literature

Constructive criticism: Batman v Superman

Deviation Actions

81Scorp's avatar
By
Published:
3.8K Views

Literature Text

In 2013 Superman`s movie franchise got rebooted with a movie directed by Zack Snyder and written by David S Goyer. The result was... a little bit divisive. Some loved it, some hated it, but never the less it made money, enough to greenlight a sequel... or rather: a bigger, shared movie universe. Not unlike what they were doing over at Marvel.
There were some missteps in the first movie but surely the filmmakers had learned from them when it was time for a sequel, right?
No, not really. Like Michael Bay when he made Transformers: Revenge of the fallen, Zack Snyder and David S Goyer just kept on rolling as if they had learned nothing from the first movie. This time my love for DC and it`s characters was not enough to distract me from the movie`s shortcomings. Take the small bastardisation of some of the characters out of the equation and it`s still pretty bad on it`s own. Lack of humanity, underdeveloped characters, poor motivations and having too much stuff crammed in.
But it wasnt all bad. It had some moments that I liked. Over all I didn`t hate it... much, but I didn`t like it either. 
Where did it go wrong and how could it have been better?

The SPOILERS are coming! The SPOILERS are coming!

Before I start: In my Constructive criticism of Man of Steel I suggested a climax that didn`t involve killing Zod. If they don`t have Zod`s body to test the kryptonite on, how will they know that kryptonite harms Superman?
How about: When Superman was under arrest by the military in the first movie they took some hair or skin samples from him (I prefer to think of Supes as superdurable rather than invulnerable). I mean, he is an extraterrestrial afterall. They should take DNA samples from him FOR SCIENCE! So this is the kryptonian DNA that they use to find out that kryptonite is harmful to Superman.

Batman`s origin
Yes, I know, the part where young Bruce starts flying is revealed to be a dream the next second, but still. We know Batman`s origin and have seen it several times, so keep it to the necessary minimum. Thomas Wayne doesn`t whisper Martha`s name and it should end shortly after young Bruce finds the batcave.

The destruction of Metropolis
Bruce`s employees shouldn`t have to wait for his approval to evacuate. Here`s how it could have been:
Bruce: Jack! Talk to me! What`s happening!?
Jack: We`ve started evacuating! There are still a few left! But I think we have time to- *large crashing noise*
Telephone voice: The number you have dialed can not be reached.
Bruce: Jack?! Jack!
We can assume that Jack and many others didn`t make it. After this the scene plays out like it did in the movie. (Except the name of the man who gets his legs crushed is not Wallace Keefe, but John Corben.) We also see Lex Luthor witnessing the destruction of the city from his own building.

 The middle east scene
Appearently the photographer that gets killed is supposed to be Jimmy Olsen. I mentioned before in my previous journal that I`m not crazy about when they kill characters that have played an important part and/or has been in the comicbook a long time. I`m not a big fan of Prof Emil Hamilton (possibly) being killed in the first movie, but I can let it slide once.
But Jimmy Olsen is more wellknown. What does Snyder (or possibly Goyer) have against supporting characters? If you don`t like Jimmy because you only know about the silly version of him from the silver age comic then don`t use him! Or at least just give him a small part. So my idea is: the photographer can be killed, but make him an original character created for the movie.
In the movie Lois was there so that Superman could show up so that Lex could frame him for the killing. Uhmm... Why would people believe that Superman uses bullets? The reason for her to be there doesn`t necessarily have to tie in to anything in the rest of the movie, she`s a reporter, it`s part of her job.
Didn`t Superman have an aversion to killing? Sure, we are told later that the guy that he rammed through a wall didn`t die, but that`s stretching it a bit.
I can understand why Snyder went this direction though. If someone pointed a gun at your girlfriend`s/boyfriend`s head you`d get angry too. But still, Superman has great strength and he can`t do whatever he wants without risking hurting others or causing great damage, he has to practice restraint, something Zack Snyder is not very good at.
How about: Superman uses his superspeed to grab the bad guy`s gun-hand and aims it in the complete opposite direction of where Lois stands. Then he grabs the bad guy by the collar (in regular speed, but still pretty fast though) with his other hand, lifts him off the floor and pushes him against the wall. Then he calms down, squeezes the bad guy`s gun into something unrecognizable and ties his hands together with an ironpipe.
Then a scene with no dialogue: he takes a look outside, at the photographer who died because he wasn`t fast enough. Lois understands how he feels and puts a hand on his shoulder.

