thomas Wayne in the movie, using guns and his main weapon. This Batman barley used guns and the movie is go great to complain over little things like Batman using guns in his dream sequence. Batfleck did an amazing job as Batman.
@JeffChad Michael Keaton was a straight up murderer bro. Branding criminals is nothing.
@@nickhutcheson8580 & there back at it again in this thread lmao
The dumbest thing about Batfleck is that he was letting the Joker lives, murderer of his adopted son Robin, while was willing to kill Superman, who is a hero in the eyes of many people but a POTENTIAL threat in Batman's eyes. Batman makes contingencies for that, not take such drastic actions like directly trying to kill him.
If Batman actually crosses the line, his first victim will be the Joker. He will sreach the entire planet to hunt him and he will just burn the clown down. Sndyerverse is just full of LAZY WRITTING.
The worst part of this movie, is they could have taken all these ideas, and made 8-9 iconic movies. It’s a bit ironic they overlooked 2 or 3 franchises by making a movie that was supposed to kick off a cinematic universe…
The only thing I remember about this movie is that as soon as it was over, I had already forgotten everything I just watched.
3:29 I know what Vee means & mostly agree except it worked pretty well in "Justice League the Flashpoint Paradox" I know it's different, but that is a Batman that shoots & it works pretty well!
because that isnt bruce.thats his dad.he is a batman that will kill criminals.and the best way to do that is a firearm.
@@gamedragonja8962 Vee didn't say "...a Bruce Wayne that picks up a gun or intentionally kills..."
@@charleshardesty1828 but in context.he is talking about bruce.thomas is a different character all together.
I wish this version of batman was introduced with a solo movie first. Wasted potential
Not at all, we have a million Batman solo movies. We needed to jump to the VS battle already instead of wasting everyone’s time.
@@midsectionmark8956 If we got to see how this Batman was and how he loses his way, maybe the way he's potrayed would be at least a bit more understandable
@@midsectionmark8956 we could have at least get a Flashback of Robin's Death and how this changed Bruce, instead it is only kinda referenced
I agree, Batfleck is great as Bruce Wayne and truly understands the character.
Hell no
He’s my favorite portrayal
@@silashurd3597 for a true fan of the comics, who else would it be? When Affleck was cast, everyone was saying, Affleck? Nah, he's not Batman. A millionaire playboy who spends the nights with booze and women and looks tired all the time, can't be. Not a good fit, obviously 🙄
@@jeffmoppi well, thankfully I don’t read the comics
@@silashurd3597 what did you like best about Affleck's portrayal?
Simply put... You can't do a deconstruction if there's barely been any construction to begin with...
That's not true in this case. Both Batman and Superman are well known.
And this movie is deconstucting the general ideas behind them not the spesific versions.
And those have long been constructed
Exactly. If you want to do a deconstruction and a critique of a character, you have to build the character FIRST.
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ that isn't ane excuse. If you're gonna show us different Interpretations of characters you have to show us why, not just immediately jump to batman being a killer and superman being worshipped after being hated .
@@nickhutcheson8580 But the movie (at least the UE) DOES show why.
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ barely we should've gotten a solo batman movie first. Like what marvel did with their heroes.
I think the conflict between Batman and Superman should've played out more subtly. It should've been Batman using his detective skills to find out who Superman is (because Batman) and then tension building from him confronting Clark with his newfound knowledge. That tension and mistrust remains under the surface while both focus on different problems that eventually lead them to the same villain. The villain somehow manages (most likely mind control) to make Clark fight Batman while actively resisting the control which allows Batman to survive long enough for the control to be broken and the threat defeated while reaching a reluctant (still suspicious on Batman's part) common ground. We get the fight without the nonsensical "plot".
Would you have used Maxwell Lord for this, as a tactic employed by Luthor? Then obviously Luthor turns out to have developed an immunity to Lord's telepathy either through science or meditation to disperse any suspicions of having had a hand in this.
@@tutorialslave Lord or a version of Psimon. And Lex would definitely have something to make him immune.
Sounds like it would have been shit
Regarding the Martha scene, everybody who had watched it definitely felt something wrong but find it difficult to identify the problem other than the fact that how ridiculous it is. I'm here to tell you exactly what's wrong with it, the problem is not about the scene itself, it's everything leading up to it - the built-up for the fight.
The first and biggest problem with the fight is that there is no true conflict. A good fight scene always comes down to the ideological conflicts between 2 characters. While Batman has a reason to fight, Superman has none, he didn’t even want to fight in the first place. The second problem is that there is no emotional stake. Emotional stake is established when the movie shows how important the goal is to the character and that the character HAVE TO complete that goal or bad things will CERTAINLY happen. This clearly isn't the case in BvS because letting superman live will not lead to anything bad at all and Superman didn't even want to fight. Without a clear conflict and emotional stake, it’s impossible for the audience to get invested in the characters or even care about them.
In the end, we got a fight with no underlying conflict, no emotional stake, and no audience investment. By the time the Martha word were spoken, we realized that even Batman’s motivation for starting the fight was just a misunderstanding, a misguided hatred. The Martha scene made us realize that we just sit through 2 hours of a movie to wait for a fight that doesn’t even need to happen in the first place. The Martha scene itself is not the joke, it’s the punchline, everything leading up to it - which is basically the entire movie - is the joke.
What’s funny is the 2nd season of the punisher did the Martha scene better when Frank says to John Pilgrim “what are you some kind of maniac?” and Pilgrim says “they have my kids” and there’s a beat... that was the Martha scene done right
The film was supposed to be called "Dawn of Justice." But the execs made Zac put Batman V Superman.
Was it because Warner Bros. thought the names of Superman/Batman would be enough to get butts into seats(it did, the first weekend) With little charm from the comic it was "borrowing" from? Or the discount Doomsday, or touchy Lex? I can't wait to hear why.
You honestly put it perfectly jessie eisenberg isnt doing a bad job at being a villian hes a good villian just not lex luther
He fits as Alexander Luthor tho
Would enjoy seeing you do some of the other DC ones - curious to see how your take changes, particularly wiht some of the more recent ones!
Also my take on the 'Martha' bit as well is Batman realizing that he's being the same man that killed his own parents. He's about to take someone else's loved one away from them. So he's become everything that made him what he is. That's part of my take on the scenario, at least. It's something that could have (if it was intended) beplayed up a litlte more so I could be stretching.
So if Joker or any other villains even the goons he killed called Martha he will stopped what he intends to do right? Thats just not enough believable reason to justify to how terrible the narrative of that scene is. Very contradictory to what he said before, and not to mention the aftermath of that supposedly 'realization' scene, where he still not learn anything.
Okhaye!!!!!!! Please don't get me started on this.
