So tell me what you guys thought about the movie, did you guys like it, hate it? I personally love the movie and don't get the hate about it. The only real criticism I have is that it was a little jumpy with its story. But what about you, /co/?
Oh, and also do agree with the critics? Why or why not?
I didn't like it for the same reasons that I didn't like Iron Man 2 or AoU.
They have stories, scenes and visuals just about as deep and engaging as a puddle of cold spunk, and they only exist as setup for other movies that don't have any reason to suck any less.
I say this as a fan and proponent of the superhero genre, knowing that it can be light years better than what's being churned out right now.
>>81875840
But why don't you think this movie was engaging or deep? Sure it may have been a little cliche at times withbatman's parentsbut found it still an entertaining movie.
>>81876060
>engaging
What reason do I have to care about these characters?
Yes, I'm a comic book fan and these are comic book characters that I have read before, but these aren't the SAME characters, they're different versions that I don't know. We (the audience) don't know enough about any of them nor even have enough reason to like them to care what happens to them, especially if you're in the know about Justice League being right around the corner meaning that they all eventually make it out A-Okay.You know he's not dead, don't even fucking start.The movie makes the same mistake that MoS did, it doesn't actually take time to let us get to know its heroes so that we can get sucked into the movie.
>deep
There's nothing deep about this movie. It's not thoughtful, it's not introspective, it's just dumb and boring.
I personally don't understand why it's so polarizing. People seem to either hate it or love it(well only a handful of people have said they love it).
It was entertaining, and each individual scene was pretty good. As a whole, it wasn't very special though.
The "darker" take on the characters, even if it's not the definitive version of either character, appealed to me.
I'd give it a solid 6/10. Totally fine. Nothing to get excited or upset about.
>>81875226
I'm another guy who loved the movie and I'm going to give my best stab at explaining why. It will take multiple posts for me to do so, and I will refer back on occasion to MoS.
At first glance, the story is simple, some would say nonsensical, and on my first viewing, I left the theater thinking that the film hit a few home runs, but struck out almost as frequently. There was. however. one particular scene that my mind kept returning to, not just for its striking visuals, but for what was happening, or rather not happening.
The flood rescue.
Why is he simply hovering there? Why isn't he helping? It was on my second viewing that it all fell into place for me. This is the moment. This is when he realizes what he's becoming in the eyes of humanity - the "man in the sky." What is it that he's looking down upon?
Next post.
>>81877350
This.
This family didn't write "HELP," they drew his symbol, but what does it mean to them? For him, it's supposed to be a symbol of hope, his symbol, and he's very much trying to become the man that his parents all hoped he would become - an inspiration, a hero.
What he's looking down on isn't how one responds to a hero. The Superman we know and love is greeted with cheers, smiles, and waves from grateful victims. Here he's being met with hands raised in supplication and religious awe.
This has quite visibly given him pause.
>>81877727
It completes the the realization that began dawning on him in the fire rescue. Here he is surrounded by more people reaching out to him, as if seeking to touch some sort of religious icon. their faces painted as skulls.
Clark's already had one vision of himself sinking into a sea of skulls - an extermination that would have come courtesy of his fellow Kryptonians. He's becoming troubled by the reverence he's increasingly receiving in response to his appearance. He's seeing that he's possibly leading us down a path we'll be only so happy to follow him on - one that brings our destruction by our own hands.
In the rescue montage, we hear one of the celebrities echo this sentiment while debating mankind's place in the new paradigm when he talks of mankind's long history of following powerful figures into atrocities. The debate closes with one of them asking, "Has anyone stopped to consider that he's not some sort of savior figure or Jesus figure but just a guy doing what he can to help people?"
Clark ponders on the couch in silence, wondering how to find his way off this path.
>>81878267
These moments served as my insight to a deeper, more complex message being carried by the religious imagery of the films. I revisited MoS to see if it was a theme that originated there and it was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4teJPCcJSQ0
There is just so much packed into this three-minute scene that I barely know where to begin, so I'll just tackle it chronologically. Here, we're given a scene from Clark's childhood where he's bullied and resists the urge to strike back. After his father approaches and the pack of bullies retreats, Pete Ross lingers behind to help him to his feet, Pete's face a mixture of sadness, sympathy, and maybe even a little fear. Jonathon asks him if he's all right, confesses that part of him wanted Clark to strike back, but then says something that I'm sure that many of us heard from our fathers at one point or another(I sure did) - "You need to decide what kind of man you're going to be, Clark, because that man, good character or bad character, he's going to change the world."
What follows is a scene where Clark decides who he is going to trust - humanity or Zod. He unburdens himself to this simple priest. Only after his revelation do we see Clark framed with the image of Christ in stained glass. Here in this priest we see the first person to associate Clark as being representative of a "higher power," something quite literally otherworldly. Framed with the priest, suitably enough, is a cross, symbolic of the burden he himself is taking on - his words here in these private moments are actually helping to shape the events to come. In the closing shot, we see Clark standing on a threshold, framed by a blank white background, conveying that the priest has passed the test - he's seen beyond the god-like aura that surrounds Clark to see nothing more than a man about to step out into the world, his future yet unwritten - a blank slate.
>>81876371
>>81876585
>>81877350
Thank you guys, I've just been given vague statements for each side of SvB. At least you guys are precise and clear. Thanks again guys!
I didn't enjoy it. Affleck was great, but the plot was all over the place, the character motivations were weird, and for a 2.5 hour long movie it rushed through so much stuff
>>81875226
It was a disjointed mess. They had all the elements to make it work and they fucked up the script and the editing so bad, it ended up being a disaster (in more ways than one). I need Zack Snyder to stop ruining my favorite characters with his bullshit.
>>81878881
That church scene served as my primer for understanding what religious imagery in these two films is actually there to convey - not that Clark is a god figure, but that the people around Clark see him in that light. That's a subtle but important distinction in light of what's to come.
In choosing to trust humanity and defy Zod, Clark is forced into a battle very much not of his choosing and of a scale I doubt he ever imagined. His defeat of Zod echoes his birth as Kal-El. It is the painful birth of Superman as a world figure.
https://youtu.be/IdckKLhIN-E?t=1640
While I disagree with some of the parallels the author of this video makes(I think of Lois as being more symbolic of Earth and humanity), his discovery of the mirroring between Kal-El's birth and Superman's birth is eye-opening.
As an aside, it's worth mentioning that when the Kryptonians first make themselves known to Earth, it's as a simulcast across all electronic media in apparently all languages simultaneously. In essence, Clark is defying the "Voice from the sky speaking in diverse tongues." In this context if he's any god-like, mythological figure, he's Prometheus, choosing rather to defy the will of the "gods" and instead champion the cause of humanity.
>>81875226
Two main issues I had with it
>Superman's character is still way too mopey and passive. Things happen TO him but he doesn't really have a clear development arc to himself
>Justice League preview tie-ins are poorly contextualized within the actual main plot and conflict of the movie and detract a lot from the already jumpy pacing
I have no clue why it's being met with such vitriolic hatred. Especially hearing some things that people nitpick and bitch about that either are explained within the context of the movie, or the shit they complain about directly contradicts the movie.
Like, there are legitimate complaints to be made about BvS. It pisses me off that people fixate on the dumbest things to shitpost about instead.
