Yesterday I saw Batman V Superman.......it was ok...[MAJOR SPOILERS THREAD]

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

This Aquaman hate is echo-chamber-y and nitpicky

Judging an entire character and movie because of how one shot of him was filmed

Yes, it is nitpicky.
But this doesn't stop me to find others things why the movie was just ok for me.
If the problem was just Aquaman, I could let it slide. But seeing so many problems, it made me have the need to start tearing the movie apart for my enjoyment.
Just think how I felt I paid 7 euro to see an awesome cameo or an important role in the movie base the promotion the filmmakers did for him and in the end I get some seconds of him swimming doing nothing....

I am still curous as to how much was cut from this movie since it was 4 hours long. Mabye there was more of Aquaman was shot.

 

[Tharaxis]

Sorry, but I am from Greece and my English isn't my main Language. I know I use this reason a lot to excuse myself, but this is the true.
Also I really like your explanations as well. Please let me answer:

1. Thank for agree with Lex's new persona. We really need a calculating calm villain to plot something massive to win Superman. THIS Lex isn't the one.

2. Fair enough. I had the assumption Lex hated the idea of God like being have the control the Earth at some point. I though Lex wanted to show even he is a weak human can make God himself serve him and kill him of course.
But then here is a question: Is there any kind of clue how Lex could then control Doomsday after defeated Superman. Not kill him. Control him as you said.

3. I wanted to make a point Superman should speak to make people understand him. No cover his tutu between his legs and run away without saying anything. Saitama did that with his own way.

4. Aquaman = Disappointment.

5. Sorry about that. That I was trying to say is it doesn't matter what kind of name it would have a file for each Metahuman. Even it describe a unique feature or just a generic name was fine. But having the logos of Superheroes who will use as their simple, make a little rage.

6. Of course I was joking about the whole scene. Realistically, after the first attack [the sound wave one], Superman just could yell IMMEDIATELY "A HUMAN LIFE IS IN DANGER AND YOU NEED TO STOP RIGHT NOW. I NEED YOUR HELP". You get my point.
Heck ,at ANY POINT of the fight Superman could yell that but no, he decided to say it before Batman could kill him with the Spear....
Do you know how this fight could make sense: If Lex, a Real Lex told Superman "Also don't even think about telling Batman the truth. I have in the whole area covered with any kind surveillance gadgets and men covered with cloak suits with the technology that cover their heartbeat to infor me and at any moment they can that you f*cked up our little deal."
This could be at least cool I guess.

7. I wanted to express my disappointment that a part of a film which I though it was real, was just a dream. That it. I know it had a purpose, I really wanted to see a scenario of Superman doing this. Just for the mystery god dammit...
Plus to be well written and make sense of course, not just because dreams.

1) Yeah it definitely fell short.
2) I'm not 100% sure how Lex expects to control Doomsday, perhaps he believes as being part creator, part that which is in control of the ship, that in some form he will have control. I think the movie pretty much established that Lex isn't good at making sane decisions.
3) Possibly, but I think in the context of the story they were wanting to tell a fight was fine.
4) Agreed. It wasn't the worst, but if you're going to make a deal out of it, it should be something special, not just someone floating in front of a camera for 30 seconds.
5) Look obviously it makes no sense logically that Lex miraculously has their logos as it implies that he was the creator of those logos, so in that regard I totally agree, it was a bit dumb. But obviously it was done just to make some fans giggle so whatever, it doesn't break the movie for me.
6) See (3).
7) It's perhaps not particularly well spelled out (a problem the movie tends to have in general - possibly due to cuts for time?). Maybe the rumoured longer cut (3.5 hours, yikes) will help explain some of those larger issues. Maybe they'll also help one understand why Lois seems to get the idea out of the blue to get the spear from the water. One can only hope.

 

[Tharaxis]

I just wanted to point out that we (Me) did some math, and found out that since the 'honest' reviews started showing up on Rotten Tomatoes (Ones posted after the movie was actually released country wide), the user rating has averaged at about 40% approval. Not 70%.

How are you aggregating/calculating that information, can you provide quantifiable proof of your statement and outcome? I would love to see how you calculated that metric.

 

[VoidWanderer]

Are Marvel movie threads like this?

 

[DefunctTheory]

I just wanted to point out that we (Me) did some math, and found out that since the 'honest' reviews started showing up on Rotten Tomatoes (Ones posted after the movie was actually released country wide), the user rating has averaged at about 40% approval. Not 70%.

How are you aggregating/calculating that information, can you provide quantifiable proof of your statement and outcome? I would love to see how you calculated that metric.