So, I am not saying that you don't have any understanding of the movie or you are a Snyder fanboy. I am just here to share my POV (You know that's how social media works).
the 1st aspect of "THE MARTHA SCENE":-
So, the thing is that Batman realizes that Superman can destroy the world any time wanted nd there he goes to "Kill" Superman and on the verge of killing him, Batman comes to know that Superman's name is Martha and immediately befriended Superman. I mean, I understand that Batman found Superman relatable at that moment. Superman was begging Batman to save his mother's life just like Batman did in the first place in his case. But does that mean Superman can't destroy the world any time wanted? Does Superman pose any lesser threat to the world now than he did in the first place? Ask Yourself.
the 2nd Aspect of "THE MARTHA SCENE":-
So, Just like you said, maybe Batman remembers why he became Batman at the first place place hearing his mother's name. He remembers that he did not dawned the Mantle to kill but to protect . But then he went to the Warehouse and straight up killed a bunch of people and additionally "burning the KG Beast alive" to save Martha. I mean, the name which put Batman back to his old track of "No Kill" rule, is the same name which belongs to a woman for whom Batman had to kill a bunch of people.
Hope you got my point.
PEACE!!!!!☺☺☺
This movie should have had Superman align himself with the US government to help repair his image after the whole Zod fight leveling Metropolis, and Batman not trusting him not only because he's an all powerful alien, but a government puppet like in TDKR. Throughout the film Superman realizes that being a government stooge isn't what's best for being a superhero, and by the end he and Batman decide that Superheroes need to act independently thus forming an early brand of the justice league.
Ah yes, the movie that was trying to be like 5 different mcu movies at once. It represents all the problems that the early DCEU had, mainly just that they tried way too hard to catch up to the competition and it shows that this was a big mess up from WB.
How is it like 5 MCU movies? How did it try to catch up? Different styles, different tone, R-rating etc.
@@The80sWolf_ What he meant, I suppose, was that WB wanted to jump to their version of Cap vs Iron Man, without the 8 years of character development.
I know they're different tonally and everything, but that's not the point.
And to do that they pushed to cram too many stories into one single movie, which hurt it more than anything else.
They pretty much went from their equivalent of Iron Man (Man Of Steel) to Civil War (BvS), to then Infinity War (Justice League). All of that without taking the time needed to build the characters up, relationships, conflicts, etc. As Marvel did.
WB didn't have the patience and it shows.
Anyways, hope that clears it up a bit.
Cheers from France! 🍻
@@DarthWinterMadness So the braindead audience needs 8 years of build up before they can understand a movie. Got it.
@@The80sWolf_ That's not what I said.
I just tried to clarify what the initial comment said, which I apparently failed to since that's what you got from my reply.
If you want me to clarify some of what I said, I'll gladly do so.
If not, have a good day (or night/evening/morning) depending on your time zone.
@@DarthWinterMadness I get attacked daily by comic nerds and marvel fans because of liking BVS and whatever. I dont bother to read so much into every post.
For me the Martha scene isn't the problem, in a film with a different tone it could be good. But not in a movie with moody Superman who you just know listens to My Chemical Romance in his downtime and a Batman who is branding fools and has a body count well into the double digits.
Lexerburg was never gonna work, Snyder blended Ledger's Joker with the Jim Carry's Riddler and for some reason called it Lex.
Bruce says he thought WW was with Superman when we all saw him literally send her an email.
Jesus christ I hate BvS, fucking capped Jimmy Olson, maybe the second or third most important Superman Supporting character in what I can only call anti fan service.
Also why does Superman need to fly the kryptonite spear into Doomsday when there is an Amazon warrior who is known to be trained with that weapon and isn't deathly allergic to it. Just have her chuck it at him.
Also why does Batman have absolutely no regard for human life. I don't by the lost his way thing, he is straight up, sadistically murdering people left and right. He kills them with guns, he kills them with cars, he kills them with explosions. One time he uses a gun to cause an explosion that kills two people. Why Zack Snyder why? The same Zack Snyder who BTW said in his ideal Batman movie Bruce could get sexually assaulted in prison.
Who hurt Zack you?
Wow this because a rant lol. Great video BTW.
For context here, I was initially mortified when Ben Affleck was cast as Batman- but he actually turned out to be (what could have been) my favorite on screen version of Batman. Now obviously, I too hated seeing him picking up guns and shooting at people, machine gunning people down in the batwing, all just stupid writing. But he didn’t write that script, he had to work with what he was given, and it’s just truly a shame that we’ll more than likely never see the movie that he DID write (The Batman- before it was handed over to Matt Reeves). I honestly think that could’ve been an amazing Batman movie, but I think at that point, WB had already had it with Zack Snyder and his characters, and around that time started trying to phase them all out, kind of started trying to figure out the new future of the DCEU, for better or worse 🤷♂️
And I agree- the whole, “a Batman that lost his way!” argument is f*****g stupid, I’ve never bought into that horse s**t either. But, Snyder’s gonna Snyder. I actually like Zack Snyder’s JL alright though, even though Batman v Superman was a travesty. It truly is a damn shame the way these characters were handled because, for the most part, the casting was just about all good (hold for a handful of characters; Lex, the Flash, I wasn’t the biggest fan of Lois’s casting either, I’m sure there’s a couple more that I’m probably drawing a blank on here)
How is the batman that lost his way argument bs when its completely explained his behavior in the movie considering that this movie is about why batman shouldn't kill and isn't trying to justify the way he's acting when they are actively trying to show u that its wrong
His character arc through ZSJL and BvS is him learning to become the batman he use to be I bet you're a smart person but if you were to pay attention to the movie you'll realize that its hard to miss
I don't like him
@@Ian-hj4yt and that’s totally cool- you’re absolutely entitled to whatever opinion you might have 🍻
@Erik Kemeey Then he goes back to killing during the warehouse fight
Im glad that at least you understood the "martha" moment, I think it became just a trend to make fun of the movie just by the sake of it.
People get it. The way it's played out just makes it unintentionally silly.
@@parkerboy795 also because Zack Snyder tries too hard to be deep when he's not
@@Spongebrain97 True. If anything, this movie showed why no one ever brought up their moms sharing a name.
@@parkerboy795 yeah we all know Batman cant get over his parents death but there were better ways for this version of Batman to see Superman's humanity. In comics and other forms of media Batman initially is skeptical of Superman but eventually there's an instance where he sees Superman on humanity's side aibet he has a backup plan in case he went bad. Thats Batman. Not Synder's version who plans to go on the offensive against Superman who had not demonstrated to be bad. Batman is smart enough to have seen him beat Zod and save the world. He wouldn't automatically trust Superman but also wouldn't antagonize him by trying to spend the whole movie trying to kill him until the Martha moment
@@Spongebrain97 Really, the movie didn't really show their differences and why that would cause them to butt heads. It actually made them too similar.
For my money, The Dark Knight Returns animated movie had the best Batman vs Superman fight. I mean the source material was pure gold, so it was hard to go wrong, but still. That's the best one.