Clark and Lois`s bathtub scene
I dunno. It felt like it was (almost) nudity for the sake of (almost) nudity. You could:
Change it so that Lois has already bathed and goes out in the living room, wearing a bathrobe, where she meets Clark. They can talk a little about what what happened. Clark wishes he could have saved more people. Lois can say that not even he can be everywhere at once. Clark: "I know..." (It`s basically like the scene where Lois puts her hand on Supes`s shoulder but here it is done with dialogue.)

Bruce wayne at the fight-club bar
You know that bar that Bruce visited to steal information from the russian guy`s phone? Those two guys beating each other up and people being OK with it made it feel like it was some kind of illegal, shady place. Shouldn`t Bruce Wayne, a wellknown millionaire (or billionaire) and philanthropist, be more concerned about his image and not go to places like that? They could have made it an ordinary, legal bar. I know, it`s a short and small scene. But still.

Batman killing
First let me get this out of the way: Ben Affleck`s portrayal of Batman: good.
How Batman is written in this movie: not so good.
Why do I feel that Batman shouldn`t kill? Batman the animated series and the Dark Knight trilogy established that Batman has a no killing rule. Sure, this is a different universe, but still. Batman`s no killing rule is an important part of his character. I think it would be more interesting to see Batman balancing on the edge rather than to begin with him already fallen. They could at least have acknowledged it, that there was a time when Batman didn`t kill and Alfred could try to talk him into finding his humanity again. But it feels like Snyder didn`t think that far, that he only thought behind this decision was because it "looked cool".
How would I have done it? Batman doesn`t kill criminals, but he`s very close to trying. And he`s cruel, ruthless and he brands criminals with the bat-symbol. Alfred confronts him about it. Bruce responds that it is "necessary cruelty"
Alfred: Is it?.
Bruce knows where Alfred is going and defends his actions with:
Bruce: There`s one thing that separates me from the criminals that I fight.
Alfred: One thing, yes. But how long will that one thing last?
Bruce Wayne is a man who has been pushed closer and closer to the edge by traumatic experiences several times in his life. The death of his parents turned him into Batman. Joker killing Robin is what made him extra cruel and made him treat criminals as less than human. Superman destroying buildings in Metropolis and being responsible for the death of several of his employees made him hate Superman.
There could be some monologue when he looks at Robin`s suit.
Bruce: I took him in, gave him a home when he had nowhere else to live. But I couldn`t save him. That psycho beat him to death.
This could be followed by a quiet moment. Alfred understands how he feels and puts a hand on his shoulder.
There`s no reason to have Batman chasing after the bad guys in his batmobile and shooting and destroying them. Not just because of my opinion that Batman shouldn`t kill, but because it felt like action for action`s sake. Just have him shoot the tracer on the truck and leave it there. (BTW: Batman didn`t manage to steal all of the kryponite from Lex. And Batman knows that Lex is very likely up to something fishy, but he focuses more on Superman because Supes seems like the bigger threat at the moment.) Also, when Bruce first visits his parents grave there should be a tombstone visible that says "Jason Todd" to tell us that the Robin that died is not Dick Grayson.

