Don't believe the critics. It was OUTSTANDING.

It's a drama and, while it had it's funny moments, it wasn't funny like the Marvel films. But, hey, that's DC. They tend to be much more serious, somber books.

Affleck is, without question, the best Batman by miles. Absolutely nailed both sides to the character. Superman was excellent in the role he plays in this one. I also found Eisenberg's Lex Luthor to be perfectly fine, even though he is getting bashed for it. Lois Lane was kind of a weak spot, which was a bummer given that she was so integral to the plot.

Lots to build on here from DC.

I don't understand the whole concept. Why would Batman and Superman be against each other? Aren't they both good guys? Plus, how on earth could Batman, a mere mortal, stand a chance against Superman?

In every preview I see, I just cant get over how bad Eisenberg seems as Luther. Its scaring me away from seeing this movie.

Won't lie, the pacing by DC reeks of trying to catch up to the MCU. It's as if the upcoming Civil War was the 3rd or4th film, rather than the umpteenth. The movie is going to spend a lot of time introducing the new Batman and contextualizing the conflict. I think that Affleck will make a fine Batman. Not as excited for Eisenberg's Lex Luthor.

Either way I'm sure I will enjoy it. I don't go into superhero movies expecting sophisticated cinema a la The Godfather. It makes the bad ones OK and the great ones that much better.

(03-24-2016, 09:08 AM)McC Wrote: I don't understand the whole concept.  Why would Batman and Superman be against each other?  Aren't they both good guys?  Plus, how on earth could Batman, a mere mortal, stand a chance against Superman?

Ok, so, some bullet points so this can make some sense.

Trying for no spoilers here...

- Superman represents GOOD, yes. But in a different way than Batman. We as readers or movie watchers need to put ourselves behind the characters we are watching's mindset. THEY don't necessarily view each other as good.

- These two characters have very different perspectives on the world. From the trailers, you can see that Batman/Bruce Wayne is much older (15-20 years) than Superman/Clark Kent. What's the old saying? A pessimist is just an optimist with experience.

- Superman represents something bad in the eyes of many. He does good things, yes, but unlike a weapon people can CHOOSE to use he is a being of God like power and has his own free will. Not everyone sees Superman as a force for good.


- Batman beats Superman down in the comics all the time. Remember, Superman is mortal, too. Just Super powerful from exposure to the Earth's yellow sun. There are several things that can hurt or kill him. The main 2 being Kryptonite & Magic. Batman is the world's greatest detective - so he knows this, and is a hell of a lot meaner and more devious than Superman who, himself, is a bit of a boy scout.

(03-24-2016, 10:02 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: In every preview I see, I just cant get over how bad Eisenberg seems as Luther. Its scaring me away from seeing this movie.

He's fine. The bad guy is just there to further the plot along and lay foundation for a much larger, broader group of guys to come through. I think they will develop him as the DC Universe progresses. Eisenberg does a good job. Not amazing like Heath Ledger. Frankly, Lex Luthor is nowhere near as interesting or has as many avenues as the Joker does, so that would be IMPOSSIBLE from a character stand point.

In this movie, Luthor is very young. And a little whacky. This was an interesting decision to take the character over the older calm, cool, and calculated Luthor we know from the comics.

My one gripe is that it wasn't longer. They could have made the movie 4 hours long and gone into great detail with the main characters and it would have still flown by.

Don't let Eisenberg's take on Luthor scare you away. He's not Ledger's Joker or even Devito's Penguin, but he's not Mr. Freeze, Riddler, or Two Face, either. He's right there a shade under Devito, IMO. Similar to Hardy's Banein terms of acting (only, with less screen time).

(03-24-2016, 08:42 AM)PDub80 Wrote: Don't believe the critics. It was OUTSTANDING.

It's a drama and, while it had it's funny moments, it wasn't funny like the Marvel films. But, hey, that's DC. They tend to be much more serious, somber books.

Affleck is, without question, the best Batman by miles. Absolutely nailed both sides to the character. Superman was excellent in the role he plays in this one. I also found Eisenberg's Lex Luthor to be perfectly fine, even though he is getting bashed for it. Lois Lane was kind of a weak spot, which was a bummer given that she was so integral to the plot.