Nah man. The best Batman vs Superman fight is actually Omniman vs Darkwing cuz thats the only fight Batman is in without plot armor backing him up. Powersuit or no Batman fighting with Superman is a joke as Superman has super speed and would be able to punch Batman 1000 times before he can even lift his arms once.
In defense of Superman referring to his mother as “Martha,” he is trying to keep her safe. If he paints her as a human who needs rescued, Batman is more inclined to help. If he had said “Save my mother,” Batman could’ve gone after her too (in Clark’s mind)
Na man
They made him say Martha because one of the writers noticed their mothers had the same name. And it was supposed to mirror Bruce's dad saying 'martha..' as he died in the opening. Triggering Batman's memory and making him see superman like his dad - who when about to die his only concern is for his loved ones. And making batman see himself like the criminal who killed his parents
That was the idea. The execution was horrendous because no one would refer to their mother in the 3rd person like that. And superman had no idea that's what Bruce's father said so couldn't have been an intentional thing.
I agree so much. Probably my favourite review of your !!!
The movie was saved by the visuals and the actors portrayal.
If they do make Flashpoint, it needs to be 3 things: An actual good DC movie, fix as many of the DCEU’s problems via retcon, and fix those problems smoothly and cleanly without it being too insane. They could even do the comic version where everyone lost 10 years.
This is not only one of the worse comic book movies I've ever seen it is one of the worse movies I've ever seen. There's just not a single good thing about it. I know everyone talks about the warehouse scene but one good scene doesn't save it. It is like pulling a peanut from a turd.
I think the main problem is there is TOO many characters like with TASM 2 and Spider-man 3 and while I like the latter two film this one was just to rush the Justice League
I love spider-man 3 but i agree
As much as I agree with most of the points presented, I think, if done properly, this Batman could have STARTED the movie as a jaded asshole who kills people, but his heroic spirit was rekindled by Superman, after their fight I’d like to have seen him ditch the guns and killing for his older approach, even have Superman agree to do the same so Batman as a reason to think it’s a good idea, because even the man of steel says it’s better then killing at this point
But that's what happen in the film. This is about a batman whos more aggressive ever since his adopted son died. he doesnt directly kill but he sees no need to avoid the actions that would led to a criminals death. When he fights hes brutals because he's untamed and the only person who can reign him cant hold him back back. this is a battle that batman though that he would either come out victorious or die trying. Towards the end his eyes is open because now he can relate with superman. hes not the this evil character in his mind, hes not even an alien to him anymore. He's a man who have so much to fight for and willing to sacrifice himself.
"I failed him in life but i will not fail him in death"- BVS Bruce
@@2nd_Variable "doesn't directly kill" is a bs excuse Snyder came up with, because in the movie he directly kills even after fighting Superman, then, he kills normal people but not the persons responsable for his adopted son's murder, that's why a Batman that kills doesn't work. In comics he gets more violent after losing Jason, but he never crosses that line. If this Batman was more brutal but never killed and Superman was going to be the first life he's willing to take, that's way more compelling and consistent with the bigger universe.
@@ivanagustinortiz5237 thats is batman arc. He never directly cross the line by directly fighting to kill. But superman is someone he considers too dangerous to live. Its not a bs because plenty of batman villains die by their own doing.
The entire problem with this movie is the plot essentially is that 2 dc characters known for NOT KILLING are mad at eachother for KILLING, and they can't even do it right, having to force superman to fight instead of making it natural
That is your bias talking. The both characters killed people in some way in comics or in other media. it's just that people are butthut seeing that, because they got used to seeing very specific interpretation of those characters.
But I have to ask.....what do you mean making it natural?
@@Wlof25 using the plot to guide it fluidly into happening inevitably. Take civil war for example the one that did it right... the two clashed against eachother with the soccovia accords, and fought. But it was not personal yet, but then zeemos plan worked, got them together and showed the video. Now it was personal. He didn't HAVE to fight, but because of his character he did. Superman had no reason to fight. Didn't even want to. Its batman V superman. They should have a reason to fight. They didn't have a good reason to.
Then they also become friends too easily. Doomsday was unnecessary and snyder even backed down saying it wasn't actually doomsday.
One of the best superman story arcs was wasted.. the death of superman
And yes. Let me explain batman real quick. Criminals killed his parents, do you think this traumatized kid will pick up the same weapon used to kill his parents, or say 'no guns'? I can tell you it's much more compelling to not use guns. If he uses them he is no different than the criminal that killed his parents. That is his philosophy.
Superman meanwhile has every opportunity to kill people like lex, but never does. He's the boy scout good guy. Have the two killed before? Yes. Does that mean they should? No. Superman was communist once. Doesn't mean he should be on screen. There's a reason batman and superman are famous. Not because they kill people. Because they don't. They have moral codes. Everyone knows batmans ONE rule. His only rule. So why don't you? Because you're too biased to care. Just change this movie to some other characters and nobody would have gave a crap.
The biggest problem, is the movie itself...
It's BATMAN V SUPERMAN. People want HUGE expectations. They want it to be AMAZING. So when it falls apart and is considered one of the worst superhero films of all time, thats really disappointing to them. They wanted to see their favorite heroes duke it out and all they got was this mess.
I don't mind if you personally like it. Anyone can like anything. But do understand, a majority of audiences absolutely hated this movie because of the *potential* it had. We aren't mcu fan boys. We WANTED it to do well. We're just disappointed it didn't.
@@bluefiremarkii Actually....the CW fight was pretty bad. They didn't have to fight. They could have talked instead, because they all know each other and there was some misunderstanding. But Stark didn't want to listen for some unknown reason and he initiated the attack, and other people followed him. That's forced conflict.
In BvS, the conflict between the two was building throughout the movie. Batman thinks Superman is a threat and Luthor is fueling that fire. And Superman thinks that Batman is going too far with his vigilantism and he gave him a warning. Then later he was blackmailed into fighting Batman. There are reasons and I would say that it's much much better then the whole conflict in CW.
Too easily? They were against each other for almost the whole movie and only by the end they became "friends," because one realized that he went too far and that was manipulated by someone else. That's not too easily.
In Civil War....Stark and Rogers were friends (or at least friendly). Then they fought each other, just for Stark to change his mind and be friends with Rogers again....Aaaand to fight Rogers again when he found out for the death of his parents.... just to cover for him by the end of the movie when Rogers broke in that prison in the see. That's too easily.
How in the hell was Doomsday not necessary? It was literally necessary for the plot by the end and for the continuation of the story.
Why was death of Superman wasted? It was the same crap. Doomsday comes, wrecks, get wrecked, Superman dies and lives again later. What exactly is wasted?
Have you ever watched Superman Doomsday animated movie? Watch DC animated movies, which people praise so much and you will see how many double standards people have.
You are being dogmatic about Batman. You do realize that there are many versions of Batman, right? Which logically means that the character can vary from story to story, from universe to universe.
