Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Leading up to this movie, I decided on pulling off the ultimate binge-watch. In the month of March 2016, I watched every live action Superman and Batman film in chronological order with the exception of "Superman III" and "IV: The Quest for Peace". I also spent all of that month watching animated TV episodes based on the DC comic heroes. When the critics began to weigh in on "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice", I was left disappointed but partly in myself for forgetting that the film was being released in March as opposed to the two blockbuster seasons (the summer and the two month period before Christmas). Some movies do quite well when released in the spring but the point is they are not released during blockbuster seasons to avoid competition, sometimes because they are not good enough. "Dawn of Justice" was an okay movie but had a few too many flaws that prevented it from being a great movie. Much of the film was spoiled in the marketing also. "Man of Steel" straddled the line between too awesome and too much. "Dawn of Justice" crossed the line with its intensity but thankfully it did not cross that line too far. Actor Henry Cavill has said though that this movie is meant to be separate from "Man of Steel" but whatever the intention, this isn't Michael Keaton versus Christopher Reeve. A lot has changed, maybe too much.

The relationship between Clark Kent and Lois Lane still works but not as well as before. There is chemistry between Cavill and Amy Adams but Adams is ten years older than Cavill and you can sense that age difference. After decades of the relationship between Superman and Lois not going anywhere in any medium, "Superman II" introduced more intimacy between these two characters and this led to similar plotlines on TV and in the comics in the 90's. The relationship between Lois and Clark in this incarnation isn't something completely new but something that was pretty new for me was Superman being depicted as controversial. I admit this is a nice conflict but in the Sam Raimi "Spider-Man" franchise, the superhero was accepted gradually throughout the series. In "Dawn of Justice", you see Superman performing heroic acts accompanied by voiceover of some speaking out against him. That kind of contrast is interesting but to me, it sort of suggests that the critics are more vocal and numerous than the supporters of Superman. This creates a lack of resolution by the end of the film where the critics and mobs are silenced but we don't get to hear them voice their change of hearts. During my lifetime, the live action theatrical Lex Luthors have always been a treat to watch. This is the first time though that Luthor has been portrayed on the big screen as a billionaire businessman. This change to the lexicon was first made back in the 80's whereas before that time, Luthor was conceived as a diabolical genius. I thought I was excited to see Kevin Spacey as Luthor back in 2006 but Jesse Eisenberg was maybe even more entertaining to imagine prior to the show coming out. His casting did attract protests because many felt he was too young and his physicality didn't match. Upon seeing the film, my feelings vary. Lex's backstory was interesting in that once again, his father plays a huge part. The biggest problem I had with Lex Luthor is that all of his best one-liners were featured in the trailers. Eisenberg's performance was fun at some times like on top of LexCorp tower and too melodramatic at other moments such as his final scene. My question is whether Eisenberg's acting choices were his own or director Zack Snyder's or the studio's. Senator Finch is critical of Superman also but doesn't share in Lex's fear mongering. She acknowledges the good Superman can do but wants him to account for what he does and to work more with the government. She can sense the virtue in Superman where as Lex can not. In the Ultimate Edition, she discovers that there was coerced testimony in her prior hearings. I liked that moment in the plot and I wonder why it wasn't included in the original theatrical version. It makes what happens to Finch more tragic. I should briefly mention two other Ultimate Edition scenes here; one of which has Lois discover that Keefe didn't know about the bomb because of his groceries. I ask how the cops missed that one. In the other scene, Lois discovers that the bomb was lined with lead. That scene should have been in the original version. Lex's plan to force the gladiator match is probably the best part of the movie but the movie doesn't really reveal how he discovered Superman's secret identity. I guess if Lois can figure it out in this version, why not "the greatest criminal mastermind of our time"? My first question after seeing "Man of Steel" was how they were going to justify the quick rebuild of Metropolis in the next movie in this more realistic depiction of Superman. Sure enough, the city seems to have recovered quite fast in "Dawn of Justice" (18 months). I thought the chaos in "Man of Steel" was intense but it seems that Snyder went a little crazy this time. Sure there was less destruction on a wider scale in this sequel but the fighting was quite overwhelming. The film did stay true to the comics and other medium in terms of the outcome of Superman going up against Doomsday. I was also left to wonder if Luthor's painting makes reference to Darksied or some other DC villain. Bruce Wayne's dystopian dream sequence was a clue. The final shot of the movie was great in terms of timing but there better be a good justification.