Lots to build on here from DC.

im sure the graphics and cinamatography where great.

I couldnt give two craps about superman. I do enjoy batman though.

but the comic book movie gerne is over saturated to me i have no disire to pay to see any superhero movies anymore.

unless Space ghost gets a movie im over the current fad.

(03-24-2016, 10:36 AM)PDub80 Wrote: My one gripe is that it wasn't longer. They could have made the movie 4 hours long and gone into great detail with the main characters and it would have still flown by.

Sounds like you would have enjoyed it no matter how bad it was.

I personally don't know many people who would sit through a 4 hour comic book movie.

(03-24-2016, 11:12 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sounds like you would have enjoyed it no matter how bad it was.

I personally don't know many people who would sit through a 4 hour comic book movie.

No, if it wasn't interesting or engaging than I would have been ready to go.

It just went by really quickly. I think the pacing between action and non-action scenes was really spot on so it didn't get stale. Didn't feel like a really long movie.

But, I agree with you on the average person not wanting to sit through it.

(03-24-2016, 10:44 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: im sure the graphics and cinamatography where great.

I couldnt give two craps about superman. I do enjoy batman though.

but the comic book movie gerne is over saturated to me i have no disire to pay to see any superhero movies anymore.

unless Space ghost gets a movie im over the current fad.

I 100% get that, too. I think that writers are on a long down swing. They keep rehashing old movies and, with the comic book genre at least, they are going off of stories that are 30 years old in some cases.

I was really pupmed to hear that the writer of the original Predator, Shane Black (who also played Hawkins in the movie), was writing a new one that will be a continuation of the first movie. There is even talk of bringing back Arnold. I haven't gone to see any "new" Arnold movies since he has been back, but I think that could be a fun one.

I agree about the Superhero movie stuff. I actually enjoy the lesser B & C grade heroes and villains over the big named guys - but tend to hate the network TV stuff (other than Netflix). They're at least interesting. Hopefully some good normal films start breaking out soon!

I'm not a comic book guy, but didn't they skip a lot to get here? Didn't this Superman just become Superman at the end of the last movie?

(03-24-2016, 08:42 AM)PDub80 Wrote: Don't believe the critics. It was OUTSTANDING.

It's a drama and, while it had it's funny moments, it wasn't funny like the Marvel films. But, hey, that's DC. They tend to be much more serious, somber books.

Affleck is, without question, the best Batman by miles. Absolutely nailed both sides to the character. Superman was excellent in the role he plays in this one. I also found Eisenberg's Lex Luthor to be perfectly fine, even though he is getting bashed for it. Lois Lane was kind of a weak spot, which was a bummer given that she was so integral to the plot.

Lots to build on here from DC.

My son and I are going Saturday and we had a discussion about the critics and all he heard about the film so far.  (He's 14)

I go to these "big" movies just to enjoy them.  AFTER I read about all the things that were wrong and bad about them.  but when I get to the theater I just want to have a good experience and get wrapped up for a while.  In this case about 2 1/2 hours plus!  

The previews looked bad. The reviews are even worse. I'll see it, but in theaters? I don't know.

Not watching it.

DKR was one of the best arcs ever. Borrowing from it is ok, but it better be awesome if that's the case... and everything I've seen of BvS is that it sucks balls.

Eisenberg as Lex Luthor? Lex &*%#ing Luthor!? Luthor is supposed to be more human than human. As super as Superman is, Lex is more super just by being human. And he knows it. Handsome, smart, rich, confident. All the things that Eisenberg isn't. Why not just cast Pee Wee Herman? Hu hu! Paul Reubens is as likely a Lex Luther as Jesse Eisenberg.

Gal Gadot. My &%$%ing forearm is bigger than Gal Gadot. In most of the scenes they've shown she's dancing with Bruce Wayne... who is a foot taller than her and twice as wide. Nothing screams "I'm an Amazonian princess" like being smaller than Shannon Hamilton.