You are contradicting yourself with your talk about Superman. They killed before, but that doesn't mean that they should. Sure. I agree (read the paragraph above). But the same logic works for no killing rule. They have no kill rule, but that doesn't mean that they should. So that brings me back to what I said in the above paragraph. It all depends on the story. Not every Superman is the same Superman. So the whole criticism falls apart.
That criticism isn't valid. Overhyping a movie and then movie not meeting your expectation is not the flaw of the movie. It's your flaw.
@@Wlof25 did you even BOTHER reading your own post before saying it?
"Didn't have to fight" then call the same fight "forced?" Are you okay? Lmao! This is exactly the amount of stupidity i expect from people praising this film and hating civil war. You didn't even cover my argument. Just strawmanned it.
First off, that's the POINT. It didn't HAVE to happen, but because of CHARACTER and how STARK IS AS A PERSON, he lashes out. I don't expect you to get that because you're used to 1 dimensional depressed people who don't know wtf is going on around them.
Secondly, tony and rodgers were friends during the airport scene. Note the casual talk. They just want to bring them in, not hurt eachother. By the end, they fight. Tony feels hurt that rodgers kept a secret from him of his own parents death, and a rage toward the one who did it. Rodgers, doesn't hate tony. He is captain america, he gives tony the phone... but remember, even with half the universe on the line, tony refused to call steve. Refused. That is not friendship. They split their seperate ways and never worked together again. Even in endgame, he still verbally attacks him and tells him to do it himself at first. BvS meanwhile, what did it do? Build *some* motivation albeit flawed. Like seriously, a 1% chance superman is evil? Should we kill dogs because they have a 1% chance to bite you? xD its pretty crazy, thankfully he realizes that at the end
Supermans motivation. Tell me, what is it? Because at the end he doesn't want to. In fact he literally doesn't. Lex has to kidnap his mom to force it to happen. That is bad writing. Imagine if in the justice league, the only reason superman fought steppenwolf was because steppenwolf kidnapped his mom. Terrible writing right?
And if you're going to compare this crappie nonsense to the death of superman you're clearly not a dc fan. Every dc fan knows the significance and meaning behind it. It was an entire story, not just doomsday fighting superman. It was much more than that. But guess what, snyder said this isn't even doomsday anymore! On top of that, we haven't gotten to know this superman and most of the world currently hated him. There is no good from it. We all knew he'd come back. You need to make it meaningful and it wasn't.
And seriously explain to me how doomsday was necessary in a film *about batman fighting superman.* in what way does doomsday need to be included? This is equivalent to if civil war said lmao zeemos plan is true and he releases super soldiers to fight the three and they win and are friends forever yaaay. If snyder had the wheel thats what it would have been. That's not a good ending. Personal v impersonal. Snyder went impersonal, marvel went personal. Emotional fights outweigh big ones. So let me ask again. Why do we need doomsday in this particular movie?
And i can also add.. crappie diologue, superman has less lines than spiderman in civil war, way too many setups for other films in one movie, a terrible portrayal of lex everyone agrees should be riddler including the actor himself saying he wouldn't make a good lex.. oh and before yoy say b-b-but birthright- A. Not canon. B. Not popular, and C. Not tbe lex everyone knows and lastly D, it's not lex as people know and love lex. He is smart and commanding and intimidating. Even when not in control he sounds in control. This "lex" is just wierd. Literally crazy actually. That's.. not him. Sorry. Good performance from him, but not lex.
An unnecessary doomsday fight, a decent fight lasting 5.. wait, the entire point of the film is only like 5 minutes long and isn't even the climax? AND its ruined by the cheesy martha scene. I get what that scene tried to do but.. the execution not good. Hence the memes of it.. anyway, a terrible plot and motivation mishandling of characters, may i go on?
Stop thinking of the movie like a person who enjoyed it, and realize that these are actually literal criticism millions of people had. You can't just debunk one person when millions had the same thoughts. Clearly something is wrong if millions hated it no? If people call it one of the worst superhero films, something has to be wrong. If it was one or two people then nah. But its a majority of the audience. I understand why you like it okay? But can you understand why we do not? Its pointless to argue that its good, when in reality it is not. There are too many flaws in it. That doesn't mean you can't like it. But you have to admit we don't. I don't mind if you hate civil war, but most criticism stems from herp de derp i don't understand this. That's on you not the film, most of us understand it just fine. I can see why people hate captain marvel, even i don't rewatch it. But for some reason you guys call *every* snyder film *perfection* regardless of earnings, criticisms, etc. If we understand that people can hate marvel films why can't you understand people can hate dc films? In fact most people do. My brother in law is a biiiiig comic nerd. His friend loved this movie. Took him to see it and askes how it was. His response was that it was terrible. Hated every second of it. His friend, was not a comic nerd. See the difference here? The fanbase snyder wants isn't the dc audience. Another factor is snyder saying "he doesn't care unless it has sex and violence." And wants batman raped in prison. How is batman going to get raped xD hes batman. Hed beat them up.
Aaaaanyway lets see if you can learn to accept criticism or if you'll continue strawmanning like a moron. ;)
@@bluefiremarkii It would be nice if you wouldn't write wall of text. I will try to be short. I also see that you wrote three additional messages to me, but I am not going to respond on this wall of text and potential more walls of text.
"Are you okay? "
I am, but are you? Yes. They didn't have to fight, which means that the fight was forced and nonsensical.
So Stark and all other people who followed him are dumb and can't think rationally?
Nothing you said there defeats my point. Stark easily fights Rogers and is friends with Rogers, more than once, in like maybe 40 min of the screen time.
I already told you Superman's motivations for fighting. He was blackmailed into it. And no, that isn't bad writing. Bad writing is, for example, if some writing rule has been violated. So you have no idea what you are talking about.
You wrote the whole paragraph and not explain me how exactly was death of Superman wasted. Instead you questioned me being a DC fan, which is not answering on the question and explaining anything. Would you like to try again?
I already told you. Doomsday was necessary for the plot of the movie, just as you could have seen. You know....just like Winder Soldiers in ice in Civil War (which did nothing and ended up dying off screen) were necessary to move some characters from one place to another. You obviously don't know what the word necessary means and don't understand storytelling.
There is just one scene which is a set up for other movies. And the rest of the criticism is subjective nonsense.
No, man. Your logic is just terrible. Millions could say that the Earth is flat, but it wouldn't make it so. Millions could say the same fanboyish crap as you did, it wouldn't make it so. Your whole argumentation hinges on your fanboyism and bad logic.
1.) Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne I agree.
2.) Batman kills because he's already been your beloved traditional Batman for over 20 years, and you gotta remember
in BvS this isn't your 90s animated Batman, this is Zack Snyder's Batman. In the grand multiverse there are many different interpretations of the character and in this iteration it just so happens that this version kills.