Lex Luthor
I was OK with Lex having hair and being played by a young (or at least young-looking) actor like Jesse Eisenberg. He also added some (in my opinion) necessary humour to a very dark and serious movie. And I`m not gonna lie, I liked the "The redcoats are coming" line.
Then I watched the movie and realized: He`s gonna do that voice and personality for the whole movie. Crap.
Was Jesse playing Lex Luthor, The Joker or the Riddler? (BTW: I`ve seen a video on youtube where people who defend this movie say that they can`t see the similarities because Lex and the Joker have different goals. So let me clarify: sure, they may have different goals, but personality-wise Eisenberg`s Lex acts very similar to how the Joker is usually portrayed.)
Some may defend this with "But it`s not Lex, it`s Lex`s son, Lex jr!".
I still don`t like the personality and his motivation is still weak. Like I said: I like that he provided some humour, but I think he overdid it. How about...
A: Keep Jesse Eisenberg but have him play Lex very Tony Stark-like or very Mark Suckerberg-ish. (Though I can understand why he didn`t play him like that since he already played Mark Suckerberg once and probably didn`t want to repeat himself.)
BTW: I haven`t seen The Social Network yet so I don`t what he`s like in that movie, which is why I suggested Tony Stark as an alternative. 
Apologies to all DC-fans.
But the basic idea for Lex`s personality is: cocky and arrogant and less cray-cray.
B: Have Mark Strong or Bryan Cranston play Lex (or at least someone Mark Strong-ish or Bryan Cranston-ish), and play him like Lex from the DCAU. He can have a dry, deadpan style of humour and he doesn`t necessarily have to be bald.
Lex`s reason for hating Superman can be similar to Bruce`s reason: He`s seen what great powers Superman have and the destruction he`s capable of.

Batman and Superman`s reason for hating each other
Besides the fact that Supes is responsible for the death of thousands (including people who work for Bruce), Bruce has trust issues and thinks that Superman only helps people because he wants to clean up his image after he recklessly destroyed several buildings in Metropolis. He thinks that Superman is too much of a rookie who isn`t worthy of his powers.
When they first meet and talk about this Clark can acknowledge that Superman didn`t have the best start but also clarifies that Superman has learned from his mistakes.
Bruce says that the employees at the Wayne building must be so grateful for his progress.
Clark doesn`t like Batman because he feels that someone who has been in the business for such a long time should`ve learned by now to not be so inhumane and brutal to people, even if they are criminals. There could be a montage scene before Clark and Bruce meet where Clark does some research on the Batman and finds out how cruel he is to criminals. Batman`s a cynic and Superman`s an idealist.

The post-apocalyptic world dream
One of the movie`s problems is that it tries to cram too much stuff in. There`s too much "this will make sense in later movies", "this will be important in later movies" and this scene is one of those things. And I know that those flying things are parademons from Apokolips, I`ve read the comics, but still. Lose it.

Flash`s portal cameo
At first I was gonna put this in the "On the fence" category because I liked Ezra Miller`s performance, even if it was extremely short. And even if it was one of those "this will make sense in later movies" I was willing to let it slide because confusing things are something you have to deal with when it comes to time travels. (Believe me, I know what this scene references, I`ve read "Crisis on Infinite Earths".) But still, keeping it in just gives the movie that overcrowded feeling. Lose it.

Martha`s advice to Clark
That scene where Martha says to Clark: "Be their hero, Clark. Be their angel, be their monument, be anything they need you to be... or be none of it. You don`t owe this world a thing. You never did."
This was another scene that I was thinking about putting in the "On the fence" category. It`s one of those scenes that we`ve already seen in the first movie, where people keep telling Superman who he should be. Then again, while it`s not giving us anything useful, it`s not taking away anything good either. But then again: it just comes of as if Superman is unhappy because people don`t like him. Superman`s biggest priority is helping people, wether they like him or not.
You can:
A
: Lose this scene.
B
: Change the dialogue. She can ask him what he`s gonna do and he can say that he`s gonna keep doing his boyscout thing wether people like it or not. Then he could hug his mom. He then hears someone being in trouble with his superhearing and Martha notices this by the way he reacts and seem to listen to something that she herself can`t hear.
Martha: Someone in trouble?
Superman: Yeah, duty calls. (He flies away.)
Martha: Good luck...