Oh, and Afleck. WTF? We're going to have Matt Damon as Robin? Is that the plan? He may be great as Batman or Bruce Wayne. But he's got too much baggage. I can't see him and not see some Kevin Smith reference.

They had a couple decent Batman movies. They've got some decent shows (which, oddly enough, they've said aren't going to be part of their movies). But this thing looks worse than Green Lantern.

(03-25-2016, 12:59 AM)Benton Wrote: Not watching it.

DKR was one of the best arcs ever. Borrowing from it is ok, but it better be awesome if that's the case... and everything I've seen of BvS is that it sucks balls.

Eisenberg as Lex Luthor? Lex &*%#ing Luthor!? Luthor is supposed to be more human than human. As super as Superman is, Lex is more super just by being human. And he knows it. Handsome, smart, rich, confident. All the things that Eisenberg isn't. Why not just cast Pee Wee Herman? Hu hu! Paul Reubens is as likely a Lex Luther as Jesse Eisenberg.

Gal Gadot. My &%$%ing forearm is bigger than Gal Gadot. In most of the scenes they've shown she's dancing with Bruce Wayne... who is a foot taller than her and twice as wide. Nothing screams "I'm an Amazonian princess" like being smaller than Shannon Hamilton.

Oh, and Afleck. WTF? We're going to have Matt Damon as Robin? Is that the plan? He may be great as Batman or Bruce Wayne. But he's got too much baggage. I can't see him and not see some Kevin Smith reference.

They had a couple decent Batman movies. They've got some decent shows (which, oddly enough, they've said aren't going to be part of their movies). But this thing looks worse than Green Lantern.

Rob Zombie over Eisenberg? I dig it.  

It was an awesome movie.

A beautiful mess is the best way I can describe what I saw.

Snyder outdid himself in presentation and was his typical self when it came to character development and narrative.

I read Dark Knight Returns way back when. I was kinda happy when an animated version came out recently. But I'm surprised they also tried to do a live action movie. I haven't seen it yet so I'll reserve judgement but I have been kind of concerned by the trailers which made it look like they were trying to do too much. And honestly I'm more excited for Suicide Squad later this year.

Yknow, it may be goofy and saccharine but Richard Donner's Superman with Christopher Reeves...that's someone kids could look up to. I liked Man of Steel better than most but I felt betrayed by the ending. I don't care whether there is a precedent in the comics or not, I want a Superman that doesn't kill, who can be a role model. It sounds like part of the point of Batman V Superman (from the trailers) is that he 'doesn't owe this world a thing'. I like realism in movies given a specific premise but if the fictional Superman is so realistic he can't be a role model for kids then I have an issue with that. Regardless of the comics, MY Superman and Batman don't kill. And I think part of the reaction to Man of Steel confirmed that I'm not the only one who feels that way.

(03-25-2016, 02:38 AM)Stormborn Wrote: A beautiful mess is the best way I can describe what I saw.

Snyder outdid himself in presentation and was his typical self when it came to character development and narrative.

That's a pretty fair representation of what i saw as well. It was, in a word: disjointed. The pacing was off. Affleck added nothing to the movie and was probably just the same brooding person Jennifer Garner used to see hanging around the house. Not to mention that this "epic struggle" could have been easily diffused if Batman had just spoken to Supes on the phone for about ten minutes. There's a lenthy dream sequence that went on so long I thought that they might have cut the movie wrong and we'd jumped ahead about 30 minutes in the story. But, no.

All of that, however, paled in comparison to the ending. What a kick in the gnads to the audience after they led you to make an emotional invstment in the final act. Then, instead of having the balls to see it all the way through, they say "gotcha" and roll the credits because, hey, we've got x number of movies to crank out the next decade to pad our coffers and keep pace with Marvel.

You know, critics aren't infallible. But, when they all point out the same issues with a movie and tell you it's not good, you might want to listen. And, I went in without having read a single review. My mistake.

Save your money and wait for the Wonder Woman movie they tease you with in this hot mess. That looks like it could be decent. This isn't worth $12.50 or, frankly, the 150 minutes of your life you'll waste.

It is suppose to gross up to $170M per IMDB!