BvS is the introduction of this new character of this new Batman, it is a clean slate debut so going in you have to get rid of your comic book/90s animated bias, put them to the side and just take the story as it is and try to understand what the director is telling you. Yes Batman killing is bad and ultimately by the end of the film that's what it is trying to tell the audience, because after his fight with Clark and Batman sees him sacrifice himself, Bruce realizes that "men are still good" his faith in humanity is restored and it took an alien to make him see that.
So yes the majority of the movie you don't get your traditional Batman (Ben kills left n right just like Michael Keaton's did, just like the very first comic of Batman did, and yes even Christian Bale's did at the end of The Dark Knight) but eventually by the end of Batman v Superman you do.
thank you someone gets it. men are still good they fight and kill but in end they can come together and be better.
@@2nd_Variable Exactly
I can't thank you enough for pointing out that Bale's Batman has also killed people in each of his movies, and I say that when Batman Begins is my favorite Batman movie.
Regarding the video, I love it when people try to awkwardly pass off their subjective opinions as objective facts like "If you don't agree with me, you don't understand the character like I do!" and "If you don't agree with me, you've lost your damn mind!"
From what I hear, in the comics after Jason's death, Batman started getting more reckless and brutal (and I might be wrong on this) even threatened someone with a gun. I like to believe that this Affleck's Batman is that same Batman many years in the future, who didn't have any Tim Drake to save him, and eventually got to the point where he started killing for the greater good. The fact that Jim Gordon is not openly hostile to him and is still on speaking terms with him makes me believe that he tolerates Batman's actions to a degree and believes them necessary to a point if you consider the GCPD to be too corrupt.
I think the main problem with this movie is that it doesn't develop the universe and give enough of a backstory for Batman to have the audience empathise with him and how he slowly started getting more and more brutal and paranoid over the years. I completely agree with him doubting an alien God like Superman like he does (he has contingency plans to kill all the other members of the Justice League too when he needs them) and steals kryptonite when he realises that he can use it against him.
The movie is also guilty of placing the burden of filling the blanks on the audience rather than clearly telling it to them, which is very difficult to do when you're in the theater, watching the movie. For example, I felt that the Martha scene was utter cringe but a video on YT explaining that since 'Martha' was the last word uttered by Thomas before dying, and when Superman said the same, lying helpless on the ground, it made Batman realise that over the years in the name of justice, he had slowly sunk to the same level as the crook who killed his parents, which makes him throw away the spear in disgust. Another example is Batman leaving his face uncovered in his mech suit, which I thought was really stupid, when I had to fill in the blanks myself and theorise that it was possibly a way to taunt Superman to see if he took advantage of a weak spot that Batman dangled in front of him.
I also don't like Jeremy Irons' sadronic portrayal of Alfred. The man is like a father to Bruce and him clashing with Bruce regarding Superman should've come from a place of understanding and his tone should have been more sympathetic, considering that he had to have shared Bruce's pain. I did like the small scene of Bruce making coffee for him and saying to the other members of JL that he works for Alfred.
Overall, I like how this Batman, despite being in his mid forties, is still a force of nature who can take on armed thugs in a warehouse or aliens from other worlds. This movie could have been really better if they had given Batman a solo movie before BvS. I'm looking forward to the new Batman but I also feel sad that we won't get to see the Batman vs Deathstroke movie that Ben was so passionate to be a part of, at one time. It would have been really interesting to see him being hopeful again after so many years, only for Deathstroke to take it away from him all over again.
Edits: Some extra thoughts.
there is no reason for him to be killing and i dont care if its not like the comics or the dcau there is no point for him to be killing almost every other batman that kills has a reason and there all else world storys not the main on screen time line just admit it snyder does not understand batman
@@adultnamedtoe700 "Every other batman that kills has a reason" Really? name a couple, and also Snyder's Batman DOES have a reason, it's been made very clear why he kills.
I really can’t stand the people who argue that the only reason this movie is hated is because it is a “Different kind of superhero movie”…
A different kind of superhero movie is James Gunn’s Super from back in 2011. That is a great movie. BvS is a bad movie, cause it doesn’t understand what a superhero movie is. But sure, you can have a superhero in a movie that’s not necessarily a superhero movie, The Dark Knight. But BvS is a badly written, badly directed (Yes, I said it. I hate the direction Snyder took the character’s. Guy’s got a talent for making shit look cool, should be a Cinematographer), overall shit movie.
To me, Batman felt like a side character even though the movie was supposed to be about him fighting Superman. Also having Wonder Woman and Doomsday shoehorned into the plot made the movie feel even more bloated. Batman vs Superman suffered from the same thing Spiderman 3 did where there was too much going on for the viewer to keep track off.
That's because the movie was never supposed to be about it. It was a Superman story. He WAS supposed to be a side character.
Funny because if anything, Superman felt like a side character to me in this movie. It was more about what people thought about him and his actions and how it impacted the world than actually about Superman.
@@ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣΛΑΧΑΝΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ That's why Batman gets top billing and has more screen time right? Grow up
Complete Opposite. Superman is the side character in his his own sequel.
The Batman-Superman "rivalry' is Frank Miller's brainchild. Miller himself said that he'd happily take credit for breaking up their friendship in the History Channel doc "Superheroes Unmasked." After Batman v. Superman was announced, and they had Harry Lennix read a direct quote from DKR at Comic-Con, I just wondered why Snyder didn't just make DKR instead of this.
Snyder said he'd need another Superman for DKR to make sense.
Dude way to drop the No Way Home spoilers with no warning into a Batman v Superman video. Was just gonna go see it this weekend... thanks
The best thing about this movie is it killed the franchise so we weren't subjected to Justice League 2, and 3. Snyder screwed the pooch with DC and I would be THANKFUL if Snyder is NEVER allowed to make a DC movie ever again.
Affleck is still my favourite Batman. But the new movie is my favourite Batman movie
Just came across this review and damn you hit on everything I thought. Zack Snyder is great at shooting scenes, however he is not great at storytelling. Between miscast actors,plotholes and 2 many storylines in one movie. But this is what was given to us, and wo knows how long until we see these characters again on the big screen. I do however skip through all the Lex Luthor scenes, I just cant watch Jesse Eisenberg. ugggh just cringe. Thats not LL.
This movie was 5 movies crammed into one movie and somehow it STILL managed to have Batman's character be completely stagnant for the entire movie. The only points his character is challenged or changes is the first 5 minutes and the last 5 minutes. He decides Superman should die, does 2 and a half hours of busy work, and then realizes he shouldn't be trying to kill Superman
I heard this example of 5 movies crammed into one but it worked out so there’s no problems here.
@@midsectionmark8956 agree to disagree
There’s supposed to be a contrast between Batman and Superman. Light and dark.
Batman is the dark character and Superman is the one who sort of turns him around, brings him into the light
I hated Batman V Superman as well
I was against Pretty Boy Affleck getting the role originally, but he totally proved me wrong. He bulked up, used his facial and hair style to get the look, and got the body language almost perfect. In fact, it's clear he took inspiration for his vocal performance from Kevin Conroy, and body language from his animated work; and that's the benchmark right there.
