FILM REVIEW: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice opens with the same devastation that ended 2013’s Man of Steel, as Supes (Henry Cavill) and General Zod (Michael Shannon) threw down and battled, wreaking destruction upon Metropolis’ skyline. Only this time, it is seen from the vantage point of Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), choppered in from neighbouring Gotham City to watch helplessly as his employees are trapped and ultimately killed in the fallout.

It goes to explain away some of his contempt for the Kryptonian but only ever-so slightly. Yet again, we are treated to the now inevitable flashback to Bruce’s parents and their murder, except now they’re played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Lauren Cohan, and it’s 1981. There’s another bat sequence too. Necessary? Not remotely but it serves as a heavy-handed reminder that the two main things still driving Bruce are vengeance and fear. Clark is still working at the Daily Planet, loving/saving Lois (Amy Adams) and generally wondering whether Superman can actually exist in a world that doesn’t really know if it wants him or outside of Lois, he really wants it. He also finds himself judging the Bat’s from of vigilante justice. Eventually both are brought together by scheming sycophant Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) at the opening of a library, no less. Also in attendance is a mystery lady – could she be Wonder Woman? Of course she is, we’ve all seen the trailer.

The action flits between Gotham, Metropolis, the Indian Ocean, Africa and Bruce’s subconscious, all within the first hour or so. Sadly, this lack of focus remains as more subplots give way to some convolution and a few bloated set-pieces, in addition to some rather inexplicable moments which do not serve the overarching plot and feel wholly out of place. For example, Lois having a bath, or a sweaty Bruce hitting a large tyre with a sledge hammer and even the deceased Jonathan Kent atop a snowy mountain are head-scratchers and deserved to have seen the cutting room floor.

Usually, a superhero’s popularity depends upon the context of time and perhaps, due to the darkness of the world as it is, gives way to audiences wanting to see the character as he was - namely the Reeve guise; bumbling geek Clark and the heroic, always got a smile for everyone, Kal-El – or as he is on the page. Snyder has instead used 9/11, terrorism and illegal aliens and has the film(s) reflect this dark, angry, miserable and political world we inhabit. Apparently, in an attempt to ground Superman in some sort of reality; an alien from an extinct planet, who can fly, is indestructible save for interaction with a glowing green rock, and shoots lasers from his eyes… Can he ever really be that realistic? An audience doesn’t need to delve too far to see the potential allegorical readings, they are all fairly obvious.

On the one hand, I miss the red pants, and the confident, almost care-free caped chappy who didn’t really seem to have a temper and was a friend to everyone. Yet on the other, a change is as good as a rest, it worked (mostly) for Batman. The Superman of my childhood is still accessible, and this is the franchise which will see WW onscreen for the very first time so why wouldn’t I give it the benefit of the doubt? Cavill’s Superman is at odds with his alien heritage and human one – as his mother states “you don’t owe the world a thing” but then, when it comes down to it, it is his human side which is the most affected when Luthor finally reveals his play and ultimately his alien self/limitations which helps destroy him. Reeve, interviewed in 1987, told future inheritors of the cape to never lose the humanity of him; “to forget he can fly; [his] super strength. He’s a gentleman.” Cavill’s is a gentlemen but it has to be on his terms and the humanity is there but it has taken a film and a half to uncover it, little to no smiles, and a human Bat to help.

This Bruce is older, greying at the temples, grizzled, tired and so, very angry. There is a ruthlessness to the incarnation; Affleck is actually very good and the irony is, murderous intent aside, this Bruce needs Superman to give his life some (re)purpose. Alfred (Jeremy Irons) is a younger, more sardonic Pennyworth who seems to have less faith in his billionaire brat and wearily (often sarkily) mutters under his breath a lot of the time. The hallucinations/dream sequences (one too many if you ask me) can be read as an alcoholic’s delusions but then a fleeting face from the future may prove integral to the next film but, yes you’ve guessed it, slightly unclear. I like this Bruce. Yes, he’s different, just like all the other actors who have portrayed him, there’s a fury to this one that it great to watch if a little at times growling, ragey and largely unexplained.

