Silly for adults. But that is how it worked growing up. There were a few guys, with whom I shared that "hate you from the old neighborhood" vibe, and we just met. It led inevitably to trying to beat the crap out of each other. After which you ended up good friends because of the mutual respect you gained from fighting the other guy.
I think thats actually Kevin's Hollywood Babble-On podcast that he does with Garman. I saw Smith's Fatman on Batman podcast (he has like 10 podcasts lol) which was over an hour, and without all of Garman's remarks it doesnt sound as negative.
But its pretty much what Smith said in the shorter review, just in more detail. Characterizations, motivation and editing were the negatives, but there was a lot of awesomeness in there as well.
I actually kinda feel like watching it again, but not till the director's cut on blu-ray.
I think thats actually Kevin's Hollywood Babble-On podcast that he does with Garman. I saw Smith's Fatman on Batman podcast (he has like 10 podcasts lol) which was over an hour, and without all of Garman's remarks it doesnt sound as negative.
But its pretty much what Smith said in the shorter review, just in more detail. Characterizations, motivation and editing were the negatives, but there was a lot of awesomeness in there as well.
I actually kinda feel like watching it again, but not till the director's cut on blu-ray.
Thanks for the info. But yeah there are awesome moments in the movie but the bad pacing, editing, and not quite explained motivations of some characters were like a boat anchor that dragged something that should've been great into mediocre to pretty ok levels.
I'm hoping the 3 hour version is something that turns out to be much better than the theatrical release like the Ridley Scott director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven turned out to be.
True enough but the way the fight ended was indeed a face-palm moment.
Thanks for the info. But yeah there are awesome moments in the movie but the bad pacing, editing, and not quite explained motivations of some characters were like a boat anchor that dragged something that should've been great into mediocre to pretty ok levels.
I'm hoping the 3 hour version is something that turns out to be much better than the theatrical release like the Ridley Scott director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven turned out to be.
I really dislike this trend of releasing new cuts to improve the movie. The other night Cinemax had X-Men: Days of Future Past: The Rogue cut on. I had heard about this, but hadn't seen it. It did a lot more than just add Rogue to the movie. I could not be remembering it, but this version seemed to flow a lot better and some of the plot points felt like they clicked better. In all I wouldn't say it made it a completely different movie, but it was better than what I saw before. Between that and the news that there will be a new cut of this movie that "works better" makes me wonder why they even bother releasing what they did.
Everyone I know is really split on it. He strangely does still have fans.. which is odd because he's put out what? One good movie (300) and even that's debatable?
I really dislike this trend of releasing new cuts to improve the movie. The other night Cinemax had X-Men: Days of Future Past: The Rogue cut on. I had heard about this, but hadn't seen it. It did a lot more than just add Rogue to the movie. I could not be remembering it, but this version seemed to flow a lot better and some of the plot points felt like they clicked better. In all I wouldn't say it made it a completely different movie, but it was better than what I saw before. Between that and the news that there will be a new cut of this movie that "works better" makes me wonder why they even bother releasing what they did.
Ridley Scott didn't have final edit of the movie. It was cut for time as I recall.
I bet the same thing is true for BvS.
I don't mind being able to see the movie the way the director wanted it to be shown in theaters.
Now it can be taken too far of course. I'm sure the multiple versions of each movie in the LotR trilogy is one example of this.
If the studios were willing to allow some films to have longer run times maybe they'd end up having more repeat viewing for some of them. But they want more possible showings per day.
Just saw it: I didn't hate it, but it's pretty clear what happened.
The movie was so big they had to cut big parts of it out. When they did this, the plots queues became so diluted they became difficult to follow. I'm a comic book fan so I was able to pick up a lot of things due to previous knowledge, but most people are going to be left scratching their heads.