Given better script and direction he could've been the best live action Batman. Sad he won't be getting that opportunity now.
I personally liked the nightmare scenes it showed a world that was so different from the world we are in yet it could happen.
Batman v Superman is a prime example of dark done wrong. Dark by turning off the me , sucking out all the color palette so everything is grey, and making every character an edgelord is the cheap way out and severely lacking in any real substance. Batman v Superman did the same thing Fant4stic did.
The Dark Knight Returns is still my favorite Batman vs Superman story and a better movie
Personally I think the biggest problem with the snyder verse is that Everyone assumed we were getting an official live action reboot with these characters as if it were dcs faithful cinematic universe And Zach had no intention to do that. These stories shoulda never been the official mainline representations of these characters. They work fine as elseworld artists interpretation of these characters like a frank miller, Brian azzarello or even Geoff Johns earth one thing and if I view it that way they're just fine but that's not what they were presented as
Yeah Superman was saving lives when he blew up the gas station and broke buildings, all the other damage he was doing fighting Zod, he was saving lives. Aside from the family he saved from Zod at the end, protecting his mom, and Lois Lane, who he has no romantic chemistry with, he put just as many lives endanger as Zod and his army.
Zod would’ve killed everybody by making Earth the new Kypton…
Would you kill a million people to save seven billion?
Also, it was his first real fight, that being against someone as strong as he is.
@@SceneWins lol superman tries to save everyone not sacrifice a million.
@@SceneWins I understand what he wanted to do but still, Superman sent his army back to the Phantom Zone. Why not do the same to Zod?
Nobody brings that up.
@@SceneWins Thank god some one here with common sense
Just commenting to up VEE’s interactions
@11:18 Don’t get me wrong I know it’s not the best interpretation of Superman but man they had the best lex actor micheal Rosenbaum killed it imo
Yeah he was a strong point on Smallville for sure. He nailed it. He also voiced the flash on the animated show
This is how the first phase of the DCEU should’ve been mapped out:
-Man of Steel
-The Caped Crusader: Ben Affleck’s solo outing, without the tired origin. Joker is the villain.
-Man of Tomorrow: the sequel to Man of Steel which would highlight the fallout of the first film, with Batman as a peripheral character and Lex Luthor trying to sway public opinion against Superman.
-World’s Finest: Superman and Batman finally meet, but it’s more of an ideological conflict of differences where they’ll eventually have to team up to stop Lex Luthor and the Joker. Pretty much a live action of the animated DC film.
-Wonder Woman: essentially Patty Jenkins film.
-The Flash: solo film, introduction of Barry Allen and his origin.
-Justice League: Steppenwolf’s
the main villain, setting up Darkseid on the periphery. Have Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and The Flash seek out other metahumans (Green Lantern, Martian Manhunter, etc.)
Boom.
@Greg Elchert Agreed.
Oh, FINALLY some person again, who CORRECTLY pronounces this movie title as Batman V Superman.
Ironic somehow, that it had to be VEE Infuso, LOL. I just HATE it, when everyone calls it Batman VS Superman....
😅😡
Honestly I love how neither of them were what they should be, because they fixed that in ZSJL, which also allowed for more character development. By the end of ZSJL you can see that both Batman and Superman have turned into what they should be.
The one thing that I dislike about this movie is we hardly see Superman interact or say a word to any regular human. Even in Man of Steel we never get to see his people skills. BvS is a great movie if you know nothing about these characters.
My boss saw it as a sneak, and having never read the comics, she said she liked it well enough.
And it could be my fault for bringing reading baggage in, but I felt it was a thoroughly miserable viewing experience. Like if someone read Alan Moore and Frank Miller, but still wrote like an early Image Comics title, starring two of my favorite DC heroes. Just didn't click with me at all.
And I actually stood up for MoS!
Gotta disagree with you there. This movie is STILL pretty terrible even If u know nothing about the characters. Even if u believe Bruce wants to kill Clark because he sees him as a threat to mankind, then why the hell would that change just because their moms share the same name? What an awful, awful piece of writing.
@@KoolKeithProductions I think the Martha scene is meant to show Bruce that Superman is not just an alien but a guy with a mother that's in danger. Martha being the name of Bruce's mother made that realization deeper but then again 2 minutes before Batman mentions Superman's parents, yeah its a confusing scene. The movie has great action, visuals and acting but its just not a good Batman/Superman story if you already know these characters.
@@SuperSteph5 Batman could have come to that same conclusion without having Clark randomly say his mother's name during a fight to the death. He could have simply said "save her...please save her..." Obviously Batman would ask "save who?" And then Supes could say "my.....mother, Martha....Kent. Save her..." But nooooo, they had to write it in the worse way possible.
Ironically knowing the characters in this movie makes the movie worse than the other way around.
16:35 Possibly the best Death of Superman movie was All-Star Superman as it was about him making the most of what remained of his life rather than dwelling on the brutality and gruesomeness of his death.
It also served as Superman's ultimate moral victory over Lex Luthor who was similarly facing his own mortality after Lex gets a taste of what it is like to be Superman if only for a mere moment.
What killed this franchise from the start was having Zack Snyder helm it. He makes slow movies with slow motion action scenes that nobody wants to see anymore. He also wants to make his own original stories and not really off the comic adaptations. Kevin Feige loves Marvel so he won't completely betray certain characteristics of the characters. DCEU needs someone like that who Loves DC comics to be the head of whatever they are trying to do. Hearing the flash rumours it doesn't sound like we are ever getting that from DCEU.
It probably because Snyder directed 300 and Watchmen, WB said "hey he's the comic book guy" and thats it. Nolan was never into comicbooks yet made an amazing Batman trilogy
He also can't write to save his life. He's only good at making direct adaptations and remakes, (James Gunn Wrote the Dawn of the Dead remake) When he tries to do his own thing like writing 300: Rise of an Empire, All his dceu movies, and Army of The Dead have some of the worst writing and dialogue imaginable.
It’s the bullets this Batman has the problem with, not the guns.
Yeah that’s kind of the problem I have with Batman. I can understand him having trauma with guns due to his past so he doesn’t use them. BUT, that part in the Dark Knight Returns where he went on to say that guns are not to be used because they are the enemies’ weapons always make me roll my eyes. I’m sorry but when there’s chaos around me and my life is in danger because of some unhinged lunatics wanting to hurt me, you bet your ass I’m gonna use a gun to defend myself.
The cave troll Doomsday was the most disappointing thing about the film.
If WB is gonna get rid of Henry Cavill I think they should be obligated to do one more movie with Bruce timm style Superman story
I hate that every time Superman saves someone, the movie sucks the humility out of it. You don't need people to literally treat him like God/Jesus.
And he hardly talks. Why couldn't he speak for himself in the court scene?
Because everyone blew up
@@midsectionmark8956 no.the entire movie he didn't speak.. he has less lines than spiderman in civil war man..
