Yes, I’m writing about Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. But, I don’t feel like writing a review, at least not a proper one. Instead of a true review, I’ve just written out my thoughts on about a few key points that hold my interest. I hope they hold your interest too.
Please be warned, I can’t find a way to do this without including lots of spoilers. This place will be spoiler-central from this point on.
What was the movie about?
Okay, so Batman v Superman was about Batman and Superman each deciding that the other one shouldn’t get to go around fighting crime without answering to any higher authority. Eventually, they decide to stop each other. The sort-of twist/sort-of-not twist is that Lex Luthor had been manipulating them into fighting in an attempt to have Superman destroyed and to distract Batman and Superman from his exploitation of Kryptonian technology and other super human forces.
Was Batman v Superman a bad movie?
No, I wouldn’t call it a bad movie. It was pretty okay, especially considering other recent movie adaptations of DC comics. But it was not a perfect movie. Mistakes were definitely made.
One of its problems was marketing. For a movie titled “Batman v Superman,” there was surprisingly little of Batman opposing Superman. Don’t get me wrong, there was enough to fit the story, but that particular conflict was only one part of a big plot. However, the Batman/Superman conflict was the easiest thing to promote. So that’s what the advertisers latched onto. But, if you promote a movie based on one thing when it’s actually full of a whole lot of other things, there’s bound to be some disappointment. It’s like audiences thought they were buying a bottle of Granny’s Peach Tea, but ended up with a jar of Granny’s Peach-Pear-Mango-Artichoke Tea. Even if the tea was okay, it wasn’t what everyone was expecting.
When it comes to the movie itself, the biggest problem with Batman v Superman is that the story was not told in a clear way. I got the impression that everyone making the movie – the writers, directors, and editors- was all very familiar with the story. Very familiar. In fact, everyone was so familiar with the story in their heads that they lost track of what information they had conveyed to the audience and what information the audience didn’t know yet. For example, when Lex Luthor reveals that he was the one who had pushed Batman and Superman into a battle, he also reveals that he had already learned both Batman’s and Superman’s secret identities and had been using this information against them. How did Luthor discover everyone’s secret identities? When did that happen? The movie is full of small but important details that go unexplained, half-explained, or hazily explained. It made the movie more than a little hard to follow.
Was The Justice League stuff tacked on?
No. No, no, no, no, no. Also, no. The introduction of the other Justice League characters is actually very important to the story. And not in a “you have to understand the larger universe” way. It’s necessary to this particular tale.
To understand the significance of The Justice League, you have to understand this: right from the start, Batman v Superman asks a big question, “Should any one individual have as much power as Superman has?” That’s a good question. Superman has so much power that it seems like no one could ever stop him. If he ever went rogue or even made a decision that the rest of the world disagreed with, there would be nothing anyone could do about it. Do we trust Superman? Should we take precautions? These questions fuel both Batman’s suspicions and Lex Luthor’s hostility. In the end, Superman discovers a painful truth: no, he can’t be trusted. Because, even if his intentions are pure, he can be manipulated, especially if his loved one are endangered.
So, if this whole movie is built around a question, what is the answer?
The Justice League. The Justice League is the answer. If superhumans can’t be policed, then the only possible solution is to get all of them together and let them police each other. It’s actually pretty clever.
And if much of the audience didn’t understand that the introduction of The Justice League characters was the solution to the main problem, then it is not your fault, audience. It’s the fault of storytellers who undersold one of the tale’s most important aspects.
What’s up with Lex Luthor? Was he really that annoying?
(This one isn’t a major point, but it merits some discussion.)
The short answer is, yes, he was annoying, but that’s kind of the point.
Time for a history lesson. Did you know that in the early days of Superman comics, Lex Luthor was known as a mad scientist, not a billionaire? Sure, he was always rich, but originally, Luthor’s money was only important because it funded his experiments. It was a minor aspect of a character that was mainly know for his ability to build robots and death rays. In the late 70’s and early 80’s, the “billionaire/corporate businessman” aspect became Luthor’s dominant trait. Stacks of disposable income became his strongest asset. Instead of relying on his brains alone, Luthor could hire teams of geniuses. Plus he could bribe politicians and stage cover-ups.
Now, consider this in context. In the early days of Superman comics, the 40’s and 50’s, mankind was making great leaps in the fields of science and technology. People were fascinated by these advancements, but also a little intimidated by them. In the late 70’s and 80’s, the “me decade” began and big businesses were being recognized as giant conglomerates. Again, this kind of wealth and power was respected, but also feared and resented. The character of Lex Luthor adapts to be whatever kind of human wields the most power at the time. He’s what we most fear and admire. Perhaps that’s why he always despises Superman. The world’s most powerful human can never compete with someone who’s beyond human.
Now, let’s look at Jesse Eisenberg’s version of Lex Luthor from Batman v Superman. He’s no longer a smooth businessman. People don’t always think of those types as “powerful” anymore. We often think of them as out of touch and clueless. Instead, this Lex Luthor is the new breed of billionaire. He’s the “dot com era” billionaire, a young hipster nerd. He’s smart, but in a quirky way, a way that most of us can’t understand. He’s the creative genius that seems slightly beyond our grasp. Because, apparently, that’s the kind of person we fear and admire now. Is this Lex’s next evolution? Time will tell.
Conclusion
Batman v Superman had some great ideas that brought together many classic DC comic stories into a fairly concise package. But they bungled the telling of this story and made it too messy to follow. I got the idea that they were so afraid of being heavy-handed that they overcompensated by becoming too vague. There’s a trend in modern movies – an idea that audiences should have work a little harder to figure out a story. Batman v Superman takes that technique too far by muddling things that should have been made clear. Simply put, the storytellers mistook a lack of clarity for cleverness.
That said, the things this movie does well, it does very well. I liked the casting, the filming, even the over-all structure of the plot, if not the execution. It’s a little disappointing seeing these positive attributes not go as far as they could go. It’s like building a rocket with four boosters, but only three of them go off. So the rocket’s very shakey and veers off course a lot. But the three other boosters are so good, they really carry it a great distance. And you’re pleased with how very far the quality boosters took the thing, but you can’t help but be a little sad, thinking about how much further it could have gone if only all the pieces worked like they were supposed to.
(P.S – More Wonder Woman, please.)