>>81879719
>That's a subtle but important distinction in light of what's to come.
There's nothing subtle about the religious imagery in these movies.
>>81879874
>It pisses me off that people fixate on the dumbest things to shitpost about instead.
Maybe stop looking at the arguments as framed by contrarian Snyderfags and pay attention to the people actually making them?
>>81879719
That brings us back full circle to what's occurring in BvS. We pick up the tale a year and half after the events in MoS. The security guard Wally's newspaper clippings serve as evidence of what Clark's been up to in the intervening time - being Superman. The one that stuck in my mind was him stopping a missile strike.
Wally's rabid hatred and monument defacement serve as ample indication of the figure he's become over the course of 18 months worth of action. He's not universally beloved, nor is he universally hated. What he definitely seems to be is nearly universally polarizing. We're given a shot of the protesters outside the Senate hearing and see that interspersed among them are Super"fans."
Of all the polarizing forces in the world, the ones foremost in the frenzy that surrounds Superman at this stage of his career are xenophobia, politics, and a nascent religion of sorts. People are starting to worship Clark and his silence serves as ample testament to how unprepared he was to face the world as Superman. His coming of age was literally saving the world. Despite the controversy that surrounds his actions, his very existence, one thing that is never disputed is that his actions were the essential factor in stopping the Kryptonian invasion. But what does a savior of all mankind say to a crowd of people who are worshipping him? How do you bridge that gap? He doesn't have the answer to those questions yet, and you can see it in his frustration as he sits alone on his couch.
Clark is a hero doing heroic things, but those around him continue to see nothing short of a god. In fact, the religious imagery serves the dual purpose of not only indicating that the world is deifying him in a figurative sense, but that his nature(alien) and environment(Earth) conspire to present him as god-like in a far more literal way. Clark doesn't want to be a god, but it's hard to shed that aura.
There is someone, however, who would gladly relieve him of that burden.
>>81880394
And there's nothing comprehensive about your reading skills.
>>81880745
That explains everything.
I really didn't like it. There's parts I like but as a whole it's pretty bad. The characters are butchered, the plot is an incoherent mess that can only be explained by first year philosophy students, and it thinks it's a way smarter film than it is. The whole film tries way too hard to be art when it can't even be a good film in its own right. I think the only people who can really say this film couldn't be significantly better is the shilliest of fanboys.
>>81880745
Enter Lex Luthor.
Upon first hearing whom had been chosen for the role of Lex, I thought Eisenberg was horribly, horribly miscast. After watching his performance in "The Social Network," I had renewed hope and entered into my first viewing with as little prejudice as possible.
I hated it.
As a long-time comics fan, I recoiled at this portrayal and the apparent absence of motivation and a coherent scheme. I left the theater trying to reconcile what I had just seen with my knowledge of comic book lore and quickly began to equate him with Alexander Luthor. The physical similarities are there and he does mention that he's a Junior. Until subsequent viewings, I satisfied myself with that explanation and gave it little further thought, other than returning to my initial reaction that it was simply a terrible casting choice.
I've come to reconsider my opinion. He's not comic-book Lex, he's not exactly Alexander, either. He's his own unique entity.
>>81881161
Lex in his most popular incarnations tends to be a brilliant man. By turns, he's been portrayed in the comics as a brilliant (if diabolical) scientist, a brilliant (if diabolical) businessman, and, as portrayed on film by Hackman and Spacey, a brilliant (if diabolical) conman. In truth, he's been allowed to freely morph back and forth between these characterizations over the years, but at his core, he's always the diabolical genius, the mastermind. In his most interesting incarnations, he at least pays lip service to humanistic beliefs and claims to champion them, but at his core, the diabolical genius remains.
This is a dotcom Lex, eschewing the trappings of the 20th century mogul and embracing the nonconformist, faux-rebellious image of the next generation of entrepreneurs. He's quirky! He's insecure! He's awkward as hell! And he's a cold-blooded killer. One of these things is not like the others, and I no longer believe that's an accident.
Now let's talk about what I believe is at the very core of this particular incarnation of Lex. What is his nature? What is his secret heart? I'll let Dr. Lecter take the floor.
https://youtu.be/f33ieCWRWlI?t=43
Jesse's Lex is the veritable personification of avarice. Throughout the film, we're treated to scene after scene of quirky, twitchy Lex hammering away at the perceived fears of others, repackaging and presenting the fears he perceives them to have in metaphor. He speaks almost exclusively in metaphor and allusion until the subject turns to what he wants. It's at that point that he's only just too happy to tell you what that is, what specific thing he wants from you. When you give it to him, he wins, and this Lex does not like to lose. Just ask Senator Finch.
This is a Lex in full-on jealousy mode. He covets something Clark possesses, but this time around, it's not his godly powers he wants.
It's his godly worship.
>>81875226
its was good. not great, certainly not shit.
trying waaaay to hard to catch up to marvel so everything feels a bit rushed to have death of superman already. It won me over with A+ visuals and fights.
>>81881880
This is Lex's halo.
Here we see Lex at party honoring him for his philanthropic endeavors. His party, At his house. With a guest list that he approved. In that environment, surrounded by a crowd of sycophants, even Lex gets a halo, but notice it's a little crooked, a little tawdry. A little too obviously fake. It's nothing at all like the imagery we see associated with Clark. Ultimately, it is this that Lex covets and seeks to steal.
But how does one become a "Savior" with one already on the scene? Well, discrediting the current holder of that title would do for a start, but what if you saw a way to turn him into the new threat?
>>81875226
It is a failure as a story itself
All stories and moments are patched nastily to please the biggest number of comic fans possible. The characters are only plotpoints that move the story as unbridled train. And the worst part is all the symbolism and pretentious cinematography trying to disguise the blockbuster, like putting gravy sauce on strawberry ice cream.
There's a lot of things i like, but watching it again would just hurt me more
>>81882129
In essence, I believe that we're intended to keep in the forefront of our minds that Lex has zero problem distorting facts, misrepresenting himself, and playing on what he perceives to be the fears of others. Holly Hunter's character, Senator Finch, is one of the only people in the entirety of the film to have the slightest inkling of what Lex's motives really are. For this reason, I don't think we can safely take anything Lex says at face value, most especially when he's speaking to someone he's trying to head game, which is nearly everyone, all the time.
Finch figures out early on that what Lex really wants isn't a deterrent, but rather a weapon of assassination. She doesn't drink his piss. She goes to her grave not doing so. But we see that Lex has already been involved in a campaign of a different sort of assassination, one of character. It appears that in his mind, simply killing Clark isn't enough. No, he must first make of him a villain. One could say that this was all just fear-mongering to get the government to grant him and his company access to what he wanted, but I don't believe that was his sole motive for trying to drag Superman's name through the mud. If that were the case, he'd have had no need to bomb the hearing. By that point, he already had everything he wanted - access to the ship, access to Zod's remains, and a big honking hunk of kryptonite en route.
The hearing killed three birds with one stone -the death of the Senator who smelled a rat, the death of the guard he'd had direct (if clandestine)contact with, and Superman front and center in yet another controversial tragedy.