Ghost dad Kent
Originally I had this in the on the fence category but then I realized that in my version this scene wouldn`t work. Why?
Because in the movie this happens when Superman has given up and is ready to throw in the towel. In my version Superman keeps doing his boyscout thing regardless if people like him or not.
How about: Superman is taking a short break from superheroing on the Northpole. His dad shows up and they have a little talk. Ghostdad Kent points out that he (Superman) is in a problematic place (being wanted for a murder he didn`t commit and having the media against him). Superman says yeah, but what else can he do? Give up? Even if he`s not exactly Mr Popular right now there are still people out there who need help, and he can`t just turn away from that. Ghostdad Kent admits that he has a point. The two of them are quiet for a moment and admire the landscape. Ghostdad Kent says:
"It sure is beautiful up here."
Superman
: "Yeah... I wish you could be here to see it."
In the next cut Ghostdad Kent is gone.
This scene shows that even Supes needs time to rest, that he has limitations. Talking to his late dad as an imaginary friend shows that he has a sentimental side. In short: this scene humanizes Superman.
"But isn`t Superman supposed to be a god?" Some may say.
A godlike Superman is flawless, a flawless character is boring. Yes Superman is godlike but there is a human side to him as well and there should be at least as much focus on that as his god side.
But doesn`t this mean that his character doesn`t go through any changes?
Yes it does, but then again, Supes already had his inner journey in Man Of Steel. BvS is not about Superman`s inner journey, it`s about Batman`s.

The reason for Batman and Superman to fight
Instead of Lex killing several people with a wheelchair-bomb, how about this: Early in the movie when we meet Lex he talks about the many scientific advances that his company has made. He mentions that they have come a long way in laser technology. Later, after Senator Finch has nixed his idea of weaponizing kryptonite, she is found the next day, dead in her home, with third degree burns. An autopsy shows that her death was caused by two heat-rays, similar to Superman`s heat vision.
But why would Superman kill her? Here`s where Lex goes all J. Jonah Jameson on Superman (again, apologies to all DC-fans). Superman killed Finch because she tried to tell him what he could and could not do, and his sensitive ego couldn`t handle that! His good guy persona is just a facade! He may have the powers of a god but he has the mind of an immature sociopath! He`s a threat and must be dealt with! 
Batman believes this, steals the kryptonite from Lex and starts preparing for a fight. One of the things that he packs in his "Kill Superman-kit" is an E.M.P gun. (Hey, you never know, it could be useful.) He must stop Superman, and to do that he must cross the line and do that one thing that separates him from the criminals that he fights.
Hearing this saddens Alfred. 
Batman later attracts Supermans attention (He could put the Superman symbol on the searchlight that usully has the Batman-symbol on it.) and gets him to meet him on a building where they fight.
(Superman wants to go easy on Batman, he knows that he`s too strong for him, but when Batman uses the kryptonite on him Supes realises realizes that he`s gonna have to get serious.)
 So there`s no need for Lex to kidnap Martha.
("But, then we won`t get to see Batman`s cool fight scene" you say. Fear not dear readers, for I have a backup plan! Before the scene where Batman puts the tracer on the truck there`s a scene where someone mentions a kidnapped kid. After the "put the tracer on the truck" scene Batman drives to the building where he has figured out that the kid is being held prisoner. We get to see Batman be brutal and beat the kidnappers almost to death. He opens a door to a room where the kid is hidden. He extends his hand as a way to say to the kid "It`s OK, you can come out now, the bad guys won`t harm you." but the kid is afraid of him. Batman radios the police and stays with the kid until a cop shows up to take the kid to a safe place.
On his way back home Batman meets Superman who uses his X-ray vision to see who`s under the mask and thinks that Batman should retire. Gotham deserves a better guardian than the violent psychopath they have now.)

Batman`s Superstrength
Speaking about Batman beating up a bunch of kidnappers earlier brings me to my next point: I know that Batman`s strong but his strength in the fightscene with the kidnappers feels a little too superhuman. They could have toned it down to a more believable level.

Lois Lane
I`d give Lois a chance to be more proactive and useful in my version. So there`s no need for Lex to kidnap her either.
When Lois hears that Superman is accused of a murder she starts to do everything she can to prove his innocence (instead of the "trying to find out who made the bullet" subplot that we got). She gets help from an anonymous hacker that mails her files with blueprints of the heat-ray weapon that was used to kill Finch. There are also detailed files about Superman and a very old photo of Diana in her WW costume.
The anonymous hacker is later revealed to be Victor Stone. He can be revealed, sitting in a poorly lit room, wearing civilian clothes. He`s wearing a hoodie and the shadows cover most of the metallic half of his face, but we can clearly see his glowing, red robot eye.
(Victor Stone could be foreshadowed earlier in the movie. When Lex talks about how advanced their laser-technology is, he also mentions that a young athlete who got into a terrible accident is now able to walk again, thanks to Lexcorp`s advancements in the field of bionics.)

