The comic book movie is blowing up and there's nothing you can do about it. The most popular trend in blockbusters over the past decade, the superhero film has engulfed the market thanks to Marvel's overwhelming success with its cinematic universe.
In an attempt to provide competition and cash-in, Warner Bros. studios launched the DC cinematic universe in 2013 with "Man of Steel." It was a decidedly rocky start that didn't compare to Marvel's first self-produced film, "Iron Man" (2008), but at least it was a start. It introduced us to the first incarnation of Superman that truly felt like a god, with his indescribable feats of strength and heroism. It was a beginning that wouldn't be so bad if the following films made up for it.
But, in truly disappointing fashion, the second installment in the DC universe is even worse than the first. "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is one of the most bloated films I've ever seen. The film equivalent of morbid obesity, "Batman v Superman" is stuffed to the brim with useless diversions and is largely incomprehensible. Anyone who saw "Avengers: Age of Ultron" (2015) knows that superhero movies have a tendency to start far more than they can finish, and "Batman v Superman" is the indisputable king of this trend.
Based on "The Dark Knight Returns" comic series, "Batman v Superman" picks up where "Man of Steel" left off. I'll attempt to describe the plot here, but just know that in truth, there is little plot to be described in the first place. After witnessing the apocalyptic destruction of Metropolis that resulted from Superman's scuffle with his own kind, Batman (played by Ben Affleck) gets really mad and decides he has to kill Superman (Henry Cavill). As Batman broods, the Man of Steel deals with the fact that some people don't like him and gets really sad.
Then, because movies need villains, Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) shows up, pits the two against each other and then releases Doomsday, a horrible plot device of a monster that ruins everything both literal and figurative. Oh, and I forgot to mention, Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) shows up too, but I couldn't even begin to guess why.
I could spend hours discussing precisely how the translation from comic to movie went terribly wrong, but I'll spare you all of that. We're here to talk about movies, not comic books. But I'll say that from the very beginning of the film, "Batman v Superman" has no idea how to tell its story.
Inherently it deals with a lot of very interesting philosophical dilemmas. What constitutes a god? Can a god live among men? Is it the duty of men to kill the god if he threatens all of humanity? As interesting as these questions may be, the film never fully delivers on any of them. It's too busy juggling its impossibly large cast of equally important characters to make sense of any of its more engaging pieces.
And by impossibly large, I do mean that this film carries the weight of 10 characters too many. As if the two title characters weren't big enough, the film tries to hammer in a third major hero, two laughably constructed villains and a whole slew of important side characters — far too many for any one film to address.
It's the concept of time that "Batman v Superman" doesn't understand. It doesn't realize that in order for a character to be important, you must devote an appropriate amount of time to them. Without the proper amount of attention, characters like Wonder Woman just don't matter, regardless of how much you fluff them up. But even beyond the simple issue of character screen time, which is far bigger a problem than I can communicate here, "Batman v Superman" struggles with time in regard to its pacing as well.
I can't tell you how many times I was confounded beyond belief while sitting in that theater seat. This is a film that shows no desire to establish a proper timeline. Far too frequently, I found myself gawking at the screen as entire scenes sprung up out of nowhere without any attempt to explain the placement of the characters in time or space. People drift from place to place, days seem to pass and then get revisited and events occur seemingly without rhyme or reason. Because of this, "Batman v Superman" is one of the most frustrating films I've seen in a very long time.
Even though it carries the weight of so many errors, there are moments of clarity. Affleck's Batman is arguably the most interesting incarnation of the character that the silver screen has ever seen. He's older, darker and more disgruntled than we've seen before and doesn't shy away from brutality. He and his associated plot lines are highlights against the muddled and confused backdrop that the rest of the film provides. Though much of the action is cartoonish, certain sequences stand out due to their uncharacteristically complex choreography. But any positivity the film conjures is fleeting. Everything eventually gets caught in the maelstrom of confusion.
At this point, director Zack Snyder is known for his style-over-substance method of filmmaking, but "Batman v Superman" hit a new level for him. Though it's a bit too early to know for sure, it would seem that DC's cinematic universe doesn't stand a chance against Marvel's.
