Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Reading all the nerd theories and analyses of how far Snyder's vision actually reaches is fine. It clarifies a lot and provides the opportunity to look forward to the DC version, but on the other hand, it indicates the fact that it doesn't give a damn about the average viewer because if you don't get on the geek bandwagon, those characters without proper motivations will eventually beat you to death in 2.5 hours. The digital finale is fine. But the futile relationship with the (foster) mothers? Not so much. PS: This is the most boring music from Zimmer in 15 years. PPS: In the Ultimate version, I especially appreciate Jena Malone's 20 seconds, which paradoxically adds a more meaningful dimension to Lois Lane. The rest of it is rather subtle directional cues for viewers to clarify motivations, but there is no epic sweep. It’s just a more sweeping comic book movie that wants to set a more mature tone with its Nolan-esque bleakness but gets too overwhelmed with unnecessary visual gluttony and is stripped of perspective. (31/03/2016)

Basically, everything that was true about the first movie applies perfectly this time as well, but it is more chaotic and noticeably less tight thanks to the number of characters and story lines that are only started but not developed properly. The main distinguishing features are contradiction that goes hand-to-hand with divisiveness, where every fifteen minutes of footage include five minutes of enthusiasm (some performances, storylines, specific scenes), for five minutes you look at your watch (the amount of ballast around the lengthy building of the fictional world, which is not properly used, there are unnatural story lines packed with troubles of Lois or a too complicated dull phase of Luthor's plan) and five minutes of desperate beating of the head on a seat (bloated pomp, dream sequences of Clark and Bruce, Eisenberg's childish play, confusing action culminating in a half-hour digital mess like "skyscrapers" are falling again dull finale scene, absent tension between the central duo and especially "Marta"). And the whole movie consists of ten consecutive 15 mins sequences. This is best illustrated by Affleck/Batman. The role of the weary aging Bruce fits him perfectly, but the script makes him a stale naive puppet in the game of smarter people. Like Batman, he is also excellent, but he is useless, because during the final settlement he just dodges the falling building while the super (men / women / mutants) are fighting. So, you have everything in one basket: good intentions and ideas, the realization of which is often not very smooth and sometimes becomes almost an unwanted self-parody. The Ultimate edition montage is then smoother, despite the length. You feel that everything is running more smoothly but nothing more. Yes, it's good for the first two hours, Clark and Bruce's motivations are more elaborate, Lois suddenly has something to do. It all represents Snyder's gloomy vision better. But what's the point of all this if the functional stress is ruined in the last third of the movie (which is still an hour of footage) during "we fight a monster in a CGI way" which is both silly and boring. And it does not fit into the atmosphere set by the first two thirds. Not at all. Which, this montage surprisingly makes even stronger. (23/03/2016)

Fans would see this as the best sex of their lives, but for casual viewers it might be a hard pill to swallow. Christopher Nolan’s Batman anchored in reality was replaced by Zack Snyder's expansive comic universe. Because of the number of characters and even more motivations, this would require a slower pace and an even longer runtime. Yet it remains an immersive experience, with familiar music from Man of Steel (there is no trace of the motifs from Nolan’s Batman trilogy). In the last third, the demands on the viewer’s attention decrease and we’re in for a nerdy climax. I enjoyed the linking to Man of Steel at the beginning. Ben Affleck’s performance is okay. (23/03/2016)

Except for the fact that for the first hour they talk with the attention and style as if someone ate the Bible and drank it down with horse sedatives, except that for almost two hours one tries to understand why those two hate each other so much that in a few seconds they began to love each other, except that almost all dynamic shifts are done by gossip and dream sequences, except that the motivation and actions of the characters follow the logic of the perverted screenwriting god of lobotomy, except that it (again) does not have full-fledged characters, but only square voices, except that Jesse Eisenberg plays a very low-cost version of Heath Ledger, except... what did I want? I don't know anymore. Actually, I do. Nice pictures for comic fanboys and excellent directing of contact events. I think. I have a dull feeling that Man of Steel pissed me off more than this Dawn of Randomness. If DC has chosen to make their films as a genetic conglomeration of highly comic stylization and very rhetorical references to serious topics, they are going to have to find a director who will be able to keep it all together. But it's not Snyder, especially when he is working with a screenplay that is more like a set of unrelated ideas for further elaboration. (24/03/2016)

SPOILER ALERT!! – This anticipated disaster is a blockbuster full of surprises. Zack Snyder skillfully twists what seemed like a nightmare during promotion, namely Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor and Doomsday as the final monster. The former, as a disturbing element of a jumping gnome in the trailers, is a captivating portrayal of a young man with great power consumed by his own ambitions. The latter, despite its visual similarity, functions as a multiple catharsis with an amazing soundtrack in the background of a suitably titanic (and sufficiently impactful) fight. However, what precedes this catharsis is a mishmash where confidence alternates with noticeable hesitation. The most notable aspect is referencing comic events that we have never seen in movies and will not see in the foreseeable future, regardless of how the whole building of the grand universe ended. Why mention the Joker and his deeds when we have never encountered him in this world? On the other hand, the criticized enticement to the Justice League led by Wonder Woman does not end up being an eyesore, even though this is where DC significantly stumbled over its own feet. Now, all it takes is for Gal Gadot to blink a few times, put on an all-knowing smile, and not only Bruce Wayne will be left speechless. Unfortunately, it is precisely The Dark Knight who remains in the background throughout the entire duration, which is the biggest failure given the space he is given. It's not that Ben Affleck is utterly hopeless, as melancholic pondering suits him. It's just that in direct confrontation with Henry Cavill, especially in emotional moments, he is outdone by his counterpart in almost every sentence, and it's a bit sad to see how he unexpectedly fails to deliver such intense scenes. On the other hand, Cavill dominates with every gesture in the role of a descending Messiah, and his bond with Lois Lane is the most magical thread of the entire film. After two and a half hours of proper chaos, I haven't absorbed everything. There is too much noise, insensitive throwing away of potentially gracious storylines, and I dislike how overdone Batman's behavior is considering the fragility of his motivation and its resolution. Nevertheless, this power struggle made sense, it could have paved the way for interesting creative efforts, but everything was overshadowed by the desire to step towards the Justice League. It was more than thoroughly enticing – and still, it didn't arouse any desire, let alone hunger, in me. (31/03/2016)