As is Luthor’s motive in proceedings – he want Kryptonite for assassination purposes and access to the crash site and Zod’s remains. Why does he need Batman for that? Eisenberg seems to channel Edward Nygma via Mark Zuckerberg – if you’re going to give us Lex then do so, not some weird, obnoxious Riddler-hybrid. He’s a sociopathic teenager hell bent on destroying the one man getting more attention than him. Yes, he’s a villain but he’s irritating rather than intimidating; he is more memorable than Spacey’s turn but not sure how high a bar that is to set, and the hair – why? It’s more distracting than the weird noises he makes.

Which brings me to Wonder Woman, a character I adore, and finally, she’s here. She’s not given nearly enough screen-time, nor given enough dialogue and my expectations were not particularly high following Gadot’s casting but her presence gave me a buzz, people even clapped in my screening for her. I haven’t been lucky enough to see an evolution of character or multiple versions of WW and so, I was happy with the little I saw. She kicks Doomsday’s derriere and seems to thoroughly enjoy doing it and as for the Turkish Airlines bit, SHE GOT OFF THE PLANE (phew) presumably to fly her own invisible one…. But not before she sums up the entire film (and perhaps fanboy-dom in general) in one snarky sentence – about little boys and their lack of inclination to share.

The supporting cast are fine, no real standouts. Callan Mulvey is now Russian arms dealer Anatoli Knyazev, last seen as Jack Rollins in The Winter Soldier (and you thought there could be no DC and Marvel crossovers). Fishburne is back as Perry White and far more flamboyant than the MoS version, Holly Hunter is great as Senator June Finch, who stands in the way of Luthor Jr but whose senate spiel is pointless. “We know what Superman can do” Do we, really? “We haven’t considered what he should do.” What does that even mean? Run every potential saving by the US government? Say, “okay I’ll help those people over there but not those here”? Wait for a phone-call on a flashing red telephone…oh wait. The word unilateral is thrown about several times which is exasperating; as if Superman saving folk is somehow a selfish act. Diane Lane and Amy Adams are, for the most part, bait, or perhaps I’m being unfair. Adams is definitely stronger in her performance here but I am yet to be convinced by her Lois and then there’s all that running about amid rubble and destruction and swimming… all in heels.

Snyder has always been commended for his visuals and there is a depletion of colour (not always as depressing at it sounds) with red, white and blue colour motifs dotted throughout and Affleck’s batsuit appears to riff off of Adam West’s outfit with the black on grey. There are nostalgic nods but let’s face it, these aren’t the characters we grew up with, and as the last week or so have shown, few seem willing to welcome change. I really liked the intertextual links and the Justice League Easter eggs (although, shoehorned isn’t the word) and, obscurely, The Wizard of Oz. It is referenced multiple times and I’m still contemplating why. Perhaps, it is tenuous commentary on American commerce or Lex requires courage, Bruce a brain and Clark a heart and then there’s Dorothy, the infamous orphan as all of our boys here. Plus, 1939, the year of the film’s release and the year Batman was created and joined him in the DC universe and there’s even a witch, sort of but I digress.

By the time the big face off presents itself, it’s not quite worth the wait, actually a little dull and oh so futile but Luthor is the puppet master. When both titular characters realise they should be working together, it should be joyous and not just that they realise they both have mothers named Martha. The score is a little hit-and-miss, Zimmer is renowned for big anthems and when the two titans do finally square up, I was expecting fireworks, not just a damn squib. Lex’s theme (The Red Capes Are Coming) is a standout as is Wonder Woman’s (Is She With You?), that electric cello is really quite something.