19:40 are you saying that all of those builds destroyed while fighting Zod, no one died? Sure Superman wasn't directly responsible, but, couldn't he take the fight somewhere else? Lead Zod out of the very densely populated Metropolis? I mean shit, even dumb-ass Goku was smart enough to do that. Nah, people had justification to hate and fear Superman. If I lived in that universe, I would have, for sure. It's why I hated Man of Steel. It wasn' the neck snap, it was the wonton destruction, and zero attempt from Superman to lead the fight elsewhere. Why? Because buildings equals explosions. If you told me Man of Steel was directed by Michael Bay, I'd believe you.
My biggest issue with this movie was not only Snyder's abysmally pretentious style and cringy dialogues, and aside from the absolute worst adaptation of Luthor, was the fact the entire fight between Batman and Superman was held on pure bullshit. Luthor got Supes's mother... in a random building... within earshot of Supes's hearing and vision nevertheless, so he should be able to pinpoint her location and save her, or quickly tell batman himself, since there was NOTHING indicating Luthor was actualy keeping an eye on their fight, since he went immediatly ahead to make "doomsday" (which by all means is more like Nuclear Man, which means Snyder unintentionaly ripped off the worst superman movie of all time). If this movie truly wanted to stablish Luthor as this mastermind between their fight, it needed A LOT more time dedicated to clashes between those two set up by Luthor, with the inclusion of impostors of both Batman and Superman trying to make it seem like they were trying to off each other much earlier and reveal it at the movie as the ultimate plot twist. It wasn't batman who threw a Kryptonite Batarang at Superman and it wasn't Superman who fired a laser at Batman, its been Agat-I mean Luthor all along.
And the reasoning could've been the events of MoS, with Luthor thinking Superman would just attract more trouble, since in the comics and cartoons, Luthor have a mix of a Hero Complex and Xenophobia, which could've been explored here. With another actor.... and a better script... and director.
Fair point;don't blame the director, blame the studio
Also people need to watch the UE. The theatrical is a 6/10, 7/10 if you are lenient. That I can't deny.
But the UE, is a pure 10/10
@@chetori__ If you really think that you need to watch more movies.
Like seriously if you'd give that a 3/10 what would you give to green lantern or Catwoman?
Nah, it's not
People are gonna make excuses to complain about this movie no matter what. You’re absolutely right though the UE is definitely a master piece.
@@midsectionmark8956 nope
The death of Superman was handled like the death of Brian from Family Guy. It's there for shock value only, but you know he's coming back soon so what's the point of giving a damn
If that worked for comics, then it can work for the movie too. In animated movie Superman Doomsday...Superman like died half way through 70 min movie and was resurrected and healed to fight another villain. That is literally nothing new.
@@Wlof25 no. It worked in the comics because superman hadn't died before and was a loved character in the comic world and in real life. Nobody expected it and it was made to be impactful. People had to cope with what to do without superman. In BvS he dies meaninglessly. Most people hate him. Batman already tried to kill him. Honestly if batman killed him and regretted his actions it would be better. And whats worse is superman revives *in the next movie* , meaning nobody has to deal with not having superman around.
Hear me out. Mark Zuckerberg playing Lex Luthor COULD HAVE worked. If he had different line delivery. Think about some of the words he says, now imagine them being said by the Justice League Animated Series version of Luthor or something. Its awesome
Hmm i don't think so
I honestly do not see why so many movies are hated as much as they are. Its a lot easier to shut your brain off and just enjoy it than it is to pick it apart.
Because if you just accept anything given to you, people won't give an effort to try and deliver something good.
@@parkerboy795 i think its taken too far, tho. Ive seen a LOT of movies that are universally hated, but that ive loved. Im not saying not to point out flaws, but people get way too nitpicky, and down to the dirt with it.
@@ZGKIV Hey, I like Batman and Robin unironically, but I know it's bad and it made sense why it ended the franchise. Even when you like a movie, you have to see it as it is.
@parkerboy795
Well in the movie they gave you effort, a clear direction, and a vision but people still complain. So this doesn’t apply to this situation at all.
@@midsectionmark8956 Fair enough. I guess in this case it be more appropriate to say some visions and directions aren't the best to take for certain stories.
I don’t care what anyone says. The ultimate edition is a masterpiece. Also, how is this film still living rent free in people’s heads?? I guess it’s just that good.
This movie is so bad that ive actually watched it like 8 or 9 times just to get my head around how bad it is and marvel at all the wrong decision
Like a slow motion car crash. You just cant take your eyes off it!
The one scene that sums up why its so bad is rhe car chase
Batman fires a tracker onto the truck
Only to then follow it
Crash into it almost knocking rhe tracker off (when it reaches the conpound it is shown hanging off a piece of metal where batmobile came crashing through it)
Only to then lose the truck
Only to then go to the batcave and track it
Making the entire scene...completely pointless!
You could cut from him firing the tracker to checking the location and the story would make as much sense!
Now..im not saying that that one scene ruined the film. Its just a perfect microcosm of the lack of clear direction, internal logic, and motivation that the entire film suffers from.
Theres this principle in writing that you should tell the plot with 'so then..' whereas this film is entirelt 'and then..'
One action doesnt follow from the previous. The plot doesnt develop as a consequence of previous point. Its just a collection of moments. The cinematic equivalent of a 5 year old bashing his action figured together
Though i still think its a good movie, i will say that they missed abig opportunity trying compete with Marvel
You hit every point spot on and I agree 100% with everything!!
This is a masterpiece compared to what Warner bros is planning in the upcoming Flash movie.
Hell no
@@Ian-hj4yt you'll be crying tears of pain and anger after seeing this upcoming Flash movie and probably praising Batman v superman.
@@solomonallen3524 Nope lol
@@Ian-hj4yt And that's your problem not mine
@@solomonallen3524 Then stop complaining
If I were the decision maker at WB, I'd have done these films the following way:
Man of Steel (Zod is still the main villain but doesn't die)
Batman (basically Arkham Asylum the movie)
Man of Steel 2 (introduces Lex Luthor and Cadmus w/ a Bruce Wayne Cameo cameo)
Wonder Woman
World's Finest (Batman vs Superman)
Flash
Justice League 1
Aquaman
Wonder Woman 2
Suicide Squad
Batman 2
Man of Steel 3
Teen Titans
Justice League 2
Aquaman 2
Green Lantern
Gotham Knights (Batgirl, Nightwing, Tim Drake Robin)
Flash 2 (Flashpoint?)
Teen Titans 2
Wonder Woman 3
Justice League 3
The opening scene is one of the greatest, maybe the greatest in comic book movie history. And BatFleck is best Batman.
