Jasonic's Favorites: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Hello, and good evening, Internet!
Call it clickbait if you will, but this movie had some neat ideas going for it no matter how overcluttered it got -- I hear the Ultimate Edition is better too!
Released in 2016 (10 years ago -- can you believe it?!), Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was a sequel to 2013's Man of Steel and an attempt at propelling forward the DCEU (DC Extended Universe) into relevance well before James Gunn got involved in fixing the universe himself. At the time of release, however, it was one of the biggest opening weekends ever, but its mixed critical reception resulted in a sad dropoff in box office returns by the following week. With its universe only having done a single film with Man of Steel three years prior, DC apparently were clamoring to play keep up with the MCU, which had masterfully built up a compelling universe starting with Iron Man in 2008 followed by several successful solo films, two Avengers crossovers, and at least one or two unrelated films about different groups and heroes. With all that leg work built up to get us to care about the Marvel universe's characters and heroes, it was a shame that DC seemingly had no plans or intention of taking its time to do the same before this film came out to bring Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, and several other DC universe elements together in a cohesive way. Coming off the heels of the successful Dark Knight Trilogy, this also served as a quick reboot of the Batman character, intended to bring him about into a universe where other DC superheroes existed so he could play off them and form the Justice League later on. When they could have easily done at least one Batman solo film to follow Superman's before bringing them together, they decided that Batman's debut would best work as his clash against Superman; it was certainly a noble idea, but far from the proper execution given how people reacted to the original version of this movie upon release. The Ultimate Edition released later that year managed to salvage what was there and make the film better somewhat, but by that point, it would have been too little too late for most fans. I was not in the camp of hatred toward this movie as much as many other DC fans and critics and was willing to enjoy it based on what ideas it introduced to me; having barely seen much DC besides The Dark Knight movies at that point, I was willing to give it a chance and enjoyed the thrill ride it presented for a non-DC fan like I was at the time. Even so, I don't consider it the best Batman film or the best superhero film for a number of reasons though I am willing to look at the positives so that I don't sound too much like a Debby Downer. For the sake of this review, I will be looking at the original version so that I can refresh my memory and judge the film based on what it originally was -- and with that, maybe the film deserves a lot of its criticism, who knows? Let's suit up in the cape and cowl, rev up the Batmobile, and grapple shot our way into the delightful mess that many claim is Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice!
*SPOILERS AHEAD* (unless you're a fan of the comics and other media, I would turn away now)
The film mainly takes place 18 months after Man of Steel; it opens with a flashback to the childhood of Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), keeping us up on the iconic origin where his parents, Thomas (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) and Martha (Lauren Cohan), were murdered by a criminal, inspiring him to become the Gotham City vigilante, Batman. Years later, Bruce's company tower is destroyed in the destruction caused by Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod (Michael Shannon) at the climax of Man of Steel, inspiring vengeance in Bruce. In the present day, Daily Planet reporter, Lois Lane (Amy Adams), is captured by strike forces in Nairobi, but is saved by Superman who is subsequently blamed for the deaths in the incident; Lane, however, acquires a mysterious bullet provided to the terrorists and intends to uncover it by any means necessary. Meanwhile in Gotham City, Bruce, now a billionaire, has been hard at work as Batman for twenty years and has been interrogating criminals for a means to kill Superman, but is no closer to an answer than when he started. On the other side of things in Metropolis, Clark Kent (Superman's alter-ego) is obsessed with documenting the detestable vigilantism of Batman while his boss, Perry White (Laurence Fishburne), demands he document football on the front page. With the two already at odds with one another, this works to the advantage of businessman and CEO of LexCorp, Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), who is obsessed with defeating Superman, imposing his hatred of God onto him and siding with the view of the population that Superman is a false god. As Bruce works to steal information from Lex Luthor in order to uncover his weapons and means to his own ends, Superman continues to save people throughout the world despite what people think of him as some still praise him as a messianic figure while US politicians, including US senator, June Finch (Holly Hunter) view him as a potentially dangerous threat to the world after the destruction he instigated. While Bruce manages to decrypt Lex's data, Lex, meanwhile, uses Finch's subordinate, Wallace Keefe (Scott McNairy), to gain access to the Kryptonian scout ship and Zod's corpse so he can do some experimenting. In the event that Lex uses Keefe's wheelchair to hide a bomb that blows up the Capitol senate hearing in Superman's presence, he manages to experiment on Zod and combines him with his own DNA for the sake of a backup plan in the event that Bruce fails to kill Superman. With Luthor's master manipulation pitting man against a figurative god, the only thing that can save them from killing each other is their heart to protect and save the innocent over killing each other.
