@msgtv
This is true, I enjoy it more because I’ve accepted it’s a b-movie. It could become the Rocky Horror Picture Show of superhero movies. When viewed as a parody of what a JL movie should be, it’s still awful, but in a good way.
@BeardOfZues
It’s already been 6+ years since MoS. MoS and BvS, neither are a fine wine. Not getting better with age. If anything their faults are amplified. Perhaps someday they will be looked on as “quaint”. Although I think that is stretch. Some movies are just fish. The longer they sit out in the sun, the more stench they create.
At best they will be looked at lovingly as examples of how not to make a superhero movie with cultural icons. We have 80 years of Superman “always finds the better way”, and 143 minutes when he doesn’t.
@desade specifically how is it a fish
1 Like
@BeardOfZues
I have written quite a bit on these films in other threads on “the Snyder verse”, my dissecting can be found there.
If you take off your DC fan goggles, it’s not underrated. From Lex to MARTHA!!! to plot holes to pacing, theatrical release deserves the criticism it gets.
I like it a lot. It fits with my personal likings. I can rewatch any Wonder Woman scenes and still love them as much as when I first watched them. It’s far from a perfect movie, but it’s not the trash everyone wants to convince me it is. I mostly find it strange how this movie and Suicide Squad make people want to tell you how bad they are even after you’ve told them you like them. I mean, okay? You don’t like them, but I do. I think some people that love the movie overrate it and in turn people that hate it bash it too much. I can still put the movie and enjoy if. I actually enjoy the theatrical cut more than the extended version. The extended version just spoon feeds you things that you could have gotten out of context clues.
5 Likes
I thought it didn’t get the credit that it deserved, I liked it a lot actually. It’s not perfect and there are some things I would change if I could, like Jesse Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor and how Doomsday was made. General Zod and Faora created Doomsday in the comics but he wasn’t made out of Zod’s corpse mixed with Lex’s dna. So there are some flaws but overall I loved it 
2 Likes
I really enjoyed it. The sad thing is the haters never took the opportunity to dissect and learn from it. It had many interesting themes from the political insight to philosophical elements you wouldn’t find in a modern superhero film. It did have flaws, but at the end of the day: Don’t we watch films like this for entertainment? Cannot say every film I saw based on an Marvel or DC character I liked, but I did find many of them entertaining.
But it also goes to show how little the average film watcher knows and to hard for them to expect them to. That is why they say it is a “bad movie” without understanding the underlying elements. That is the sad culture we live in. Unfortunately, we will never get a interesting story like that ever. Because they’re superheros and all these films are to be about is the bad guy getting beat down by the good guy and nothing more…
3 Likes
Plus, I have to say this:
I hate the way pop culture shamed this movie. It just made me realize how much some people can appreciate films as an art as opposed to just saying “this movie is trash”.
4 Likes
I’ll put my .02 cents in here. I thoroughly enjoyed Batman v Superman. Yes it had it’s bad points, including Henry Cavill as Superman, Jessie Eisenberg as Lex, and some other things I don’t recall due to their insignificance.
Some of the things it had going for it, Lois Lane doing some investigative reporting, Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Doomsday, Batman v Superman fight, K G Beast. Martha Kent, the Martha moment (and I don’t get the hate on this. It wasn’t the name that defused Bruce. It was the realization that there was a human side to Superman he had not taken into consideration. Superman has an Earthly mom named Martha too. That name, Martha, and Thomas, were the reasons Bruce became Batman. Of course those names would be trigger words. Those names would bite him deeply, down to the core of who he is. If he did not react to Mart ha’s t name, I would cry foul at that!)
I even liked the Batmobile, although it still doesn’t trump the '89 Batmobile.
3 Likes
I don’t feel like it is.
I know in my heart it is.
2 Likes
@MakasuB
You said and I quote, “It just made me realize how much some people can appreciate films as an art”
Some art is just awful and trash by objective measures such as genre or style. Also, in comparison to other references on the source material, style, theme, etc.
Take the Getty Kouros. If it is of the date it is believed, based on all objective research on it’s age, it is not well executed. Some have been lead to believe that this means it is a fake, the view that fits all the available evidence is it just executed poorly.
Yes, “some people”, only those whom share your opinion it seems, can “appreciate films as art”. Some people whom don’t share your opinion can also “appreciate films as art” and when dissecting the work, come to an equally valid conclusion that “it’s garbage”.
Perhaps the “underlying elements” don’t support the character and the character choices are poorly executed by the director, writer, and/or actor(s). The “underlying elements” don’t find support in the base psychological constructs of the character.
Since you want to talk about “art”. I will leave you with something Jerzy Grotowski said, “It does not matter whether I (as the director) believe it. It does not matter whether you (the actor) believe it. What matters is does the audience believe it.”
Some did, some did not. That doesn’t make those that did or did not, any better than the other group or have a lack of understanding of the work. Dissection can work both ways.
If you thinks it’s “great”, bully for you. Enjoy it. I find it one of the worst superhero films ever made, because it lacks fundamental support of character psychology for the choices some of the major characters make. IMO, it fails, and fails miserably in that.
@desade are you a middle school math teacher or are you mormon?
1 Like
@beardofzues
I am a divisive, atheist, punk and have been since the early 1970s, and damn proud of it.