However, even I'm not sure why Lex has it in for Superman. There was no reason given. Also Jesse Eisenberg was COMPLETELY miscast as Lex Luthor. It's like he read the script, then said "You know what? I'm going to play the character like Johnny Depp's Willy Wonka...that will TOTALLY work!!!" Lex has always been a cold, calculating, intelligent, and formidable character. His performance was cringe-worthy and nearly ruined the movie for me.
Some of the subtle things that I had to explain to my wife that a lot of people may have missed:
- Superman doesn't like Batman because he wants to do good and protect people from harm. Batman's behavior appears to be a threat, so Superman wants to stop it. He is totally in the dark of Bruce Wayne's intentions.
- Batman doesn't like Superman because he saw all the destruction first hand and lost friends when his power was being used. He's terrified Superman will kill everyone on the planet- accidentally or on purpose.
- Lex finds a method to kill Kryptonians from the fragments of the world engine. We're not sure why he wants to weaponize it, but Batman gets a hold of the plans and steals the fragments.
- Lex knows Batman has the fragments, so he blackmails Superman into fighting Batman, knowing Batman will use the "Kryptonite" to kill him.
- Batman realizes Superman is being manipulated right before he's about to be killed, then takes his side (not because he finds out both of their mothers are named Martha, but it helped).
- A ridiculous Doomsday fight then occurs, Superman punches him into space, and they're both nuked. Superman looks like a shriveled zombie as a reference to Frank Miller's nuke scene in Batman Returns. The sun revived him, and non-comicbook people generally don't know the sun gives him his powers.
- The dream sequences were well done at first, then they started getting clumsy, causing my wife to ask "Is this another dream or is this real?"
In all, there is a decent story in this movie somewhere, but I think it got splintered up and left on the cutting room floor. It should have been two movies, or there should have been another Batman and another Superman movie to lead up to this one. I'm wondering if the uncut R rated DVD release is actually going to make us all go "Ohhh...so THIS is how it was supposed to play out!"
Something else that puzzles me: Marvel has Stan Lee. DC has Bruce Timm. Why the HELL are they not consulting with Timm on these movies???????
Ridley Scott didn't have final edit of the movie. It was cut for time as I recall.
I bet the same thing is true for BvS.
I don't mind being able to see the movie the way the director wanted it to be shown in theaters.
Now it can be taken too far of course. I'm sure the multiple versions of each movie in the LotR trilogy is one example of this.
If the studios were willing to allow some films to have longer run times maybe they'd end up having more repeat viewing for some of them. But they want more possible showings per day.
I honestly don't know who gets to say what. I've heard that the Rogue cut of X-Men was done to appease fans of Rogue. They had filmed her in the movie but cut her for whatever reason. It's too much like the Star Wars stuff where Lucas went back in and 'fixed' things. I get this isn't new, I remember Highlander 2 had a new cut to 'fix' it's issues. It just feels like this is happening more and more. Director cuts in the past didn't really add much, at least not that I remember of any. This movie looks like it's getting the cut to help 'fix' the train wreak. Makes me wonder why they released a product they knew they'd have to fix.
AFAIK, unless it's a really high powered director who has the pull to get "final cut" studios can force them to keep a maximum length on the movie (as I said before this is done mostly to maximize the amount of showings per day it can have). Spielberg comes to mind as a director that the studio is likely let do whatever they want.
What is cut may or may not have an effect on the quality of the movie.
I gave one specific example of a longer director's cut being better than the edit the studio wanted for theatrical release.
AFAIK, unless it's a really high powered director who has the pull to get "final cut" studios can force them to keep a maximum length on the movie (as I said before this is done mostly to maximize the amount of showings per day it can have). Spielberg comes to mind as a director that the studio is likely let do whatever they want.
What is cut may or may not have an effect on the quality of the movie.
I gave one specific example of a longer director's cut being better than the edit the studio wanted for theatrical release.
It feels more like BvS viewers are getting shafted if the director cut somehow makes this mess work at all. I can't imagine a lot of the people that hated the movie giving this new cut a chance.. I'm only going to watch it because I"m a whore for comic things.