On paper, this has all the pieces of a compelling narrative and an emotional DC movie; the only problem: it's the second movie in its entire saga. I neglected to review Man of Steel at any point in time and enjoy the Superman character enough, but me, personally, Batman appeals to me more and, frankly, the DC movies haven't been as good, this movie being a prime example of why. It's not a horrible movie by any means, but as I said already, like The Amazing Spider-Man 2 a couple years before it, it bloated itself with a ton of franchise setup for future DC movies instead of taking its time like the MCU did and building several movies up to this big crossover point. It's fine for what it is if you know the characters and ideas from other DC media; I, on the other hand, was largely disconnected from even the animated DC projects growing up and only ever saw Batman's films prior to seeing this one and went to the midnight premiere of Man of Steel with a friend in 2013. To me and many casual moviegoers, it unfortunately lacked the emotional depth and humanization that drew in audiences to the Marvel movies due to the amount of clutter and rushed plot points that prevent it from living up to the hype that the MCU thrived on last decade. Rewatching it this time, however, I was more emotionally invested in the Batman side of things knowing the various other versions of the Dark Knight from the Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher series, the Batman: Arkham games, and Batman: The Animated Series so I was at least keen on Batman's general history and other cheeky references they sprinkled in there -- i.e.: Bruce saying they have a problem with "clowns" in Gotham. I know general stuff about the more "proper" versions of Superman from research, osmosis, and occasionally seeing him show up in DC games that I at least feel like I understand the character better as a Kryptonian alien who has all this power, but uses it wisely in the midst of his human struggles. When this version so recklessly causes destruction in his battles, I understand why the super fans (no pun intended) are outraged at this versions, especially for outright killing Zod in the last movie. Even without enough groundwork to make this a faithful and compelling Superman, however, the analysis of this movie, according to Wikipedia, seems to be a more fantastical depiction of a post-9/11 world. What that means is that Batman tries the right-wing apprach to stop threats proactively while Superman is a more left-wing liberal approach; Luthor, meanwhile, is an "insidious opportunist" who seeks power for his own gain. Political as it may be, this appears to be the most compelling way to explain the movie without the mess of the other plot points. That said, I do believe that there still some good things to be said about this movie that most don't talk about.
One of my biggest sources of Internet film positivity continues to come from YouTuber, CinemaWins, and he taught me a few good things about the theming of this movie that most critics missed. While the intro does show the murder of the Waynes for the hundredth time, it's not without thematic reason or payoff; the whole arc of Batman in this movie is from the perspective of a twenty-year running, jaded, grizzled Batman who apparently lost Robin at some point and may have even lost to the Joker some times over. He goes about his quest for vengeance out of obligation to protect his world from anything that will threaten it. The fact that he kills in this movie has been a huge talk of debate amongst fans who all say that Batman does not kill, but, shockingly enough, Batman will kill in the comics and most certainly will in other movies when the moment calls for it. It's not hugely out of character for someone as mentally lost as this Batman to try and sacrifice certain lives for the sake of saving many. Many have complained about the uttering of the name "Martha" as this silly reason to make Batman and Superman team up in the end, but the thematic substance is this: that was the human element of Batman that he lost as a child and he sort of projects that inhumanity onto someone as alien as Superman. When Superman utters that name and Lois explains it to him, Batman realizes that the alien has some human elements to and snaps out of his blind rage, realizing that he was about to become the very thing that stole the grounding element of his parents when he was young. Even the nightmare Bruce has about something bleeding out of his mother's grave and a manifestation of the bat taking control ("Man-Bat" as it resembles) is visual evidence that Batman was losing control of himself and about to go off the deep end. This Batman doesn't have enough movies for us to get emotionally invested in this arc, but it's a different take on portraying Batman that's thematically potent and ties well into that iconic line of Aaron Eckhart in The Dark Knight: "You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain." With this being the first time they genuinely showed Batman himself about to become the villain after his apparent heroic sacrifice in The Dark Knight Rises, I'd say it's the best way to flip that Batman philosophy the other way and show us what it's like when the hero goes down a quest of revenge.
The action is one of the most underrated highlights of this film in my honest opinion; the opening car ride of Bruce swerving around the destruction of Metropolis is an underrated portion of the movie as he acts with ingenuity like he's driving the Batmobile as things explode around him. And when he runs straight into the dust of the collapsing tower while everyone else runs away? Cinematic GOLD! Superman doesn't get nearly as much action or fight scenes in this movie, but the fact of the matter is that he stands out in whatever scene he's in; when Batman chases the truck carrying Kryptonite all by himself and Superman shows up, that was quite the intro. I even got chills my first time watching this movie in the theater as Superman and Batman, the two most iconic caped superheroes in fiction, stood before each other as the score swelled. This was their first time appearing together in a live action film and they nailed their fist meeting in costume. The title fight of Batman and Superman actually fighting toward the end of Act 2 is very well done and is a demonstration of how well Batman is able to dominate if not get the upper hand with enough prep time. One of the many reasons fans often determine Batman as a victor in a lot of battles against other fictional characters is usually the factor of prep time because as long as he has the proper equipment to deal with a formidable opponent or threat, Batman, despite being a regular human with all this equipment and gadgets, can really hold his own against a lotta baddies. Superman and even Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), on the other hand, get their chances to shine in the finale fight with Doomsday; the first phase of the battle is exclusively Superman and Doomsday going hand-to-hand with Superman taking him on in an uninhabited area before taking him safely into space. When POTUS makes the executive decision to fire a nuke at both of them upon them reaching space, Superman then proves himself nuke-proof and recovers while Batman and Wonder Woman take to the ground battle with a more powerful Doomsday. Batman shockingly evades the monstrosity with impressive grapple feats while Wonder Woman steals the show as she does in every scene of this movie. And her intro of dropping in to protect Batman with her gauntlets while her theme blares in the background is *chef's kiss*! Say what you will about Wonder Woman being a background element that wasn't set up properly -- I mean, she DID get a solo film later -- but this version of the character and Gal Gadot as a person/choice for the character made me like her all the more. If I got the chance to see more Wonder Woman after this movie, then sign me up!