>>81882277
So about that kryptonite
The only reason Lex ever wanted the government involved in the importation of the kryptonite was to lend him an air of greater legitimacy down the road. We already know he was bringing it into the country, approval or not. I also believe he always had every intention of it ending up in Bruce's hands. Lex invites him to come take a look at Lexcorp's R&D lab, he's already aware of Bruce's secret, and he'd have already heard that his illicit activities were drawing the Bat's attention(the White Portuguese).
His plan in regards to the Bat was to push his buttons via the security guard and the smear campaign against Supes, and make damn sure that the kryptonite ended up in the Bat's hands via a method that allowed Lex to appear blameless. Finch's refusal to grant him an import license stymied his efforts somewhat by denying him the opportunity to appear entirely aboveboard in his actions, but he would still come out smelling like a rose in retrospect if the rest of his plan had succeeded.
OK, so he's wound the Bat up tighter than an eight day clock, and already orchestrated a brief confrontation between Supes and the Bat(and eliminated Bat-Brand in the process, a low level operator that knows nothing, or at least doesn't know what he knows). At this point, all he really needs to do is keep tabs on Bruce's progress and keep teams on standby to nab Martha and Lois.
That's key - the next phase of his plan involves nothing more than keeping assets in place and waiting on Bruce.
>>81882387
Fight Night
With Bats prepping his killing ground, he has his Kansas team nab Martha and transport her to somewhere along the Gotham Harbor. Once Bats lights his signal, he contacts the other team to bring him Lois, confident that putting her in peril will bring him Supes, which it does. At this point, Lex attempts to use Martha as the necessary leverage to get Clark to bring him Bruce's head.
Remember what I said about Lex's propensity for manipulation and lying? It's on full display here, as practically nothing beyond the bare skeleton of what he says to Clark is the truth. He's saying exactly what he thinks will best convince Clark that he's a dangerous lunatic whose sole motivation for wanting him to kill Bruce is to prove that "God chooses sides." He even throws in the whole abused child angle to further convince Clark that he's dealing with a dangerously unbalanced individual. He is, mind you, but Lex's madness is of an entirely different sort than what he play-acts for Clark.
He calls Martha a witch, shows Clark pictures of her with "witch" written on her forehead, and tells Clark that she'll receive "death by fire" as witches have throughout history. This is all subtle manipulation and misdirection on Lex's part. We saw earlier with Granny's Peach Tea that Lex absolutely loves his victims to know it was him that was the author of their doom, and Martha's(and Lois's) manner of execution would have had the same effect on Clark, if not for Lex's one catastrophic, if understandable, miscalculation.
Honestly to me the worse characters in MoS and BvS are the Kents. They are meant to be just good old fashion farm couple. Who raised Supes as a fairly normal boy. Who told him the foundation on which he base Superman on. Superman is just what Clark views as the best of humanity and use the Kents as what that image as. But the Kents seem to raise him with a paranoid mindset that almost push the idea of him being better than us. That the death of kids is somehow justify as long as Clark is alright. Yes you can say it's "realistic" to which I say this is Superman. The man who sets the moral compass of the DC universe. And to show his parents say things like it might be alright to let kids die and that he doesn't owe the world anything goes against what he is meant to be.
Also it just feel like Clark isn't that important. Yeah he loves Martha but he doesn't seem to have any real connection to Clark.
>>81882509
Many people contend that Lex saw the big fight as a win-win, but I don't think that was the case at all. I believe he had a backup plan in place to account for the slim chance of Bruce actually winning, but a slim chance is all Lex could realistically afford him. This plays back into the sole miscalculation in Lex's scheme.
Lex believes that, god-like powers aside, Clark is still just a man, no different than himself or anyone else. But what does Lex believe about people to begin with? Earlier, Lois calls Lex psychotic, and he replies "'Psychotic' is a three-syllable word for ideas too big for small minds." This is one of relatively few insights we get into Lex's true character and motives. While psychosis is sort of a catch-all term for madness, Lex definitely does have a far more specific condition -psychopathy. As such, he views others without empathy and ultimately believes the same of everyone. In his mind, acts of altruism and heroism are just self-serving and that people behaving in such a manner are doing so because they believe themselves to be, in some way, acting in their own self-interest, otherwise, he views it as a sign of limited intelligence, shortsightedness, even. In his mind, great men like himself(and Superman) only do "good" to serve their own image and ego. Ultimately, he sees no difference between Clark's acts of heroism and his own acts of self-aggrandizing philanthropy.
For these reasons, he fully expects Clark to act precisely as he would if presented with a similar dilemma. In other words, he expects Clark to take Bruce's head off without any appeals or negotiations. Why? Well, Lex's stated reason is so that people can see the "blood on God's hands," but as with so many things with Lex(and this film in general), that is simply the most superficial of truths. In reality, Lex definitely needs Clark to win for his "Plan A" to succeed, which is to present Clark to the world as a cold-blooded murderer, a dangerous alien menace.
>>81882544
I used to see it that way, too, but I've come around to realizing that what they were really trying to do is make sure that he didn't commit to anything before he felt absolutely sure he was ready to.
Basically, they saved us from "Child Star Superman" or "Bieberman."
>>81882640
Eh I still really hate what they did to them over everyone else. It just felt like they kept pounding in that he should help people in case it harms Clark. Turning him more selfish. Yeah it makes sense realistically. But it comes off really badly. Not saying Kents should be perfect but the morals they teached him really doesn't jell well personally.
>>81882593
When Superman departs for his fight with Bruce, he does so as the only person other than Lex and Martha herself who is aware of Lex's blackmail. This can only mean that regardless of the outcome of the fight, he absolutely intends for his mercenaries to burn Martha. It's his only out other than prison. The same can be said for Lois, who he just pushed off a building and to which, again, Superman is the sole third-party witness.
How does Lex intend to eliminate the remaining witnesses to his crimes? The answer is Doomsday.
If all had gone according to plan, Clark would have returned with Bruce's head, Lex would have most likely told him that he could find Martha at the family farm, and off he would have flown. Meanwhile, Lex starts the countdown we hear till Doomsday's release and beats a hasty retreat; his mercenaries burn Martha and depart immediately to find and eliminate Lois.
Here is Lex's true win-win - Clark versus Doomsday.
is this copy pasta or is a dude seriously firing off his autismo magnum opus thesis on an overall average movie in this thread
>>81882690
Earlier, I mentioned Lex's manipulative use of the flamethrower to elicit the horrors of burning in Clark's mind, but it too serves a dual purpose. Their choice of flamethrower is even important, as the kind they're using isn't the military grade one might at first expect. It's a commercial grade that produces flame via ignited gas as opposed to dispersing a liquid petroleum jelly. Why is that an important distinction? Because it would leave little in the way of evidence and of all the ways that Superman might kill a person, burning them to death is not only the method that doesn't require physical contact, but is also the most easily mimicked.
So. Clark kills Bruce, the mercenaries torch Martha, and Lex releases Doomsday, in the ensuing chaos, his mercenaries find and eliminate Lois while Clark's in the fight of his life.
Lex wanted to give the world an alien menace. In reality, his plan goes one better than that and gives it two -the murderous Kryptonian who just killed a fellow vigilante and the alien horror that is Doomsday. The only person left living(and not on Lex's payroll) that can oppose Lex's version of the facts is Clark himself, on whom Lex fully anticipated having video evidence of the commission of murder.