In an attempt to provide competition and cash-in, Warner Bros. studios launched the DC cinematic universe in 2013 with "Man of Steel." It was a decidedly rocky start that didn't compare to Marvel's first self-produced film, "Iron Man" (2008), but at least it was a start. It introduced us to the first incarnation of Superman that truly felt like a god, with his indescribable feats of strength and heroism. It was a beginning that wouldn't be so bad if the following films made up for it.
But, in truly disappointing fashion, the second installment in the DC universe is even worse than the first. "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is one of the most bloated films I've ever seen. The film equivalent of morbid obesity, "Batman v Superman" is stuffed to the brim with useless diversions and is largely incomprehensible. Anyone who saw "Avengers: Age of Ultron" (2015) knows that superhero movies have a tendency to start far more than they can finish, and "Batman v Superman" is the indisputable king of this trend.
Based on "The Dark Knight Returns" comic series, "Batman v Superman" picks up where "Man of Steel" left off. I'll attempt to describe the plot here, but just know that in truth, there is little plot to be described in the first place. After witnessing the apocalyptic destruction of Metropolis that resulted from Superman's scuffle with his own kind, Batman (played by Ben Affleck) gets really mad and decides he has to kill Superman (Henry Cavill). As Batman broods, the Man of Steel deals with the fact that some people don't like him and gets really sad.
Then, because movies need villains, Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) shows up, pits the two against each other and then releases Doomsday, a horrible plot device of a monster that ruins everything both literal and figurative. Oh, and I forgot to mention, Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) shows up too, but I couldn't even begin to guess why.
I could spend hours discussing precisely how the translation from comic to movie went terribly wrong, but I'll spare you all of that. We're here to talk about movies, not comic books. But I'll say that from the very beginning of the film, "Batman v Superman" has no idea how to tell its story.
Inherently it deals with a lot of very interesting philosophical dilemmas. What constitutes a god? Can a god live among men? Is it the duty of men to kill the god if he threatens all of humanity? As interesting as these questions may be, the film never fully delivers on any of them. It's too busy juggling its impossibly large cast of equally important characters to make sense of any of its more engaging pieces.
And by impossibly large, I do mean that this film carries the weight of 10 characters too many. As if the two title characters weren't big enough, the film tries to hammer in a third major hero, two laughably constructed villains and a whole slew of important side characters — far too many for any one film to address.
It's the concept of time that "Batman v Superman" doesn't understand. It doesn't realize that in order for a character to be important, you must devote an appropriate amount of time to them. Without the proper amount of attention, characters like Wonder Woman just don't matter, regardless of how much you fluff them up. But even beyond the simple issue of character screen time, which is far bigger a problem than I can communicate here, "Batman v Superman" struggles with time in regard to its pacing as well.
I can't tell you how many times I was confounded beyond belief while sitting in that theater seat. This is a film that shows no desire to establish a proper timeline. Far too frequently, I found myself gawking at the screen as entire scenes sprung up out of nowhere without any attempt to explain the placement of the characters in time or space. People drift from place to place, days seem to pass and then get revisited and events occur seemingly without rhyme or reason. Because of this, "Batman v Superman" is one of the most frustrating films I've seen in a very long time.
Even though it carries the weight of so many errors, there are moments of clarity. Affleck's Batman is arguably the most interesting incarnation of the character that the silver screen has ever seen. He's older, darker and more disgruntled than we've seen before and doesn't shy away from brutality. He and his associated plot lines are highlights against the muddled and confused backdrop that the rest of the film provides. Though much of the action is cartoonish, certain sequences stand out due to their uncharacteristically complex choreography. But any positivity the film conjures is fleeting. Everything eventually gets caught in the maelstrom of confusion.
At this point, director Zack Snyder is known for his style-over-substance method of filmmaking, but "Batman v Superman" hit a new level for him. Though it's a bit too early to know for sure, it would seem that DC's cinematic universe doesn't stand a chance against Marvel's.