Last, but not least, the actors may not have been the most stellar of any film I've ever seen, but they get the job done and are able to convey emotion quite well. Ben Affleck has gotten trashed on for not being the most "faithful" Batman, but, in my honest opinion, he embodies an older Batman well, his jawline is comic accurate in the costume, and his anger and emotions swell in spots where they're most appropriate. The aforementioned "Martha" scene, goofy as it's been deemed, is a prime example of why "Batfleck" is underrated because the raw confused outrage in his voice shows how much he's questioning whether or not this is simply a trick from Superman to get him to lower his defenses. It works to get him to mellow out and he sold the scene well in my opinion. Henry Cavill, on the other hand, has gotten so much flak for being a more serious and non-smiling Superman and I'll admit that I don't often buy the serious tones he's trying to convey. One thing I do enjoy about this theatrical version I rewatched is the opening bath scene he has with Lois in which he's actually being cheeky and smiling with her; if he had exhibited more of that range in this movie, I probably would be on board with his Superman, but as it's stands he's a spiritually different take on the character and that's that. Amy Adams is a great actress from what I've seen of her in other stuff, however, she doesn't seem much to write home about here. Her Lois Lane's main arc here is her persistence to figure out the bullet from Nairobi, which doesn't give her much emotional depth outside of just being "the reporter" to get the plot going, though I have grown to know and like Lois Lane because of her and am interested in seeing other versions. On Batman's side, Jeremy Irons as Alfred Pennyworth is an underrated part of this movie; he doesn't replace past Alfreds by any means, but his British accent, entertaining lines and observations, and overall demeanor makes for an entertaining presence as Batman's Alfred should. Jesse Eisenberg has gotten so much flak as Lex Luthor and has been deemed a "miscast" by many, myself included when I first saw this movie. So what do I think now? He's not the classic, cunning Lex Luthors of the past that I've seen snippets of, but, in a DC universe where so many of the actors are serious and somber, he's honestly the biggest comic relief that could have been in this movie. Sure, it's a skeptical choice to have him be in such a potent DC role and many were complaining about it all those years ago, but now? He got the most laughs out of me with his quirky, even Joker-like attitudes and mannerisms that I couldn't help, but enjoy rewatching parts of this movie for him as the villain. Sometimes different is refreshing and I won't deny it. Other actors such as Laurence Fishburne as Perry White and Holly Hunter as Senator Finch are just kinda there, but are welcome presence, though I will say that because of this movie and her solo movie later, I admire Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and as an actress. She hasn't had the best performances or line deliveries as her character from what I've seen and heard, but I like her so much with her character stealing scenes, acting clever, and pulling out all the stops to get the plot going. I won't overpraise her for being a recent celebrity crush, but she brought such an iconic character to the silver screen in live action that I can't help, but love her.
So despite the flak it got for being an overstuffed superhero movie that paled in comparison to Marvel at the time, I can conclude that the theatrical version of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is at least a decent movie. It may have been a little ambitious in its scope and universe setup without much films to support it, but the deeper thematic reading of this Batman, the action (and occasionally potent score swells), and actors are what made this portion of the DCEU unique in their own right and I enjoyed getting to revisit this bit of it. Say what you probably did about this movie ten years ago, but the times have changed and I, knowing a little more DC now than I used to, can at least appreciate it for what it's trying to do. Now that I've refreshed my memory on the theatrical version, I may even consider trying out the Ultimate Edition for myself and compare what the world saw vs. what Zack Snyder intended for this movie to be all those years ago. It's a bit of a shame that his DC movies have been shortened so much to the chagrin of many critics hoping for better movies and, take it as you will, but at least they got me a little more interested in DC and especially Batman alongside the Marvel fanboy I clearly am with Spider-Man and the Avengers. All that said, I believe some criticism is fair, though I won't be so hard as to trashily condemn a movie that was once so hated in the public eye. So as a final score, I give this movie's theatrical version a C+ and recommend it to DC fans, casual moviegoers who saw Man of Steel, and anyone who loves Batman and/or Superman!
Thank you all for reading and I will see you in the next review!
Comments
Post a Comment