All in all, Dawn of Justice plays with some heavy themes; democracy, xenophobia, terrorism – not so terribly far removed from the world we live in, Snyder is determined to make the world as realistic as possible yet removes most of the fun. Truth, Justice and the American way – this *is* the America of today but it all feels too horribly realistic and befuddling – I would have liked Kal to be the beacon of hope his birth parents intended him to be, not least to give Henry Cavill a bit more to do. The religious imagery is still there, Superman is the Messiah (and a very miserable boy) just as in MoS: God v Man, etcetera. There are a multitude of questions and it is left up to the audience to decipher the mess (small children may have difficulty) yet there is levity, nowhere near enough but present. 

I’ve accepted the lack of comic-book iconography in Snyder’s interpretation and it’s only a little thing but would it hurt for Supes to smile? I enjoyed far more than I loathed, however, there is just one death that was a little too calculated…Zack, you meanie.

- Hel

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter

Or like our Facebook page

FEATURE FRIDAY: Man of Steel - A Wasted Opportunity

Today's Feature Friday is a guest post from The Wide Eye writer Alex Blott who recently went to see Man of Steel and had some thoughts to share for us here at Assorted Buffery. Major spoilers throughout.

If you're looking for a fan's review of Man of Steel then turn away now. As far as prior knowledge goes I'm a Marvel man through and through, so I brought very little fan knowledge to the film. I didn't even know that 'Pa' Clark is to Superman what Uncle Ben is to Spiderman. Regardless, I was excited when I saw the first Man of Steel trailer. It looked great, with traces of Tree of Life in the camera work, and I thought that perhaps where Batman had gone the way of shadows Superman would paint an optimistic and uplifting picture for its audience. These two opposites could then be pitted interestingly with one another in the inevitable Justice League. Unfortunately, and perhaps predictably, that is not the case.

I'll start with what I liked: I saw this film at the IMAX and it looks GOOD. The set and costume design is great and there are some genuinely beautiful shots. Unfortunately, as I'll cover later, the film's 3D gets in the way of that. I know it largely goes without saying at the moment, but avoid this film in 3D. I won't say avoid this film altogether because this is the POSITIVE section. My second bit of praise for this film is that the scene where Clark Kent first dons his costume and learns to fly is pretty spectacular. The whole thing is handled very well and captures the euphoria any one of us would feel upon realising we can break the sound barrier. Unfortunately by the end of the film we've seen Superman fly into/out of so many things that the sense of spectacle is largely lost. There are elements of a good film in Man of Steel, but they are few and far between and what's wrapped around these moments is deeply disappointing.

Here endeth my limited positivity.

Lets begin with Pa Kent. Costner plays a man afraid of what the world will do if Clark was revealed as the alien he really is. There's an interesting story there but its not really explored. Instead the idiot Pa decides to tell his son off for saving a bus full of children. There's no, 'you should be more discreet Clark.' or 'We need to be careful now.' Instead he just tells a child that he should have let these kids die. Yeah sure it made for an interesting line in the trailer, but there's no depth to what he's doing in the actual film, he's just an annoying obstacle. And his death scene, which is so clearly designed to tug at heart strings but falls so laughably short, only succeeded in frustrating myself and the others who saw it. Not to mention turning Clark into a brooding 'Man of Feels' for a large section of the film. Perhaps if he'd only taken some time to pause at one of the many IHOPs he exploded through in one of the films fight scenes, and grabbed something from their fantastic menu then he might have cheered up a bit sooner. There are a lot of IHOPs in this film, and Nokias are apparently incredibly popular in Metropolis city; the product placement is frankly out of control to the point of being distracting. I understand that films need to get their money from somewhere and sponsorship is a great way to do that, but the way that several big brands are all regularly splashed across the screen is pretty ridiculous. I'm frankly surprised Superman didn't buy his suit off the rack in Sears.