Everyone I know is really split on it. He strangely does still have fans.. which is odd because he's put out what? One good movie (300) and even that's debatable?
His Dawn of the Dead remake is generally accepted as great. IMO most of his movies are great visually to look at, and he does action as good as anyone, but his movies aren't great. I wish he was co-directing these movies with someone who would handle all the story stuff, and he could do the action.
That's because it wasn't. When I see people say "there were moments of awesomeness" I scratch my head. There were none. I am not a jaded movie goer, I like B movies, I like bad movies, aside from generics, I do not follow the comics, but I am not that hard to please. This was neither. It was just a movie. It elicited no excitement from me other than, "wow that made no sense" and "wow this is going nowhere" multiple times while it was playing.
People were going to go see this movie, good or bad.. The pre-sales alone were astronomical. The sales numbers in no way represented how good the movie actually was. Once the initial excitement and actual opinions started rolling in, the sales dropped off a cliff.
That being said, I didn't hate the movie. I just have no interest in watching it again. Almost every superhero movie out there is better than it was.
wasn't bad till lex blackmailed supes.
WTF that easy to get supes to obey?
how did Lois know to get the spear?
why didn't bats go after the spear? after all, that's why he went back to Gotham.
how could supes stay conscious much less fly when that spear was in range?
and even much less have the strength to thrust it into that monster?
what the hell was that thing that created Cyborg? a motherbox?
how the hell did they get ahold of a motherbox??
other things:
Jesse Eisenberg played Lex all wrong. he was playing him like he was the joker.
and what was his motivation in hating supes? (I understand about bats.. he stole the kryptonite.)
also, in the beginning of the movie, what did they blame supes on doing?
killing everyone in a village in a 3rd world country?
def don't understands this part
I too thought he seemed more like a mentally ill joker type character than Lex Luthor. Lex has always seem like a calm and composed, deeply calculated villain. Kind of like the corrupt business man type that gerry rigs the law to pay no taxes but still gets lucrative government contracts and subsidies. I think it's a pity Batman didn't brand this pretender "inglorious bastards" style.
I finally saw this movie. Not bad; could have been better.
- About the first hour was pretty slow.
- The titular fight was fairly avoidable.
If Superman had done more talking and less punching, they could have saved Martha quicker. Then they maybe could have stopped Doomsday from growing; maybe at least had more kryptonite ammo.
Finally saw it because the wife and a friend bugged me to see it so we burned some $8.50 vouchers (none of that IMAX/3D for this movie since they now charge 15-20 bucks). My buddy had to pay $12 however.
I'd give it a 7/10. So a couple of thoughts (I'll put spoilers on even though this has been out for awhile):
1) Affleck carried the movie. He did an amazing job and especially loved
the killing. Who says Batman isn't supposed to kill? Fuck that. The branding was especially good since they said if you get branded, you're as good as dead in prison. Also, loved the weightlifting scene for obvious reasons especially since they had him pushing the Prowler which sucks btw. Well done Batfleck.
2) Did anyone else feel that the movie was
very very slow and jumped around too much before leading up to the initial and even the actual fight? How many flashbacks/dreams and superhero-doing-deeds do we need to see. The entire desert set-up scene was completely stupid. All Supes had to do was make a public statement saying I don't condone the killing of innocents and my woman was held at gunpoint so I did what was necessary to save her while trying to limit collateral damage. They made Supes a socially brooding tard when he should've at least offered an explanation for these humans which he claims to care so much about.
3) Because of #2, the scene at the Capital
caught me off guard. Really wasn't expecting that, especially since it was so slow up to that point and the wheelchair guy had other chances to be crazy and didn't do anything - like when he met with the senator in private. And since Lex' assistant was there too. Like #2, Supes could've just issued a statement saying it wasn't him. Also, wouldn't forensics find out it was a bomb anyway? The whole "Superman is bad despite his amazing acts of kindness around the world" spin was entirely stupid and pointless if only to play on Batman's emotions. If we constantly saw Supes saving humans around the globe, nobody would care about the desert or even Capital building and Bruce Wayne should be smart enough to know that Supes isn't voluntarily killing humans. So the hate shouldn't have been as strong as it was for Supes by Batman, that wasn't believable. Yeah Batman may dislike him, but not be obsessed with killing him.