>>81882754
The answer is yes.
>>81882807
Lex's plan now enters its endgame - the gathering of the Justice League. We find out via Bruce and Diana that Lex already had in his possession irrefutable proof of the existence of other superhumans. If he had such information, why did he appear to just be sitting on it? Making a revelation of such magnitude would definitely guarantee him a place in the history books, but he seems content to just keep it to himself. Also, why did they have icons that appeared to be tailor-made for each of them?
With evidence in hand, Lex is now free to reveal his true "deterrent" against threats to the people of earth. Regardless of the outcome of the Doomsday fight, there will remain one alien threat for his league to face. They'll even have the kryptonite weaponry Bruce created, but "tragically" died before having a chance to use.
And so it is that Lex Luthor becomes the founder and benefactor of the Justice League. His personalized icons for their folders even serve as evidence of how he intended to commercially "brand" them.
>>81882387
>>81882129
>>81881880
>>81878267
>>81877350
>>81881161
>>81879719
>>81878881
>>81882277
>>81882509
>>81882593
>>81882690
>>81882807
>>81882847
This honestly increased my appreciation of the film. Excellent exegesis.
>>81882847
At this point, you might still ask, "But to what end?"
Well, that all comes back to what Lex wants. Wealth? He has that. Power? He has that too, after a fashion. Fame? Already his as well. So what remains? Something that I very much doubt he saw an in-road to before the debut of Superman - godhood. Lex has seen that his philanthropy can buy you a bright, if tawdry, halo in the eyes of some, a cheaper version of sainthood, one could say, but godhood? That requires one to become a savior. I don't doubt for one minute that Lex intended to eventually find a way to grant himself Kryptonian abilities via his research in the birthing matrix, but being the man who brought the league together to save all mankind would do for a start.
Yes, this shy, retiring visionary genius, saint and savior. That'll do for now.
And it all could have worked, had Clark been anything other than what he chooses to be -a hero.
>>81883016
Many thanks.I'm glad you enjoyed it! And on this >>81883086 note, I'm done.
The film's shit with a capital S. Just deal with it.
>>81883102
Your explanation shows how much DC missed with this movie. If you had to write a whole essay to explain it. They obviously failed to convey any of that in the 2hour showing.
>>81883398
It's so kino only the intelligentsia can fully appreciate it.
>>81875226
it was the worst kind of bad.
it was boring.
>>81883964
got it
>>81877727
>Fuck the humans that could help us. Let´s put a S in our roof to suck the dick an alien
Lex was right
>>81884802
thanks m8
>>81884802
Great, now we can see this in the next 1,200 Snyder apologist threads.
I have no problem with the people who loved Snyder's movies, I just have issues with people who feel the need to endlessly campaign for them against those who didn't find them enjoyable.
>>81885277
It's less of a response to the "I didn't like it crowd" and more of a response to the "This shit didn't make sense" crowd.
>>81885277
It's already being posted on /tv/
An anon apparently had an hard time to believe this autism wasn't from /tv/ itself
>>81875226
It's a mess.
The film fails on every level. Its plot its overstuffed and incoherent, its characters are poorly fleshed and mostly unengaging, and its pacing is atrocious, getting to the point relatively early on where Snyder just stops bothering with establishing shots and we're snapping frenetically from scene to scene without resolving anything... it's just a bad film.
None of this will matter if you're a delusional company loyalist, though. You'll trick yourself into liking it anyway, because that's what fanboys do.
>>81885333
Fanfiction and correlations taken out of your ass aren't really a good response to that crowd
A good response would be "2 + 2 = 4", but when I see these posts I can only read "2 + unknown number = surely it must be 4 and there's nothing wrong in the equation"
>>81875226
Overall, it's so-so for me but I don't like the fact that they waste The Dark Knight Return and The Death of Super Man like that.
I don't really care about the critics nor their opinion so I'm not gonna comment about them.
>>81885381
That would be called algebra, anon.
>>81885333
Too bad the film mostly did make sense (except for a few bits that we're clearly forced in for the sake of imagery, which is BAD by the way), and was just put together very poorly.
Nobody fails to understand this film. It's a very shallow story. The symbolism is extremely obvious. It's just a poorly crafted film that manages to never once properly flesh out its characters, tighten its plot, or make its narrative engaging. Having symbolism is great, but having it INSTEAD of fleshed out characters and good screenplay won't get you anywhere.
Look at actual great films that use visual imagery a lot. Look at Zerkalo. Look at Barry Lyndon. Look at The Third Man. These films have strong narratives, strong pacing, strong characters... they're not blurs of boring shit that PRETEND to have depth by layering symbolism everywhere. They get across their ideas in an organic manner that meshes with the narrative of the film. They don't present boring situations, incoherent plots, and underdeveloped characters, and then sprinkle symbolic clues over everything in an attempt to make up for it.
>>81885407
English isn't my native language, equation is the first word that came to mind
Plus I'm shit at math
>>81878881
Is the priest Catholic?
>>81885419
>Nobody fails to understand this film.
Have you not seen the discussion in these threads?
I'm super fucking stoked for the extended version, and still really excited for the rest of the DC movieverse.
>>81877350
>>81877727
>>81878267
Great.
If this were actually conveyed over the course of the film rather than in a tint montage at the start, it would be good characterization. But instead we start off with a mopey, dour, angry Superman and end with a mopey, dour, angry Superman.
Don't pretend Snyder's failure to develop his characters properly is a kind of depth. That montage at the beginning is everything wrong with the film. It's in such a hurry to get all its plot threads out of the way and set up JL shit that it forgets to make any of it engaging.
>>81885494
Go back to /tv/.
No amount of fantasizing about nonexistent depth will make this film good.
>>81885466
It's Kansas. Probably not.
>>81875226
>a little jumpy
Now that's an understatement.
The pace of this movie was utterly fucked. There was no mounting tension or clear throughline, just a bunch of hacked up scenes glued together to form the barest semblance of a narrative.
How the hell are you supposed to get engaged in a movie where every non-action scene barely lasts more than a minute before they cut to something completely unrelated on the other side of town.
Hell, I dare you to find a dialogue that lasts more than 5 sentences, that isn't related to Jessie Eisenberg mugging for the camera.
This isn't just badly paced and edited, this is demonstrational material for Filmschools on how not to do it.And that's not even getting into the horrid cg on Doomsday, the often embarrassing dialogue and the sleepwalking performance of Cavill.
So even if you don't give a shit about Zack's bastardization of Batman's code and Superman's image, this is not good filmmaking.
>>81875226
It was hilariously bad, and I don't say that lightly, because I was legitimately laughing for most of the movie.
>>81875226
same, but I would have liked more action.
I guess I came in knowing most of the spoilers and what kind of Batman to expect so I didn't care so much.
>>81885512
>end with a mopey, dour, angry Superman
I guess his last scene was lost on you. I swear half you faggots played on your cellphone during the movie. Fucking millennials.