Disregard, just realized I misunderstood how that particular metric is calculated by Rotten Tomatoes.

Still, I have to agree with mduncan50 - Any potential dip in scores is more then trumped by the fact that at about 100k votes, BvS was at least at 90% approval on Rotten Tomatoes. Then the movie actually opened across all theaters, and the score dropped like a rock.

 

[Zontar]

Are Marvel movie threads like this?

No, but Marvel movies don't tend to be as decisive so that makes sense.

 

[mduncan50]

I just wanted to point out that we (Me) did some math, and found out that since the 'honest' reviews started showing up on Rotten Tomatoes (Ones posted after the movie was actually released country wide), the user rating has averaged at about 40% approval. Not 70%.

How are you aggregating/calculating that information, can you provide quantifiable proof of your statement and outcome? I would love to see how you calculated that metric.

I've pulled the post from the other thread for you:

AccursedTheory:

mduncan50:

Bob_McMillan:

The critic reviews fell again? I mean the audience review just went into the 60s, but I thought the critic reviews couldn't go lower.

What I find even sadder is that within hours of allowing audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes (and days before the movie was released) there was over 100,000 reviews with an average score of 9.7. Now it's dropped to 6.9 without even doubling the amount of reviews. I don't feel like mathing, but I'm pretty sure that means the "real" audience score is pretty darn bad. But of course it's a "big conspiracy" that the critics' scores are so low.

Well...

Votes x Percentage = Total 'Points'

100,000 x 97 = 9,700,000
197,018 x 69 = 13,594,242

197,018 current votes - 100,000 vote benchmark = 97,018 votes since 97% approval rating
13,594,242 current points - 9,700,000 point benchmark = 3,894,242 points since 97% approval rating

3,894,242 points / 97,018 votes = 40.1 points per vote

So since the votes got 'honest,' the average score has been 40.1%, or barely above 2/5 stars.

That's pretty bad.

And for the record, it's a conservative estimate, because which I know that the number of reviews giving the first number was over 100,000, I couldn't recall the exact number, so I rounded down to what I knew to be the minimum true number.

Are Marvel movie threads like this?

Yes. Unfortunately no matter what the context of the original post, anything comic book related (at least since the BvS reviews started coming out) someone always brings up how awesome Dawn of Justice is, and how people just don't get it, whether because Disney has paid off everyone except for them to trash it, or because we're all too used to Marvel metiocrity, or whatever other thing they can come up with that isn't "Maybe my opinion is in the minority."

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Are Marvel movie threads like this?

I hate current Marvel movies sameyness and over-insistance on humor which comes off as corny I mean whsat were they thinking with Ultron?

I hate current X-men movies for looking really bland and forgetable. CAN WE PLEASE HAVE WOLVERINE IN HIS CLASSIC YELLOW SUIT PLEASE!?

And I want all these movies, even DC, to be better then are now, because so far animation and comic books themselves is all I care about.

I get more millage reading Kingdom Come and watching Justice League then these live action movies.

 

[mduncan50]

VoidWanderer:
Are Marvel movie threads like this?

Yes. Unfortunately no matter what the context of the original post, anything comic book related (at least since the BvS reviews started coming out) someone always brings up how awesome Dawn of Justice is, and how people just don't get it, whether because Disney has paid off everyone except for them to trash it, or because we're all too used to Marvel metiocrity, or whatever other thing they can come up with that isn't "Maybe my opinion is in the minority."

Are Marvel movie threads like this?

No, but Marvel movies don't tend to be as decisive so that makes sense.

... or that Marvel movies don't tend to be as decisive. Whatever that is supposed to mean.

 

[SweetShark]

1) Yeah it definitely fell short.
2) I'm not 100% sure how Lex expects to control Doomsday, perhaps he believes as being part creator, part that which is in control of the ship, that in some form he will have control. I think the movie pretty much established that Lex isn't good at making sane decisions.
3) Possibly, but I think in the context of the story they were wanting to tell a fight was fine.
4) Agreed. It wasn't the worst, but if you're going to make a deal out of it, it should be something special, not just someone floating in front of a camera for 30 seconds.
5) Look obviously it makes no sense logically that Lex miraculously has their logos as it implies that he was the creator of those logos, so in that regard I totally agree, it was a bit dumb. But obviously it was done just to make some fans giggle so whatever, it doesn't break the movie for me.
6) See (3).
7) It's perhaps not particularly well spelled out (a problem the movie tends to have in general - possibly due to cuts for time?). Maybe the rumoured longer cut (3.5 hours, yikes) will help explain some of those larger issues. Maybe they'll also help one understand why Lois seems to get the idea out of the blue to get the spear from the water. One can only hope.