I am a vehement support of free-speech, LBGTQ equality under the law.
I am a “subversive” by many people’s definition.
And I have “reject their moral standards” tattooed in big bold lettering in my back in-between to pinups that are at best case NC17 in rating.
I have been told I am the man mothers generally warn their daughters about. (And never in the negative context of that colloquial expression)
I fought for consensual sadomasochism to be removed from the DSM and worked on the Spanner Appeal in the EU to protect the rights of consenting adults engaging in whatever sex the wish. I have given talks on the psychology of sexual role play.
I am a published book author. Also a playwright and pornographic novelist.
Anything else you’d like to know?
1 Like
Your age background mean nothing to me because you an anonymous internet stranger. And even if I were to believe half of what you just said, writing to the Penthouse forums 20 years ago doesnt qualifies someone to proclaim themself as a “published author” but I digress: you are an enormous bully in these threads. Telling someone their idea of art is “objectively trash” is asinine. I’ve seen plenty of other people reprimanded for the same thing, but since you refrain from using naughty language, somehow you get away with it. I know the internet is a safe place for people like you to stick your face into places you’d otherwise avoid in real life scenarios, but it doesn’t mean you opinion matters. The only objective trash is your attitude toward people proclaiming their affection for something you clearly don’t enjoy. Art is subjective, period. That’s the entire point of art. From a kindergarten finger painting to a Monet. Try using a different tone and you might find yourself spending less time seeking the approval of strangers and more time have constructive and informative conversations with potential IRL friends.
1 Like
@beardofzues
If you bothered to actually read my post, I did not say their idea of art is "objectively trash”
I said some art is trash by objective measures such as genre or style or in reference to material/style/theme/etc. This is true. This is specifically why I brought up the Getty Kouros. I actually quite like the piece, but, by objective measures of the kouros form from that era, it is not well executed and is by objective measures a trash kouros.
Art is not subjective. One’s like or dislike of a work of art is subjective. One’s opinion of a piece of art is completely valid for that person as their opinion. However, art can be viewed and studied in an objective manner. If you believe that the entire point of art is subjectivity, you are certainly free to hold that opinion. However, it is in stark contrast to the art and art history of the last several millennia.
I love some films that are absolute trash. I can say that they are objectively trash. That does not reduce my enjoyment of them. I think they are great and they are trash too.
There are people who say MoS or BvS is their favorite DC property movie ever. That’s great. I’m happy for them. Love something because you love it and to bleep with what anyone else thinks of it. However, if they are going to say that those are great works of art, now we move out from the realm of mere personal opinion. This is film analysis. That which precludes emotions and feelings about a work.
I am not the member who said that the people who enjoy a particular film are those that “can appreciate films as art”.
I am more than happy to tell you all this and more to your face. If you are in Southern California, I’m fine setting up a time to do that. I stick my face and opinions into plenty of real places in real life. I don’t need “the safety of a keyboard” to have the backbone to stand my ground on my views.
It is laughable that you say I’m “seeking the approval of strangers”. Transference much?
Let’s take it back to BvS, folks. Not necessary to dig into each other’s personal backgrounds to express an opinion.
5 Likes
To get back to the topic of BvS under-rated,
Over or under rated. It put S & B on screen in live action feature film for the first time.
I find it interesting that while this crossover model has existed and been commercially successful in both books and animation for a long time.
BvS by box office sales didn’t play as well in the overseas market as Aquaman yet, they did do about the same US box office.
Wonder Woman did not do as well internationally but did 70+ million more domestically than either BvS or Aquaman.
One would think that Batman and Superman in the same film would crush Aquaman or Wonder Woman especially in terms of domestic box office.
Why didn’t it? Batman is such a big property that he can take the air out of the room of whatever he’s in. Superman has a similar effect to a lesser extent. In the blockbuster film format, do they just take the air out of the room for each other? Essentially partially suffocating each other?
Even though the OP illicitly stated “HATERS STAY OUT” it’s fine for you to say you didn’t like it. There’s a lot of flavors of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream, some I will probably never try because I’m not big on chocolate, but they’re still my favorite ice cream maker and would suggest said flavors to others who may enjoy them.
I think the biggest reason why BvS didn’t play well was because it was released so shortly after a critically lauded series of Batman films, the divisive casting of Batman, and the previous left turn take on the most popular superhero in the world that started the saga leading up to it. They should have waited 3 or 4 years to even relaunched Superman, because plenty of die-hards loved Superman Returns, while it may have underperformed at the box office. Plenty of warning signs. And even Batman Begins brought in modest returns but word of mouth (and Heath Ledger’s untimely death) helped propel it’s sequel to be one of the biggest movies of all time.
I think their biggest mistake was not introducing us to their new version of Batman and just thrusting him into a seemingly implausible battle against the most powerful being on earth.
Batman Begins was a tanker at the box office but the other two films had very good profit multipliers.
I will also concur that just throwing Bats in without setting up his psychological base in his own film was one of my biggest issues with the film. Batman does not have a solid foundation for his fundamental psychology, and without that, going so far from canonical sources, really hurt the film.
I must confess to asking such an opened question by to OP but not wanting opinions that could say it wasn’t. If it was a BvS appreciation thread, I think it might have been more what the OP seemed to be after.