I mentioned earlier that the film is visually impressive, and it is, someone put in a lot of hard work and produced some beautifully detailed work. I'm a big fan of the new suit and when Jor-El explains the history of the Kryptonian race there are some interesting visuals. Superman's dream of what will happen to Earth if Zod is successful is compelling as well and our introduction to Krypton at the beginning of the film was a treat for the eyes. Unfortunately a lot of these treats were spoiled for me by the 3D, which made the otherwise beautifully rendered backdrops too blurry to appreciate as the camera swung around and over them. Worse were the static shots where the background was completely out of focus (I assume this was a side effect of the 3D and not just a poor choice by Snyder.) Most of the visuals which I love are restricted to the first half of the film however, after which the film reverts to CGI landscape type for Superman to be thrown/throw others through. And he gets thrown through a LOT of things, it's been said a lot so I won't dwell on it, but you'd think Superman would think to fight people a little further away from a city so filled to the brim with people it's named Metropolis. Disregarding the damage done by the Superbattles, the fight scenes themselves left me feeling somewhat bored. The early fight scenes had some variety to them but in the end there was little in terms of interesting combat. With the exception of his brief, but exciting, bout with Zod's second in command, superman's big fights normally consist of him making holes in several buildings at once. This is perhaps a problem presented by Superman as a character, he's pretty much unkillable, so it's hard to have him go toe to toe with anyone and make it interesting. As I understand it some of the best Superman comics pit him against a hugely intelligent opponent who can negate or take advantage of his powers through cunning, and I saw none of that in this film.

Finally, the greatest source of frustration for me was how shallow the whole thing felt. There is plenty of laughable, on the nose dialogue to choose from in this movie. The most notable of which for me was an American general summing up what had already been said by the actions of those around him: "This man is not our enemy." You think, Chief? It all felt clunky to me, and worse than that, serious emotional moments fall completely flat because they haven't been built on enough, if at all. There's a whole separate story thread in the final third of the film which puts the staff of the Daily Planet (themselves an impressive collection of talented actors) in mortal peril. And I didn't care because I hadn't spent enough time with them to even think of them as their characters rather than Morpheus and that guy from House of Cards. Laurence Fishburne is stood there, desperately tugging at some rubble to save his co-workers life and I can't even remember her name or what she does. I don't know if there's a whole other storyline sitting on the cutting room floor or if they just had to give these actors a certain amount of face time to get them on board, but there just wasn't enough there to make it compelling. On top of that, the Superman/Lois Lane romance was so completely undeveloped that the final kiss was honestly a little ridiculous, especially peppered as it was with cheesy one liners. There hasn't been so much as a flirtation between these two throughout the film and then suddenly, sloppy make-outs. Pair this with several false endings and I was getting pretty fed up by the end of the film. What could have been at least a huge finale was blunted and dragged out. The same can be said for Clark's childhood, which is chopped up and fed to us piecemeal in tandem with the moments which it is meant to resonate with. Superman needs to step up and help the people of earth? Here's a clip of his father explaining why he can't. Lois asking Clark to reveal himself to the world? Here's a clip showing his father dying to save him from doing so. It's as though the film makers don't trust the audience to get there on their own, and as a result they neuter the film.

I wouldn't say I had high hopes for Superman, but I was interested to see what they were going to do with it. This film was really Superman's chance to convert me into a fan and I think that's my biggest disappointment with it. I was so excited by what the early trailers promised only to be disappointed by the complete work. Hopefully those involved will understand this and take action before the second film comes out. Having seen it I think that there is something there, that much is obvious just when you consider the popularity of Superman as a character. But I think that the franchise really has to be put into the hands of a fanatic, someone who knows about what it means to be Superman, and knows how to challenge him on a level deeper than strength. I do wonder if perhaps a successful Superman film doesn't need to go smaller before it goes big. And I'm not sure that's what we'll get if the current film makers stay on for the next one. 

- Alex

You can follow Alex's blog The Wide Eye here or on Twitter @ANBguity

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page