BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE is Incompetent, Reactive, and Hateful (Review)

At this point, hating on Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice seems unfair. When critics were allowed to release their opinions, the movie took a heavy beating in the media and on social media. The film has a 30% on Rotten Tomatoes, and its reputation was tarnished way before its public release on Thursday evening. I'm sorry to say the movie is as bad as you've heard. BVS stars Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jesse Eisenberg, Holly Hunter, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne, and Gal Gadot. The film was written by David Goyer and Chris Terrio. And Zack Snyder returns to the directing chair after his controversial Man of Steel.

Normally this is the part where I give a brief synopsis of the story, but honestly I have no idea what happened in the movie. The storytelling is so incompetent, where plot points are implied without laying any foundation at all. Even something as basic as "why are Batman (Affleck) and Superman (Cavill) even at odds in the first place?" is never really discussed except in abstract. I don't need my hands to be held, but the film offers zero foundation for anything. Potentially I can imagine that Batman saw the destruction of Metropolis and was like HELL NO. And maybe Superman doesn't like Batman because IDK there's only room for one costumed hunk in the area. And then there's Lex Luthor (Eisenberg) who seems to instigate all this drama and murder for no other reason than he's Superman's nemesis.

SPOILERS BELOW, FYI (but honestly it doesn't matter)

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice is a bad movie in terms of storytelling. Thing just happen with no connective tissue. Story beats are doled out arbitrarily. Zack Snyder wants the movie to be some sort of Important Epic About Real Things, but he completely mishandled the structure, and the emotional payoffs. His depiction of superheroes is bizarre at best, downright hateful at worst. Batman kills people and the kills are depicted gruesomely. Batman's goal is to beat Lex Luthor's henchmen (fighting villains) but his ultimate goal is use Kryptonite to kill Superman ALSO A HERO OF THIS MOVIE. Superman is kept at a distance, filmed like the very God/Christ/Whatever the people want him to be. But he doesn't have any motivation to do anything, so it looks like he acts on a whim. Does he want to be a hero? Should he be stopped? Neither Batman nor Superman is strong enough to carry the movie, so it just drifts along like an outline that someone forgot to turn into a real shooting script.

The only character who seems to have a clear motivation is Sen. Finch, played by Holly Hunter. Finch asks the right questions regarding Superman, and her position on Superman is complicated and interesting. I just wish Snyder had been able to translate those question into viable themes and ideas for the film as a whole. Unfortunately Sen. Finch dies before her character can really do anything. That's just one example of Batman v. Superman cutting itself short. There's a great opportunity for Superman to talk about his own life and choices. But Snyder doesn't let Superman speak for himself.

Batman v. Superman is a bad movie in terms of technical merit. The editing in the first half is downright deranged. Scenes are jumbled together haphazardly, with no rhyme or reason. I am half-convinced the editor (Oscar winner David Brenner, who worked on Man of Steel and Independence Day) was either trolling or drugged out of his mind during the process. Visually, the film does have some pretty shots, thanks to longtime Snyder cinematographer Larry Fong, but the movie is still drab and over-serious. The few moments of wonder are drowned out by an oppressive color palette, miserable production design, and ugly layperson costumes (the superhero suits are pretty cool, but I'll let the experts talk about them in detail). To be fair, all of Wonder Woman's (Gal Gadot) layperson dresses are killer.

I don't want to compare and contrast the DC Extended Universe with the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies. But the DCEU is a complete reaction to the success of the MCU. Batman v. Superman could have learned a few lessons from the MCU. For example, how to make a noble, heroic figure question his environment and his place in the world without becoming a brooding raincloud filled with hate (Captain America: The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier). Also, how to show disparate figures disagreeing on an ethical/moral level and then forcing them to work together against a common enemy (The Avengers). Finally, giving the film some levity and writing in a few jokes to enhance the drama (the Iron Man and Thor movies). In fact, humor can strengthen drama. Unfortunately, that's a really hard lesson to learn when you have the mentality of a fourteen year old rich white boy with Donald Trump levels of persecution complex.

Because the film is so muddled and mishandled, some moments that should be huge come across laughably insane. Lex Luthor kidnaps Martha Kent (Diane Lane), even though I have no idea how he figured out that Clark Kent = Superman. Then he tells Superman to kill Batman or Martha dies. Superman goes to Batman, and they fight because I guess it's the movie title. Then it's discovered that Batman's mother and Superman's mother share the name Martha. AND THEN THEY'RE FRIENDS, GUYS! As ludicrous as that is on its own, the way it's done in the movie is even more blunt and clumsy. The Martha revelation brings about a purely superficial reconciliation between the men. They still have their issues and nothing is really resolved. The movie actively demurs from anchoring its heroes to tangible values, instead creating an abstract yet superficial throughline.

The Martha revelation might be the dumbest part of the movie, and perhaps the final nail in the coffin, but it's one of several outlandish details. The film includes several strange and inexplicable dream sequences, a jar of urine used to tease the senator, Batman doing CrossFit to train for fighting Superman, Lex Luthor talking a lot but saying nothing, and Lois Lane (Amy Adams) chasing information not really for a story but just because. At over 150 minutes, Batman v. Superman is overstuffed; a properly handled execution could have made the film worthwhile. God knows the pieces were all there.

Seriously, look at that cast. Ben Affleck does his best with Batman, showing him as grizzled and at a breaking point. Henry Cavill has the look of Superman, but sadly drowns in the film's handling of the character. Amy Adams was born to play Lois Lane, and she's far more excellent than the film deserves. Laurence Fishburne, Holly Hunter, Jeremy Irons, and Diane Lane bring class and coolness to their characters. I'm not quite sure what Jesse Eisenberg is going for--Mark Zuckerberg + Megamind?--but he's trying.

A major highlight is Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. Of course, she has little screentime. But the actress is regal and commanding as Wonder Woman, and she brings the gloomy film back to life when she appears. Her theme is electrifying. The reason why everyone's talking about her despite her character having nothing to really do is because WONDER WOMAN IS IN A LIVE ACTION MOVIE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN FOREVER. Batman and Superman are nothing new, and this new interpretation of their story leaves a lot to be desired. But Wonder Woman is new, and she's exciting. I left the theater hungry for her solo film, which comes out in June 2017.

Should you go see Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice? Some of its more eye-rolling moments need to be seen to believed (the Martha revelation, people!). But I wouldn't rush out to see it. Hopefully Suicide Squad, the next movie in the DCEU (due out in August), will be good and set the universe up properly.

Like what you read? Please like my blog at Facebook.com/MathurMarquee. Also, follow me on Twitter @HippogriffRider. Agree? Disagree? Sound off in the comments below!