>>81885575
I share this sentiment
In particular i couldn't hold myself during the senate scene. I knew it was bad/silly, but i didn't expect THAT
>Supes silently walking to his spot
>Some extras in the background laughing and chitchatting as if there was nothing peculiar about seeing him
>The debate can't even start because the senator couldn't stop stutteting and staring at the piss jar
>Those awkward looks between Wally and Supes
>The way she slooowly turns the jar around to finally see the label
>Even more awkward looks between characters
>BOOM
>Place is on fire with Superman playing statue right in the middle
I've heard other people laughing behind my seat, and i think i said out loud "HE'S JUST STANDING THERE"
>>81885786
My personal favorites were Batman hitting Superman with the sink and little Bruce getting raised up by bats.
>>81885642
>in literally the last five seconds of his life, Superman says "I love you" and sacrifices himself, therefore he has changed as a character
That's not how character progression works, numbnuts. That moment wasn't earned, because Clark didn't progress throughout the entire film. He was static until the end, so, instead it seeming as though he has finally realized that the perception of him doesn't matter, it just comes across as him, once again, putting his life on the line for Lois and Lois alone.
Which is all he's shown to give a shit about throughout the whole film - the people close to him.
Clark does not get character progression. SYMBOLISM is not a stand in for developing your characters properly. You do not know how to make stories good (actually, I'm pretty sure you do, you're just a company loyalist neck-deep in denial), and neither does Snyder.
>>81885930
I don't get what people try to say about Supes' last moments
How does "i have to defend/save (can't remember) my world, and you're my world, Lois" translate into "truly, i finally see humanity *as a whole* is worth saving despite what they think of me"
>>81885930
I'd tell you that the main issue Clark actually tackled in this one was facing the consequences of his actions and how that's informed by his finally electing to stop being a loose cannon and showing up to a Congressional summons just to have it blown out from under him by someone with a vested interest in making him look bad, then reflecting on a story his father once told him about facing the consequences of your actions and learning to live with your decisions and any accompanying guilt, then seeing him find his road past that guilt and killing the monster that's basically the walking personification of that guilt, but that will all just be me connecting dots that just aren't there to be connected.
The issue of deification isn't resolved in this one and is more than likely going to get worse for him before it gets any better.
>>81886031
Desperation.
These people are desperate for this film to be good. They NEED it to be good. If it was two and a half hours of Snyder's anus furling and unfurling all over the screen, they'd still be praising it, declaring it 'highest capekino' (fucking really? Do you people not hear yourselves?), and insisting that it was just too deep for everyone but them.
Nothing can change their delusion. It is well and truly fixed, an immovable object in their deranged psyches. This is the shape of a company loyalist's mind after years of smiling awkwardly at disappointment after disappointment, of pretending to win somehow. The final nail has settled in their grey matter as a pillar of unwavering delusion, a pure, unthinking, desperate substance, utterly alien to reality. It prods at goads them, filling them with bile for everyone that dares not to share in their illusion of victory. These are the people we share /co/ with now. This is what Snyder has done to his adherents.
He's practically lobotomized them.
>>81886123
>The issue of deification isn't resolved in this one and is more than likely going to get worse for him before it gets any better.
That's what i was thinking during the ending. If people were either too scared or worshipping when Supes was just "that really strong dude that could fly and shoot lasers" what will they think when he becomes "that really strong dude that could fly, shoot lasers and literally resurrect from death"
>>81886175
Kino is a fucking meme from /tv/.
>>81886185
Don't forget "that dude who's saved all of mankind. Twice"
>>81886225
A shitposting meme. Anyone who takes it seriously is as retarded as Snyder.
>>81886123
Oh, no, those are probably meant to be connected.
If only each segment wasn't utterly mishandled. If only the dialogue actually made sense. If only Clark was shown having some progression through the entire film rather than right at the very very end.
But hey man, it's cool, Superman was just the dream of an old farmer after all, isn't this emotional? Except hey it wasn't, that old farmer never wanted that shit.
>>81886233
But i thought the point is that people in these movies are oh-so-realistically irrational when it comes to super-people? What, they just forget about all their fears or exaggerated hopes? Plus this is the second movie in a row that ends with "humans now trust Supes, honest, they built him that statue off screen"
>>81886175
This has zero to do with company loyalty to me. I'm a comics guy. I've seen every comic movie ever made. Many, I have enjoyed; some, I instantly regretted.
This wasn't one of the latter.
>>81886233
except mankind only needed saving because of him and Krypton existing in the first place
still have to see the planet being in danger because of something not related to Superman
Martha's name drop made no sense.
Fuck you.
Fuck the mods.
>>81886299
You live in a world filled with statues and monuments to people and causes every bit as divisive as Supes is portrayed to be.
>>81886123
>a bunch of scenes utterly disconnected with the rest of the narrative
Nope, that is also not how film-making works. Your characters have got to be consistent. You can't have a scene where some important lesson is learned and then have them go straight back to how they were, with a "THIS CHARACTER HAS NO HAD PROGRESSION" sign tacked onto them.
Superman has no agency in this film. He has no character. He shows none of his progression until his very final moment, and, even then, the way the film frames this paints it as him just doing what he's done the whole time - saving Lois from stuff.
Seriously, Superman never acts on any of his epiphanies. If he did, the film would have ended before the third act.
>>81886175
no self awareness is a hell of a drug
>>81886395
That's a wonderfully cause-and-effect view of the world you have there. When the alien invasion force shows up brandishing the Voyager disc, you think we should blame the descendants of the builders of those craft?
>>81877350
>>81877727
>>81878267
>>81878881
>>81879719
>>81880745
>>81881161
>>81881880
>>81882129
>>81882277
>>81882387
>>81882509
>>81882593
>>81882690
>>81882847
>>81883086
The problem with things like this is the same problem with the explanations of why Batman stopped when he heard the name "Martha." I think we all know what they were going for. I don't think your posts are anything new in that regard. It's just that those themes and ideas aren't well established at all in the movie. Most of the things this post mentioned are subtle details that (by the posters admission) only really came to him on repeated viewings paying attention scene-by-scene. You shouldn't expect your audience to interpret Lex's metaphor speak as avarice and jealousy (somehow), or see the difference between a commercial and military grade flamethrower, or think that Lex not liking the term "psychotic" means that he thinks altruism doesn't really exist. Because, as confidently as the poster wrote about him here, those are GIANT leaps in logic that rely on you actively trying to make the film work. If these are the symbols that this film wanted to convey (highly doubt that, but still), they did a pretty terrible job at doing so.
>>81877350
Thank you for this anon, this is fantastic insight. I really liked this movie, and having layers of it peeled back like this makes it even more interesting to me.
Essentially, Superman had to die to show the world that he is not a god, but indeed just a guy trying to do the right thing. Your theory fully justifies the need for his death, which I had thought at first was unnecessary. His mortal wound also marks the first time that his costume is tarnished in any way and the first time he actually bleeds, displaying to the world that he is ultimately just like everyone else.
Was Lex ultimately triumphant in showing to the world that Superman is not a god, and was he doing Clark a backhanded favor by doing so?
>>81886498
Or those giant leaps are "with the pieces at hand," what sort of plan would an historically "mastermind" type villain be working behind the scenes?" That's basically Ozymandias cranked another notch and instead of telling you his plan once it's too late, he doesn't bother(or really even get a chance) to explain his scheme at all.
>>81886476
>implying that only marvelfags hated this film
You truly are up to your eyes in delusion.
>>81885642
>I haven´t got arguments so I´m going to insult you
>>81886622
how was that implied
dope meme by the way
>>81886581
>Superman had to die to show the world that he is not a god
And what happens when he resurrects in next movie?