4) Lex was
way too over the top eccentric with Savant Syndrome. I liked that Eisenberg wanted to make the character his own but don't shit on canon like that. I understand this is a younger Lex but cmon. Lex is a cocksure cunning mastermind, not a psychobabbling passive-aggressive guy who is laughing all the time and socially awkward. It's like combining a kid with asbergers and the joker. Wasn't a huge fan of this performance mainly because it didn't fit in what all other canon has defined Lex to be. I respect Snyder for taking a big risk but I don't feel it paid off in this case. Others were great though (Batman killing/bat branding, Batman uses tech from the video game, killing Supes via Doomsday in accordance to canon, Gal Gadot as WW).
5) Similar to #3, Lex's
motivation to kill Supes wasn't really there. I can suspend disbelief for Batman's motivation and say well it was similar to our emotions to 9/11. However, just to kill a God for the sake of doing it? Why did he let the other Justice League members off the hook, who are essentially Gods as well? Why didn't he have an even grander plan to pit those others against Supes? He had info on them way before Supes came into the fray. His motivation just wasn't strong enough. Other movies we had great incentive - Batman kept fucking up the Joker/Bane's power plays so they were forced to deal with him - not to mention that Batman created the Joker in the vat of chemicals.
6) Lex had the
Krytonian tech at his fingertips yet he chose to revive Zod into Doomsday? Why wouldn't he try to enhance himself with Krytonian DNA/tech to become a god himself? Also, if he created Doomsday why couldn't he make the ship create Doomsday to be immune to kryptonite or make it so that Doomsday shot kryptonite beams from his eyes? IIRC he still had little pieces of it. This is like having a magic genie in a lamp. That doesn't show much planning/brilliance on his part for such a mastermind. He could've done so much more with the ship like download the tech into his LexCorp computers and create more kryptonite. Or search the ship's archives for other poisonous things to kryptonians and program that into Doomsday and/or weaponize it via LexCorp. Or, he could've created an entire army of kryptonians and commanded that army who wouldve overpowered Supes and company. To have a genius only create a monster and nothing else was just not believable, especially with an entire advanced race's technology at his fingertips.
7) Those who mentioned Batman's
"dad" dying was also what I heard. I was thinking what? Did Bruce Wayne have a stepdad who died in NYC during the Supes/Zod battle? Was confusing and pretty sure he said dad.
8) I liked the reference to
Darkseid by Lex at the end. But given how ridiculous they made Doomsday I don't have much hope for how they portray Darkseid. Hopefully if XMen Apocalypse is well done, they can emulate some of the things that make him godlike. Of course, Darkseid is basically a Thanos-like character (much higher on the food chain than Apocalypse) and I'm not a fan of the cosmic crap for that reason. They should fully flesh out the Justice League before bringing in the ultimate bad guy God of the universe out (like marvel is doing). Having a Shazam movie and TWO Justice League Movies before Cyborg's movie is just retarded. Why should I care about the first or even 2nd Justice League if I don't know all of the characters? I mean, even the Hulk had Edward Norton's movie so we at least knew the origin before The Avengers. Hawkeye and Black Widow were in Thor 1 and Iron Man 2 so we got intros to them before Avengers. The only movie before Justice League 1 is Wonder Woman, so are they going to include Cyborg, Flash, and Aquaman all in 1 movie? Doubtful. They need more films to intro these characters before JL 1. Also, how do you leave Green Lantern out of Justice League? He's an original and New 52 member. I understand the original flopped with Ryan Reynolds, but hopefully we at least get a cameo of him in Justice League 1 (similar to Norton's Hulk flopping and Marvel reviving the character in Avengers 1).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.