Batfleck aint Batman
@@Cynical_Wayne disrespectfully disagree
@@jcaseyjones2829 A batman who uses guns yeah thats Batman, Afleck had the potential to be the best Batman but writing and especially Zack Snyder let him down, man was also so lame in ZSJL when Batman is supposed to be a big gun for the JL
@@Cynical_Wayne I wish Ben could've made his own bat movie without Zack
@@inthecloudz1272 same man he defo looked the part and everything Zack didn't understand Batman at all
The thing about the snyderverse movies is they're not inherently bad movies. They just fundamentally misunderstood and misrepresented the characters. Like not even just S and B but everyone.
In what way fundamentally misunderstood and misrepresented the characters?
Nono. We understand how depressed they are lol.. seriously though there's barely any character written to them at all beside maybe batman. But everything about batman is shown. Robin suit, superman fight flashback.. we know them enough to understand them. The problem is they're just bad characters. Especially superman. The dude talks less than spiderman in civil war.. not a joke.
@@Wlof25 I mean did you even watch the video
@@andyrsonx2182 I am replying on a comment of someone, not on the claim made on video. So asking me that is dumb. The person who wrote the message might think something different compared to the maker of the video.
Your point in the middle is my biggest issue with this movie. Batman vs Superman is its own movie, and the death of superman is its own movie, but cramming these two movies togther it doesnt work for me.
This movie was what sealed the wrong direction of Warner Bros dceu.
All in an attempt to cash out quickly the success that marvel had with the MCU, they squandered a Superman Batman team up, a Wonder woman introduction, a first appearance of lex lutor, and a death of Superman story before the character evolved to what he was known to be. And what did we get? Bath tub romance, eating candy and Martha.
Yes very true people being overdramatic had Warner bros think they couldn’t tackle darker tones in their movie… so we got Justice League released in the condition it was.
Ayyy good review.
But damn, random No Way Home spoiler.
:/
It's at 26:20
Go to 26:35 to skip over it.
The thing about Ben Affleck's Batman is that he's a failure on every level except presentation (like voices, appearance, and action sequences). On a fundamental level, Batman killing is a betrayal of his character. Before you fucking discord mod neckbeards say "WeLl BaTmAn HaS kIiLlEd BeFoRe," that was before people had and understanding of what he stood for and when he was still being developed as a character. By the time of this movie, Batman had been an established figure not only in comics, but in media in general for around 80 years! On top of that, he had established morals for 21 years in the eye of pop culture. He was established to be an aggressive hero, who was pure of heart and DOESN'T KILL OR USE GUNS! He's had that since the 40s in the comics. To ignore that for the sake of a non existent character arc is a betrayal of the character. I know he was SUPPOSED to stop killing at the end of the movie, but the director Zack Snyder overrode that story decisions and even went out of his way to DEFEND the murder. The way Batman is portrayed in this movie isn't the fault of WB, but of Zack Snyder. I rest my case
@Erik Kemeey Are you mocking me, or agreeing with me?
Ohhh just because it wasn’t your perfect portrayal of Batman, that means it was done all wrong. Sorry but I disagree. I get where you’re coming from with some of the points, but these characters especially in comic books, to movies, to tv shows have always been subjected to change. The changes to his characters worked in the movie and the rest of the movies. The flaws he has were for a good reason and made his growth in the movie that much better.
@@midsectionmark8956 The thing is that even in the story itself, the character doesn't work. In MoS, Superman destroys tons of buildings and causes millions in property damage, so I get why Batman is irritated with him. What I don't get is the how Batman comes to the conclusion that he is a monster who must be killed at all costs. The reason I say this is because despite the immeasurable damage that he caused, Superman was still trying to help, and that was obvious. Even if he didn't realize it in that moment, he should have later in the movie when the events that transpires became public knowledge. So Batman is braindead for not knowing that, and if he did know, he should try to reason with him instead of immediately trying to kill him. At that, why didn't he kill The Joker, Harley Quinn, Deadshot, Killer Croc, or literally any of the psychopathic murderers who resided in Arkham. Also, Batman getting mad at Superman for "killing" is pretty hypocritical when you're literally branding criminals to die and running over cars, and even shooting a car so much to the point it fucking explodes! If the point of his "arc" was to stop killing, then he didn't learn his lesson because at the end of the movie, he kills KG Beast after his supposed "arc." So even in the movie, his reasoning/motivation makes no sense. Also, I wouldn't have compared him to the main DC comics universe interpretation of Batman if Zack didn't go out of his way to do so himself, or if this wasn't the mainstream version of Batman as far as the audience is concerned. Before I go into the first part, I'm going to dive into the second part. It'd be one thing if that was a random side movie that wasn't meant to be the focus of WB, it's another when it's intended to start a whole new cinematic universe. Before the announcement of the Batman 2022 , it was clear that the DCEU's Batman was intended to be the main version of of the Batman for the foreseeable future. Then it bombed in their faces and they realized it wasn't it. And to contradict your idea that I can't handle different takes on Batman, I'll have you know that just isn't true. My favorite Batman show is The Batman (2004), my third favorite is Batman Beyond, and my favorite movie series is The Nolan Trilogy (huge shocker). All of these are radically different takes from the main universe (even the Nolan Trilogy, especially the Nolan Trilogy). But the difference between those and BvS's Batman is that they understood the core of the character while doing their own universe thing with it. Hell, Batman Beyond isn't even Bruce Wayne! It was a new character they made for the show who became a cult classic. Which leads me back to my first point, Zack not understanding the source material. See, even if Zack Snyders main influence on his Batman wasn't the mainline, he said WORD FOR WORD that the inspiration for his Batman is perhaps the most influential piece of fiction on the mythos of Batman. I am referring to the Dark Knight Returns. He has made it no secret that he based his Batman off of that interpretation of the Batman character. He even says that he like that Batman kills in that story. Which.... isn't.... true.... like at all! As a matter of fact, that Batman is most synonymous with this scene:
ruclips.net/video/y9lpXAOwLHY/видео.html
So my point still stands. This Batman is a terrible character in isolation, and in context to the greater Batman media
To sum it up. Snyder sucks at adapting any superhero besides cyborg
As much as I hate the flaws of the movie and completely agree with you, I can't bring myself to hate the movie entirely. The ultimate edition is the only edition I count for and it was good in my opinion. Not great, nor a masterpiece. Just good.
Still boring
BVS was bad but it has some pretty good parts like no talks about how well Batman planned the fight with Superman.
Lex reminds me of Mad Hatter a lot
Mad Hatter is a pretty underutilized character. It might be cool to see him in a film one day.🤔
Yeah man
Batman Vee Superman! This has always been my least favorite DCEU movie, and I was so excited for it, but was disappointed when I left the theater.
Also! For any future reviews (if you haven't already), I'd love to hear your thoughts on the original Suicide Squad.
I thought I would hate it and Man of Steel.
But Batman V Superman is probably the most underrated, underappreciated and underserved disliked movie In the last decade. Perhaps of all time?
I have never read and heard so many nitpicks and strawmen attacks against any other movie ever in my whole life
I agree with you. Batman V Superman was truly an amazing movie. It's sad that this many people missed lots of points within the movie