>>81886670
The guy was calling you and your fellows company loyalists.
Claiming that he has no self awareness would imply that he too is a company loyalist, presumably to Mahvel. If this is not your intent, your retort was even weaker than it looks at first glance.
>>81886498
Just working from the surface downward here, but you're saying that the guy who's willing to bomb a Senate hearing just to make another guy look bad and burn a woman to prove his point isn't a psychopath?
Everything else it says about Lex sort of follows from that assessment,
>>81886710
Shhh, the "Superman had to prove he isn't god" has been poked full of holes and they've quietly moved on now. Now they're saying the film was about consequence.
>>81886476
>dat palpable irony
You know why no one likes BvS fans? Because at least marvelfans can admit that AoU is shit.
>>81886610
Again, if we assume that that was the intention of the film makers (again, I doubt it) they did a really poor job of getting that across or even conveying what Luthor's plan is without him explaining it. It worked in Watchmen because the writing was clever enough that there was a reveal at the end of the story without Ozymandias announcing his evil mastermind plan. It doesn't work in BvS because the movie, apparently, relied on you interpreting Luthor's dismissal of psychosis as a rejection of all moral structure for everyone.
Side note: To me, if anything, that quote would convey the opposite. If psychotic is a three-syllable word for any thought to big for little minds, that would mean that Lex views the world as being full of those small minds. Moral codes would be small minded, yes, but extremely common and hard for people like Lois Lane and Superman to see. He'd view morality as an illusion for him but a hard and fast rule for people not as brilliant as him. Which completely contradicts both the poster's interpretation and his reasoning for Lex assuming Superman would just go and kill Batman.
You see how easy it is to write about things like this and turn minor details on their head? That's what happens with the supposed subtext doesn't match the text. You get a mishmash of ideas that some people will interpret one way and say that everyone who doesn't understand just doesn't get it. When, at the end of the day, it's just poorly plotted and thought out.
>>81886710
>inb4 "He's proving a man can have resurrection powers"
>>81886719
>my fellows
it was my first post this thread, maybe the 4th /5th in a bvs thread since its release
i was implying that they were just as dedicated to their point of view as the people they try to mock for it
it's only weak if you cant see outside of company wars
i genuinely hadn't even considered they might be a marvel loyalist
>Bruce Wayne in Metropolis was very well done
>Batman actually being a detective
>Superman being a symbol of Hope
>The OST
>Lex Luthor Manipulating everyone
>Batman becoming more Brutal since Superman appears, and after his Sacrifice, becomes hopeful and clearly stops killing
>The action in this movie was actually well done.
>On that note, Gal Gadot was a good Wonder Woman with what we saw of her
>Superman flying Doomsday to space, and that whole nuke/healing scene
>Jeremy Irons was a great Alfred
>Still think Henry Cavil plays a good Superman
>>81886819
I can already see shit like that
>By dying and then resurrecting Superman proves that not only he is a man just like everyone else, but that ideals on the other hand are immortal, so no matter how grim the world can be, hope will never die yadda yadda
Maybe we should stop giving them ideas
>>81886581
Not that guy, but I think gravely wounded would have been a greater favor than flat-out dead. Like these guys say:
>>81886123
>>81886233
>>81886185
The through-line of the people trying to make a god out of him is likely to get even worse.
>>81886917
>Batman actually being a detective
All the detective work was just planting a device to steal data authomatically
He never seems to research Superman or where he might hide
Hell, apparently Bruce is stupid/careless enough that he can't even tell what's going on with Wallace, which he apparently cares about, and he couldn't tell he was being manipulated with all those provocative messages. Did he just think Wallace was losing his mind?
>>81886747
I'm saying that the poster's interpretations could mean any number of things because they're not adequately supported by the non-subtextual parts of the story. The poster chose to interpret (often very small) details in a way that's benefitial to what he thinks is the film's thesis and doing that required him to make leaps in logic. Basically, I'm saying these posts are the equivalent of a college freshman getting out of his "Intro to Literature" class and thinking that he can break down the symbols in The Three Little Pigs because he can assert that a pig making a house of straw, for instance, is a symbol of just how shaken and insecure the pig is after realizing that there's a force in nature that could destroy his livelihood at any second.
>>81887039
The simple fact that there are at least 3 or 4 different interpretations all by people who claim their interpretation is obvious should be enough proof that the movie just isn't communicating anything and people are inventing subtext from whole cloth and knowledge from other mediums
>>81886296
That old farmer told him that he believed that Clark was here for a reason and that Clark owed it to himself to find that reason if it took him the rest of his life.
That old farmer wanted Clark to decide who he was going to be before he committed himself to revealing himself to the world.
That old farmer knew that, good person or bad person, his very existence was going to change the world.
That old farmer was interrupted in the very conversation where he was in the middle of a dialogue with his son about him wanting to go out and "doing something worthwhile with his life."
We're going to keep getting deeper insights into that old farmer's character.
>>81887057
Exactly. Just because you can think of an explanation, doesn't mean it was explained or well explained.
>>81886815
Lex being dismissive of being psychotic was only that guy's segue into talking what specifically he thinks is wrong with Lex. It's not much of a stretch, really. Lack of empathy and an inability to understand altruism are two of the hallmarks of psychopathy.
>>81886815
>Moral codes would be small minded, yes, but extremely common and hard for people like Lois Lane and Superman to see.
But he doesn't think of Superman like other people. He thinks of Superman as someone like him - a powerful man, and he doesn't seem to believe that "power can be innocent."
>>81875226
I loved it, I get the hate but I also think it's unfair to call Snyder a hack.
>>81887261
Again, same problem here. Even if that's the case, then that means the poster is taking flimsy evidence from movie and turning it into what he thinks of the characters based on information he assumes about him.
see:
>>81887039
>>81887057
>>81887097
That person found a way to make the movie work for him and that's great for him. But that doesn't mean that any of it was intended. And it doesn't mean that any of it was adequately conveyed. You can argue about the importance of the former but the latter is important.
>>81887330
Or he'd think that anyone following a strict moral code (like Superman) must not be as brilliant as he is. Because if they were, they'd see morality as an illusion. And this doesn't necessarily mean that Superman's power is innocent. He's still using it to render judgement on people. Just, in Lex's eyes, that judgement would be simplistic.
I'm not even arguing that this is what happened. I'm just saying that there are a lot of different ways to take the things that the person wrote about.
>>81887407
OK, so if Lex isn't a psychopath, then what is he? An ideological extremist?
We saw him commit to courses of action he absolutely knew were going to get innocent people killed without batting an eye. I fail to see how that's flimsy evidence for the case of him being the textbook corporate psychopath.
>>81887476
He also had a precedent. He knew that Superman absolutely would kill if left no other choice. He tried to leave him with no other choice.
>>81887508
I think you might be missing the point.
First, no one's saying that Lex isn't a psychopath. Just that his psychopathy, as an explanation for his motivation for killing Superman or thinking that Superman will follow his orders, is a little weak.
Second, that's not even the main point. The point is
>>81887097
>>81887597
Now that, I can agree with.
>>81887550 raises a better one, really.
what did you think about the Jesus symbolism in BvS and MoS? Personally I hated it. Setting up Superman as a god equivalent has creepy implications in my book.