The reason for Batman and Superman to stop their fight
Batman get`s the upperhand. He`s about to use the kryptonite spear on Superman. But... he hesitates. By killing Superman he`s become just as bad as the criminals he fight. (This can be shown visually by cutting from a shot of the kryptonite spear to a shot of the gun that Joe Chill used to kill Bruce`s parents. Followed by cutting from a shot of Superman`s face to a shot of young Bruce`s face from the scene in the beginning where his parent`s were killed.) Lois shows up and shouts: "Stop! Don`t do it! He didn`t kill Finch! I have proof!" Batman decides to believe that they are telling the truth until he knows for sure.

Wonderwoman`s character developement
I like Gal Gadot as Wonder woman, but it would have been nice if she had some character developement. How about:
Before Lois discovers the old photo of her there`s a scene where Diana meets her old friend Julia Kapatelis in a restaurant. Julia talks about how Diana used to help people and wonders why she gave it up. The way things look right now the world could use an extra pair of helping hands. (They use the word "help" as a codeword for "doing superhero-stuff" since they`re in a public place and don`t want to out Diana as a superhero.) Diana responds that there were several reasons but doesn`t want to go into details. Julia thinks that whatever the reasons for quitting are, the reasons for getting back in the game seem bigger.
Then the waiter shows up with their meals.
Instead of finding out about the fight when she`s on a plane Diana could be in her own home, packing her bags, prepairing to leave when she gets a call from Julia. She tells her to turn on the TV, Channel 12 (or some other number). Diana does so and sees what`s going on.

The introduction to the future members of Justice League
Like Flash`s portal cameo I was toying with the idea of putting this in the "On the fence" category. Unlike Flash`s scene this is more of a "This will be important later" rather than a "This will make sense later". I prefer things that become important later over things that has to wait for a sequel to make sense. But keeping it in just makes it feel like it was shoehorned in at the last minute. Not to mention it`s a lazy way of introducing these characters. Lose it.
I know, my own version also has a cameo of Victor Stone (Cyborg). The difference is that I only put in one of the other members of Justice league, and he at least had someting to do and wasn`t just there to be there. And the thing that he did was payed off within the movie, we didn`t have to wait for a sequel.

Doomsday
Personally I don`t mind that Doomsday looked like a cave-troll from Lord of the Rings. He looked Doomsdayish enough to me.
But he was introduced too early in the DCCU. A problem that DC movies have is that they use up their big guns too early. Now that we`ve already had the fight against Doomsday and the death of Superman there are no higher stakes left (except maybe Darkseid). It would have been better to save Doomday for a third solo Superman movie where you could give the Death of Superman story the proper time and care that it needs. How about: 
Remember John Corben who I mentioned earlier? Instead of getting a high-tech wheelchair, John Corben gets recruited by Lex who uses technology from the kryptonian ship to build him a giant, kryptonite-powered robot-suit equipped with rockets (It`s built with nanotechnology, so if they harm it, it repairs itself). Supes and Batsy fight him, Corben uses the kryptonite on Supes who is weakened. Batman is in trouble but Wonderwoman shows up and joins the fight. (BTW: when Corben opens his chest to reveal the kryptonite, it`s still protected behind superdurable glass, so Wonderwoman can`t just stick her hand in and pull it out.) Batman uses his EMP gun on Corben and knocks him out (See? I told you it could be useful!) 
WW or Supes manages to open the robot-suit and pulls out an angry, legless, halfnaked Corben. He has plug-in holes in his back, kinda like the people from The Matrix movies. (He controlled the robot-armour mentally with the help of these.) He is furious and shouts: NO! NOO! You took my legs! You took everything from me! 
WW feels sorry for him, but he doesn`t want her pity. Supes doesn`t want the robot suit (which is still mostly intact) or the kryptonite inside it to end up in the wrong hands, so he takes it with him out into space to throw it into the sun.
Out in space the robot-armour comes back to life and notices that the human host is gone but also that it is close to Superman, it`s autopilot kicks in. It starts to wrestle and fight Superman and exposes him to the kryptonite in it`s chest. Supes is weakened but pulls himself together and delivers a powerful kick that sends the robot-armour into the sun and himself back towards earth. He lands somewhere in Japan and manages to avoid destroying any property or hurting innocent people. He whispers one word: "...Ouch!"
Lex goes to jail, he could be visited by Superman or Batman. When Supes/ Bats leaves Lex could shout that they have opened Pandora`s box.
Before Supes leaves Lex asks him one last question.
Lex: "Tell me, do you see yourself as a good man?"
Superman: "I see my self as a man who tries to be good."
Later, Bruce visits his parent`s grave and is later accompanied by Clark and Diana. Clark sees the name on the grave and mentions that his mom`s name is also Martha. Bruce allows himself to smile at the coincidence. They talk about joining forces, finding other extraordinary people similar to them and together fight great threats that are to big for one of them to handle. 
Bruce puts his hand out, Clark puts his hand on Bruce`s and Diana puts her hand on Clark`s.