2. Maybe that why Lex was crying over Zod's corpse...He thought is was a moment who felt for the first time being a God by giving his blood. I don't honestly.
6. The filmmakers could easily find another way to make a solid reason for Batman and Superman to fight.
Here what I thought about the plot when i saw the trailer: Superman fanatics. An Army of them. But not real ones. Fakes created by Lex to provoke Batman and similar people who hate Superman to hate him even more. And even a fake Superman which this superman mimic could be of course Metallo.
Plus the suit Batman wear could be SO easily be a suit created the first incarnation of Metallo who fought Superman in the comic. They look similar. SCARY SIMILAR:

Plus.....PLUS the second version of Metallo aslo DRESS as Superman so this is my biggest reason for the Superman is Evil cospiracy I had in mind:

Spoiler

And what about Superman? What kind of reason should had to fight Batman? Here is the thing. Very simple. Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.
Superman just want to stop Batman killing people.

 

[Tharaxis]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

 

[mduncan50]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

I'd like to point out that while this is the most common excuse given for Batman becoming a murderer, this is taken from the comics where the exact same thing happened, and he did not turn his back on his ideals. It just makes Batman seem more weak in my opinion.

 

[SweetShark]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

I'd like to point out that while this is the most common excuse given for Batman becoming a murderer, this is taken from the comics where the exact same thing happened, and he did not turn his back on his ideals. It just makes Batman seem more weak in my opinion.

Yes, I think you mean the Red Hood Animated movie. Good movie.
However the filmmakers needed Batman to become "darker" because the fight between him and Superman could be meaningless...
This was a solid reason for a 2 hours and a half movie.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense.

I could maybe agree with the Dead Robin theory, but two things stand in my way:

1. Batman only really kills when he uses one of his Bat-vehicles. I was fine with the grenade thing, and maybe even the flamethrower one. Speaking of the flamethrower incident, that just encapsulates my point. If he is so truly affected by Robin's death, why wouldn't he kill people in his day to day, hand to hand fights? Why doesn't he use conventional firearms? Sure, he used the bad guy's machine gun to shoot the flamethrower tank, but shooting him in the head would have been much easier and a lot safer. The film ironically shows in the Nightmare scenes how effective Batman would be if he used guns.

2. Zack Snyder himself thinks that Batman doesn't really kill.

So, I tried to do it by proxy. Shoot the car they?re in, the car blows up or the grenade would go off in the guy?s hand, or when he shoots the tank and the guy pretty much lights the tank [himself]. I perceive it as him not killing directly, but if the bad guy?s are associated with a thing that happens to blow up, he would say that that?s not really my problem.
Source: http://collider.com/batman-v-superman-killing-zack-snyder/

I am almost certain they will throw the idea of a killer Batman out for his solo movie. They did it for Superman in BvS.

 

[mduncan50]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

I'd like to point out that while this is the most common excuse given for Batman becoming a murderer, this is taken from the comics where the exact same thing happened, and he did not turn his back on his ideals. It just makes Batman seem more weak in my opinion.

Yes, I think you mean the Red Hood Animated movie. Good movie.
However the filmmakers needed Batman to become "darker" because the fight between him and Superman could be meaningless...
This was a solid reason for a 2 hours and a half movie.

Well, it happened in the "A Death in the Family" storyline from 1988. And it did make Batman darker for a while, like when brutally beat the crap out of the Joker, and he refused to have any sidekicks. The Red Hood crap just retcons a huge event in Batman's life (matched only by his parent's death), giving us the dumbass excuse that Superboy...sigh... punched reality.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

I'd like to point out that while this is the most common excuse given for Batman becoming a murderer, this is taken from the comics where the exact same thing happened, and he did not turn his back on his ideals. It just makes Batman seem more weak in my opinion.

Yes, I think you mean the Red Hood Animated movie. Good movie.
However the filmmakers needed Batman to become "darker" because the fight between him and Superman could be meaningless...
This was a solid reason for a 2 hours and a half movie.

Well, it happened in the "A Death in the Family" storyline from 1988. And it did make Batman darker for a while, like when brutally beat the crap out of the Joker, and he refused to have any sidekicks. The Red Hood crap just retcons a huge event in Batman's life (matched only by his parent's death), giving us the dumbass excuse that Superboy...sigh... punched reality.

Ironically that was retconned too. Now its the Lazarus pit that brought Jason back.

