In article <ndbj78$75a$
1...@dont-email.me>,
Arthur Lipscomb <
art...@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
> Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (theatrical) - Caught it a second
> time. I definitely liked it more this time than the first time. It
> helped that I had read up on all the Easter eggs and was ready for them.
> I still don't care much for Lex Luthor's portrayal. And I still found
> the music to be obnoxious. However on second viewing I was better able
> to notice that the truly obnoxious parts of the score seemed to be Lex
> Luthor's theme so maybe that was intentional since his character was
> also obnoxious. Nevertheless, it is actually a pretty good Batman movie.
> Obviously it's *supposed* to be a Superman movie too but I'll take
> what I can get. And I can say without any hesitation that this is a
> better movie than either "Batman and Robin" or "Superman IV the Quest
> for Peace". If that's not a ringing endorsement I don't know what is.
***SOME SPOILERS***
I really don't know why there's all this hate for BATMAN/SUPERMAN. It
was a perfectly decent comic book movie.
Did I walk out raving about how awesome it was? No. But then again, I
didn't with THE AVENGERS, either.
Was I entertained for two hours? Yep.
Was the plot decent? Yep.
Were the SFX top-notch? Yep.
Were the performances decent? Yep, with one exception.
Affleck was actually pretty good as Bruce Wayne/Batman, and I say that
having been very doubtful when I'd heard he'd been cast.
I thought Gal Gadot was a little too petite for Wonder Woman, but
otherwise acceptable.
The movie's big misstep in my opinion was Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor.
Not only does he not physically resemble Luthor in any way (he doesn't
even have Luthor's traditional bald head until the very last scene), but
his performance was *way* off. Luthor is supposed to be a sociopathic
narcissistic genius, like Hannibal Lecter. Suave, but vicious. Charming
but deadly. Eisenberg played him as batshit insane, babbling stream of
consciousness nonsense, giggling inappropriately, hopping around the
room, facial tics, etc. I swear someone gave him the wrong script and he
thought he was playing the Joker, not Luthor.
Also pleased to see Lauren Cohan, looking gorgeous, as Martha Wayne, and
Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Negan) as Thomas Wayne.
I was also pleasantly surprised and pleased that the Batman/Superman
fight wasn't the whole point the of movie, and that the real nemesis was
Doomsday. The marketing people amazingly kept that out of the trailers.
I also very much liked the universe-building elements in the movie-- the
introduction of the Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg, setting up the Justice
League, the same way Marvel set the stage for the Avengers with the
standalone movies that came before it.
Unlike Marvel, however, it doesn't seem like they're bringing the TV
shows and movies all under one umbrella. With Marvel, if a movie
character (Lady Sif, Nick Fury, etc.) appears on TV-- i.e., AGENTS OF
SHIELD-- they are played by the same actor. Likewise, if a TV character,
say, Melinda May, were to appear in a CAPTAIN AMERICA or THOR or
AVENGERS movie, she'd be played by Ming-Na, not some other actress.
DC doesn't seem to be doing that, since the Flash is not played by Grant
Gustin in this flick, nor will he be playing him in the upcoming JUSTICE
LEAGUE films. (Although you only see him for a few seconds, I was not
pleased with the casting choice for the movie Barry Allen.)
One admittedly minor plot point rankled me throughout the movie--
apparently in this version of the story, Gotham and Metropolis are
literally right next to each other, with only a river separating them.
Something about that just doesn't sit right with me. I've always thought
of Gotham as a surrogate for New York City, and Metropolis as a
surrogate for Chicago-- mainly because it needs to be somewhere in the
midwest in order to be within driving distance of Smallville, Kansas.