The End

Snyder was not a good director for this movie. It could have been better if they had tried some restraint in some scenes, something that is, as I mentioned earlier, not Snyder`s strong side.
It seems that the only thought behind the decisions that were made was focusing on how cool it would look.
I may be wrong but I think Michael Bay once said: "I make movies for 13-year old boys. What a crime."
Snyder is similar to Bay in that they both know their audience, but they never seem to think about the periphery demographic.
This movie had several opportunities to be good but someone (Snyder? Goyer? Terrio? Some of the Big suits at Warner Bros?) really dropped the ball on this one.

I get that Warner Bros wants their DC movies to be different from Marvel but it seems that they are putting their focus more on being different than telling good stories. DC, if you want to be different that`s fine, but be a different kind of different.

And those are my ideas and thoughts. Feel free to disagree.

I am currently working on a constructive criticism of X-Men 3 which was originally gonna be my next CC since I`ve already covered six DC movies. But after I saw Batman v Super in the cinema I felt that it could be next in line.
Why do you keep doing this DC? Stop making it so easy for me to put your movies in my Constructive criticisms! :(

English is not my first language, so apologies for any mistakes I`ve made in spelling, grammar or sentence structures.


Periphery demographic: Fans of a work that are outside its primary target demographic.
tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php…

Superman was created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.

Batman was created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger.
Wonder Woman was created by William Moulton Marston. All of them belong to DC comics.
© 2016 - 2024 81Scorp
Comments2
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Crosswire40's avatar
Man of Steel and Batman v Superman came off like badly handled fanfics to me. Having Jimmy Olsen killed off purely to create drama and Robin dead before the story even starts seems like something a super-edgy high school student would write. The crappy dialogue, the stilted characters, the questionable portrayals of the heroes, the near non-existent character motivations, and a few brief moments of decent writing just makes the fanfic comparisons even stronger. 

Synder obviously doesn't have any remote respect or understanding of the source material he's butchering. I'm no purist when it comes to adaptions, some things simply need to be modified to work for a film and we've gotten some amazing things thanks to people experimenting with existing material. However Synder isn't experimenting, he's simply doing whatever he wants regardless of how foolish of convoluted it is. 

The fact he's been allowed to do this and these movies have made so much money have set a horrible precedent and sent an even worse message.

"As long as it's flashy and fancy you can wipe your sweaty bum with the source material and you'll still make fat stacks off the gullible fools who go to see it!"

Your mention of Micheal Bay was spot on. Synder's another Bay, someone with all style and no substance who doesn't care about anything but appealing to the lowest common denominator. 

I don't mean to be one of those people, but look at the Avengers. That is a fantastic movie series and it's managed to stay very faithful to the original spirit of the characters while making changes and doing their own thing. What Warner Brothers had made just comes off as a rushed, half-hearted attempt to emulate what the Avengers managed to do without really paying attention to why the Avengers worked to begin with.

All I can do is cross my fingers and hope that Warner Brother's ditches any plans for further movies because I don't have a shred of hope things will improve.