To reboot Batman after a successful trilogy may seem unnecessary and despite the fact that Christopher Nolan is the executive producer of "Batman v Superman", his directorial version doesn't account for the existence of Superman. Even though I haven't read "The Dark Knight Returns" comic series, I could at least sense while watching this movie that Snyder was taking inspiration from something popular on paper that was different from any other cinematic Batman before. Even though Synder indicated that there would be mostly story similarities, I still see a visual reference. The use of the bat brand bothered me because in the theatrical version, it made Batman a little narcissistic like the Riddler. The Ultimate Edition reveals that he has truly crossed a line with the brand by having others do his dirty work for him. Right up until the release of this movie, the public still had problems accepting Ben Affleck as this iconic character. The trailers for "The Dark Knight" ended any criticism of Heath Ledger but not so for Affleck in "Dawn of Justice". I guess many fans couldn't get Daredevil out of their heads. Ironically, Affleck once portrayed George Reeves (the 1950's TV Superman) in "Hollywoodland". While Affleck isn't my favorite Batman, he is better than George Clooney. Because the Batman franchise is full of other examples where filmmakers were at first written off but then accepted by moviegoers into pop culture, I was willing to give Affleck the benefit of the doubt. In the end, there is nothing wrong with his performance and most acting criticism has now been directed at Eisenberg unfortunately. I knew from the start that Affleck could easily pull of Bruce Wayne because he looks like a million bucks. I did have issues with Batman's electronic voice. It didn't allow us to hear Affleck actually voice Batman. Because I grew up with the Burton/Schumacher Batman films, Michael Gough was the quintessential Alfred in my eyes. Michael Caine however opened my eyes as only he could. Now we get to see Shakespearean actor Jeremy Irons as the famous butler. Because of Irons' appearance, Alfred has the usual dignity on the inside but his physicality is rough around the edges. In my opinion, they should have made a separate Batman film to establish the Affleck incarnation. This hypothetical film wouldn't need to be an origin story but it could have been used to spawn both "Batman v Superman" and "Suicide Squad". They could have had Batman coming into contact with other future league members and then at the end of the film, make reference to their inevitable encounter with Superman in a later film. Instead, DC and Warner Brothers moved too fast to catch up to the success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and it has consequences. "Civil War" worked because Iron Man and Captain America have a long cinematic history but the DC Extended Universe had the gladiator match occour as soon as possible. The amount of foreshaddowing in "Dawn of Justice" was also a little excessive due to this desire to catch up.

I felt there was not enough balance between the storylines of the two main characters. The overall narrative didn't have a natural flow the first time I saw it. When you look at "The Avengers", the characters have already been established in previous films and there is plenty of time to entertain, create conflict and move the franchise forward. In "Dawn of Justice", Affleck had to be established as Batman and there was also Diana in the mix. Furthermore, for a film called "Batman v Superman", there was not enough of Batman fighting Superman for my taste. I am not talking about a longer or bigger fight at the end but they could have thrown a few blows when they meet for the first time in costume. That would have satisfied me. The scene of Clark Kent confronting Bruce Wayne at the fundraiser was very well handled and it is entertaining but as with Luthor, it was all spoiled in the trailers. The most amazing moment in this film for me is when Superman and Batman set aside their differences because I realized something I should have seen before. I have been a DC fan since the 90's but only a movie like this could point out this fascinating coincidence that both mothers are named Martha (maybe it's not a coincidence). I guess the reason why I never noticed this before is because Martha Wayne is a character that isn't featured very much in any medium. Without her death, there is no Batman. Many fans say that Superman and Batman make peace too fast but this similarity I believe isn't the only thing that stops Batman from killing Superman. He suddenly recognizes that he is breaking his "one rule". He is becoming like the very man who killed his mother. It is cool to see Batman go to save Martha Clark Kent for a change. I also like how Doomsday is defeated by all three superheroes working together.

Another cast member in this movie I should mention is Oscar-winner Holly Hunter. She isn't a stranger to superhero films. I love how Patrick Wilson is voice of the President. Other cameos include Chris Pine and Joe Morton. I also like the inclusion of a Jimmy Olson character. I was grateful to see Patrick Tatopoulos' name as the production designer. I first saw his work in "Independence Day". I am impressed how Hans Zimmer didn't reuse his musical themes from "The Dark Knight" Trilogy. His best moment was Wonder Woman's musical theme. I have said before that, "I am willing to accept change when it doesn't take away from the original spirit of the lexicon". Superman is a metaphor of the American dream where an immigrant adopts a new home, becomes something far greater than even he could have imagined and proves that virtue conquers evil. Batman's ultimate theme is about avenging a tragedy by turning "fear against those who prey on the fearful". Unfortunately, those themes are given less attention in favor of action and intensity. Despite the campy, spiritual, gothic or realistic approaches of past movies, these themes were never lost. "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" wasn't as much fun as I was hoping for. I think we had more fun watching the marketing for this movie than the movie itself. I fully understand that I am being picky, which is why I gave this movie the rating I did. Thankfully, Warner Brothers and DC would make some changes in subsequent films and just in time.

3.5 Stars out of 5