 

[mduncan50]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

I'd like to point out that while this is the most common excuse given for Batman becoming a murderer, this is taken from the comics where the exact same thing happened, and he did not turn his back on his ideals. It just makes Batman seem more weak in my opinion.

Yes, I think you mean the Red Hood Animated movie. Good movie.
However the filmmakers needed Batman to become "darker" because the fight between him and Superman could be meaningless...
This was a solid reason for a 2 hours and a half movie.

Well, it happened in the "A Death in the Family" storyline from 1988. And it did make Batman darker for a while, like when brutally beat the crap out of the Joker, and he refused to have any sidekicks. The Red Hood crap just retcons a huge event in Batman's life (matched only by his parent's death), giving us the dumbass excuse that Superboy...sigh... punched reality.

Ironically that was retconned too. Now its the Lazarus pit that brought Jason back.

Yeah, which makes even less sense. The pit has always been used to rejuvenate, to heal wounds, and even to bring someone back from the brink of death, and then all of a sudden in it's used to bring back to life a twenty years dead and buried corpse with no explanation beyond "because". Like, did it rip his soul back from the afterlife too? I actually prefer the reality punch origin, because at least that one knew how stupid it was.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Batman v Superman should have just been about those two. Not Doomsday, Lex or WW. Ok, maybe a little bit of Lex, just that the new Lex is annoying. Superman is depressing, when is he going to be the positive character of hope? How many more movies is he still going to be this way? I dont mind them starting out as dark but at some point they have to change his character. Doomsday should have been saved for another movie and i would have prefeered if they had Zod been brought back to life at the end as the villian. Also now Superman has died, they cant reuse that again as it will be cheap - but then they just had him die as a similiar ending to the Dark Knight comic were it was Batman that was in the coffin.

As for the cameos? That should have been an end credit scene - nothing todo with Marvel, just that it would work better not being in the middle of the movie. Would have loved it if we saw Batman at his computer showing multi screens showing he had been tracking down other people like Superman. On the screens are footage of WW, Cyborg, Aquaman etc.....maybe even a Green light shooting across space. Then.......ghost Flash warning him about Darkseid. Excellent.

I think they just tried to squeeze to much into one movie - especially as the whole Doomesday thing didnt need to be there. As much as i feel this movie was a mess, i still want to see the WW, Batman and Aquaman movie and I hope all the world building has been complete in BvS and can now concentrate on the characters and story.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Batman in this movie kills people. Which at first it was weird, but then I saw the reason why he was doing this: We see the suit of Robin, who is believed of course he was killed by Joker. This change the attitude of Batman for the criminals. He want to just outright murder them so they don't harm a human being ever again.

Thanks for pointing this out, I never made that connection, but it absolutely makes a lot of sense. I think that's the biggest problem with the movie in that I think there's a lot of things they expected moviegoers to notice without necessarily directly calling it out which serve to explain some of the motivations of the characters.

The problem is that these things are incredibly easy to miss or not understand if you are not an avid fan of the characters, or you just happened to miss the reference, which then ends up with you being confused as to why person X is doing something or acting in some way.

A more direct reference (perhaps in conversation with Alfred for example, maybe something along the lines of "What was done to Master Todd is unforgivable, but it doesn't justify this" or something like that).

I'd like to point out that while this is the most common excuse given for Batman becoming a murderer, this is taken from the comics where the exact same thing happened, and he did not turn his back on his ideals. It just makes Batman seem more weak in my opinion.

Yes, I think you mean the Red Hood Animated movie. Good movie.
However the filmmakers needed Batman to become "darker" because the fight between him and Superman could be meaningless...
This was a solid reason for a 2 hours and a half movie.

Well, it happened in the "A Death in the Family" storyline from 1988. And it did make Batman darker for a while, like when brutally beat the crap out of the Joker, and he refused to have any sidekicks. The Red Hood crap just retcons a huge event in Batman's life (matched only by his parent's death), giving us the dumbass excuse that Superboy...sigh... punched reality.

Ironically that was retconned too. Now its the Lazarus pit that brought Jason back.

Yeah, which makes even less sense. The pit has always been used to rejuvenate, to heal wounds, and even to bring someone back from the brink of death, and then all of a sudden in it's used to bring back to life a twenty years dead and buried corpse with no explanation beyond "because". Like, did it rip his soul back from the afterlife too? I actually prefer the reality punch origin, because at least that one knew how stupid it was.

Wait, wait, sorry. My mistake. It was the combination of the two that brought Jason back to life. Superboy's punching brought him back to life, and the Lazarus pit restored his mind. It was just in the Under the Red Hood animation where it was Lazarus Pit that brought him back to life.