>>81887550
>>81887621
When Lex pushed Lois off of a roof, he did so assuming Superman would come and save her just in time, no matter where he was.
When Lex threatened to kill Martha Kent, he did so thinking that there's no way Superman would be able to saver her before she died.
Personally, that seems a little contradictory and the fact that Superman won't be able to fly off and save his mother before your thugs can kill her is a lot to assume.
>>81887713
Without going into horrid detail, one of the commonly misrepresented things in burning is the victim screaming, Your first inhale of superheated air destroys everything you vocalize with in the first place.
>>81887662
Ugh I hated that MoS scene where he's in the church and they have that hamfisted Jesus shot behind him. This movie could do without the whole god thing with superman.
I didn't think there was enough light to balance out the dark and any scenes that were meant to be a little of both they mixed as well as water and oil. The only scene that actually shined for me and the positivity wasn't crushed by the negative was the tub scene. Man of Steel had the learning to fly bit, the flashback where his mom comforts him when he's freaking out about his powers and even that small exchange with the army dudes at the end, they were the Joy that gave the the film some kind of emotional balance. BvS as it was should have felt like watching someone kick a puppy but instead it was beating a dead horse.
At least the fight against Doomsday was cool.
I feel like I'm the only person who had a problem with Bruce's motivation in this film. Bats has always been..."pragmatically paranoid" we'll call it, but this 8-month long plan to kill Superman was way over the top. Any fool could've seen that Superman was trying to help people the entire time, and Bruce would've seen through whatever pictures the media painted about him, as he'd seen the same thing in his own case.
I can even get on board with Bruce trying to send Clark a "message", but he was actually trying to kill him. Batman was a better Lex Luthor than Lex was.
>You're not brave. Men are brave.
Who does that actually sound more like? We didn't need two Lex's in this movie. We just needed one good one.
>>81887851
That's actually a pretty good point. I loved the Batflecktastic fight scenes, though, I'm actually really anxious to see how his solo film turns out.
>>81887797
Even if that's true, I'm saying that Lex assumes a lot when he makes this plan. Assumptions that someone portrayed as the mastermind of everything in this movie shouldn't make.
1. Superman can only detect people by their screams.
2. If Martha Kent screams, Superman can't be near her in time to save her.
3. The only way Martha Kent could scream is if she's already being killed. There's no way the hired thugs I have could bungle this. They will prevent her from making any noise whatsoever. (wasn't she yelling before they put a gag in?)
4. Superman will not fly off (or even run off) to save her instead of killing batman. If he does, I will know. (Note that Lex doesn't know that Batman flew off to save Martha until Superman told him that that's what happened.)
5. If I find out that Superman ran off to save his mom, I'll be able to kill her before he gets there. I'll be able to give a signal to my thugs to kill her while Superman is already in the progress of saving her. Essentially, I am faster than Superman.
After hearing the metric fuckton of problems the movie has I've been putting off seeing it because A.) I don't want them to have my money even if it is a measly$10 and B.) I just don't care about Supes, Bats or WW, they're just not interesting to me.
Now it's kinda like a car crash, it's horrible, but you just have to slow down and look at it.
I'm seeing it for the first time at 11:05 (1 hour from now) because I have fuck all to do this morning.
What should I expect?
>>81887851
I just didn't understand "YOU LET YOUR FAMILY DIE" as a motivating message for Bruce. Because presumably, that message would only make sense if the person writing it knows that Bruce is Batman. Otherwise it's "You CEO of a corporation, should have done something to prevent the crazy powerful aliens you knew nothing about from killing your employees. This is somehow all your fault and the fact that you're not, right now, stopping one of the aliens is your fault too."
>>81887941
I've always felt this was the weakest part of his plan. I'm just glad they didn't go superdark and have his thugs having already killed her, which, frankly, makes more sense to me.
That's what I'd do, and I'm a professional supervillain.
>>81875226
There's a lot of flair, but the more you think about it, the dumber things are. It's clearly going for thought provoking since it's trying to explore the concept of a super man in modern society, but the writing really lets the theme down. It felt like they were going for epic or quotable, but none of the characters felt like they were fleshed out or more than people that had to behave a certain way so the movie would play out like it did. It also suffer from the same kind of "hurry up and set up the universe" that the ASM series did. MoS actually feels better in that regard because at least it's its own movie.
The critics gave it a 5/10 and I can see that. The RT score is really about recommending it to others and I agree with that. There's nothing in here for the loud blockbuster audience or the thoughtful, critical audience. It's not the worst movie I've ever seen, but I can't really imagine sitting through it another time and I would not recommend it to anyone I know.
>>81887961
Depends on what kind of taste you have. If you are a decent, semi-intelligent human being capable of being subjective, you will probably enjoy it.
If you are a retard manchild who sticks his fingers in his ears and just wants to bitch, you will the the worst movie ever made.
>>81887961
Expect some plot and motivation problems that will impact the movie only a little or a lot depending on your movie preferences.
>>81886175
I disagree. I'm not a superhero fan and not a Snyder fan in particular, but I thought BvS was a very interesting take on the genre. It seemed to be a deconstruction of these icons rather than an attempt to create the definitive screen versions of them. It's not deep but definitely had something to say about the relationship between belief/hope and cynicism/hopelessness, and appropriately couched in the imagery of popular literature and film, since Batman and Superman are popular icons.
As for the editing, I actually liked how dense it was. Superhero films are usually very lightly plotted so one where something is always happening, and nothing is needlessly lingered on, came across as refreshingly different. I disagree with the idea that every character needs their own film to build the universe at a slow pace. A usual film has to introduce all the characters and the entire set-up within itself, and BvS even has the luxury of being part of a series, so why can't it introduce lots of things?
It's fair enough if that didn't work for a lot of people, but personally I didn't find it disorienting or dour. In fact the message at the end seems very uplifting because it was surprisingly applicable for a superhero film: that although perfect heroes like the popular idea of Superman can't exist, with sacrifice there is a way forward.
>>81887851
You're not alone. It was stupid as fuck but it worked because there's plenty of precedent for Batman being crazy and Afleck did such a great job.
>Who does that actually sound more like? We didn't need two Lex's in this movie. We just needed one good one.
I actually think the movie should have been Man of Steel 2 with Batman's role given to Alexander Luthor, who like Bats is mad because he's an all around unstable person and has a massive complex that Supes triggered by knocking down his building and making him feel small, but they could have been more honest about it. Lex could easily pit the two against each other, goading his dad in an attempt to discredit and usurp him while acting all innocent to Superman and playing of his trustworthiness, they could have even kept in the whole "My powers should have given it away but I was too distracted".
>>81875226
I'm going to wait for the Directors Cut before I fully condemn it. The DC Universe isn't completely fucked but man these first two outings are not great.
Loved it. Genuinely feel it's a brilliant movie. But understand why so many hate it.
Something I'm surprised no one mentions is how well the big bad tease was handled. The whole trope of "Coming up in the next issue..." is a huge trope of superhero comics and now superhero films. So I was impressed that BvS handled it in a way that's very different and effective at the same time. There's a weird speech by Lex about setting off a bell and alerting things in the dark of space, then a zoom-in to the painting of demons. The significance of the demon painting was set up earlier, and it being turned upside down and the room being a crime scene at the end created a great sense of something being wrong or sinister. Rather than setting up a villain of the week, the implication was that evil itself is coming.
>>81887961
Hilarity, and I honestly mean it.
All in all, I didn't hate it. It suffered from many bad points, mostly from MoS.
It's not a muh superman issue. Superman can be good or bad, gloomy, cheerful, a boy scout , a dictator, all that works. But he's the leading force. As a good guy he's the plantet's champion, as a dictator he rules with an iron fist. He's now swayed, he sways. I can imagine a future where he's broken and old, where the world moved past him for him to not give a fuck but at his prime? when he just saved the world an announced himself? having a whiny teen with angst as the spotlight of the world is very, very annoying. Not to mention his constant need for emotional support. The guy literally needs a hug from mommy or gf/mommy to move on. He's the big guy (for you) he pulls people behind him, he doesn't get pushed forward by others. There are many ways to do superman but that doesn't mean that every single idea is possible.
That being said the movie had good parts
Alfred
Battlflec
WW getting turned on by being beaten up. -I hope this stays as a theme- Gadot in general was ok.
>>81888937
>Rather than setting up a villain of the week, the implication was that evil itself is coming
Zack, is that you? It's pointless to act as if your stuff is so grandiose when each new "Blank-man" movie ends up being way better
>>81888937
It didn't really work, because people who don't know DC were confused as hell (at least in my experience) and those who do knew what was going on immediately.
Kinda like the Omega in the Knightmare.
>>81889279
>It didn't really work, because people who don't know DC were confused as hell (at least in my experience)
In my experience not so, I was only vaguely aware of darkseid but the idea that something big and evil had been alerted came across very clearly for me.
>>81889394
I guess anecdotes are anecdotes.
>>81889432
Yep. Everyone gets a different experience out of stuff. I thought it was great, but I totally get why a lot of people didn't like it.
>>81889121
*not swayed
>>81877350
It's almost kind of amazing what mental gymnastics people will go through just to justify liking a 5/10 (at best).
>You don't understand there are so many layers!
Bullshit, this movie like with most of Snyder's movies, are the movie equivalent of bull shots. The flood scene was designed to be shown in a trailer, it makes no sense that Superman would fly out to help people and then just sit there and think about it an extra secondunless that is what he did for Jimmy Olsen, by the time he arrives he would already be aware. It's like the shot in MoS where he sinks into the skulls, it looks good in a trailer but makes no fucking sense in the movie. This made more obvious by it's disjointed nature, jamming in plot elements that exist solely to set up other movies and show in trailers to trick people into thinking that it might matter in the movie. What purpose did all the JL shit have in the movie? It might have been appropriate at the end, but it otherwise brought nothing to the narrative. What the fuck was the point of Wonder Woman? She served to drag out the 2nd act by taking something from Bruce that would have been better off in his hands to begin with. Oh and of course showing up to fight durrsday, which was also another necessary subplot.
And shit like this >>81878881 really demonstrates to me how juvenile the audience who are so die hard over these movies are. You make a big deal about these themes in these movies and act like they are some subtle whisper of a brilliant artist when it is a deafening roar of a buffoon. They aren't subtle imagery or hidden themes, they are obvious as a flamingo in the arctic. You are so caught up by the spectacle of supposed depth you don't look any deeper to see the vast incoherence.
These movies are fireworks displays. They exist purely look good in the eye of the audience, anything past it is empty sky.
>>81889612
That's an awful lot of words to say "I don't like thing".
Regardless of my opinion of the film, by virtue of the fact that the purpose of art is to enflame, this film is an absolutely top tier piece of art
>>81889612
>It's like the shot in MoS where he sinks into the skulls, it looks good in a trailer but makes no fucking sense in the movie.
But it does because it's a psychic vision and represents all the humans Zod's gonna kill.
I don't even like Man of Steel and think the scene is silly but it's pretty obvious what's going on.
>>81889612
A lot of this legit makes it seems like you actually didn't understand some things
>>81889612
>a capeflick being a big, flashy spectacle is a bad thing
That's what they're supposed to be, anon. Obviously, someone thinks it's a deep and complex movie is wrong, but people liking it for the wrong reasons doesn't make the movie bad.
>>81889612
Don't bother, anon, as another already pointed out these people are just desperate to either feel smart about something or to prove that my company/favourite thing > yours
They feel like the underdog, "complex" and long analysis like the the ones ITT are their way to claim justice against such "unfair" criticism
Then when you start doing the same to explain why you didn't like it they call you names. The other day i explained in 4-5 posts what i thought of the movie and i was told to stop write "blogs". Months ago an anon decided to make a long comparison between MoS and Birthright (the movie was obviously partially inspired by it) and when things didn't look good for MoS people called him an autist and claimed the movie "actually" takes inspiration from X or Y so that comparing it to Birthright wouldn't be fair
>>81890414
Have you considered that entering these threads and engaging with this kind of person isn't a valuable use of you time
>>81883016
Yeah, the movie is a visual assault, but if you watch it more than once, everything comes into image. The fact it's a "dumb cape movie" makes critics under value it, since they don't want to praise a dumb blockbuster.
>>81887713
Did you miss the part with the wheelchair? Superman didn't look and he has doubts about whether he can save everyone. Luthor made Supes doubt his ability to do his job
>>81889279
You're just supposed to know that something evil is coming and that everything's going to hell if the league doesn't stop it. You don't need to have Darkseid on a chair laughing to show that
>>81890414
This board is v 2.0, so it's not surprising
>>81875226
Loved it. Batman was perfect
Lex was laughibly bad
Superman still uncharasmatic as fuck
Blatant Bat homicide
useless subplot thats only there because Lois needs to do something. Actually lets talk about that.
So lois is in africa interviewing a terrorist, Superman comes down and Raidens the guy. Outside Lex's men shoot everyone, and everyone back in metropolis is mad he killed those people.
First off, Superman's public opinoin would sky rocket if he murdered a bunch of terrorists. Second. how the fuck was lex framing superman here? "Yea, Superman killed those guys with guns. yes-sir-ee"
And then I thought they were gonna do something smart with Lex framing him for blowing up congress or whatever. But the movie throws that out the window with the news going. "We have reports the explosion was caused by Wally Whatshisface, with a bomb inside his wheelchair." What? Their first and only thoughts should be "Oh my god Superman killed everyone at the Superman hearing." How did they get this info? And if they got that info, then they should also know that Lex was mysteriously missing and that said wheelchair was from his company.
This movie is such a fucking mess
>>81890804
If that was the point of blowing up the Senate, then Lex is still making a load of huge assumptions. Assuming Superman wouldn't be able to detect the bomb. Assuming Superman would be able to save Lois after "doubting his abilities." Assuming that, despite being able to save Lois, Superman will doubt his abilities enough to not even try to find his mom. It's a stupid plan. They're both stupid plans.
If Superman could tell Lois was falling off of a building and respond almost instantly, why couldn't he do the same for his mom?
>>81878938
Hey, I appreciate people who have the wisdom to listen to and understand people with different opinions. Gold star, OP.
>>81891199
He never fucked his mom pussy.
>>81891937
I feel like I've missed some vital aspect of Superman's powers.
