BATMAN V SUPERMAN: REALLY THAT BAD - Part III
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.ย. 2024
- / moviebob1
PART 3 OF 3
PART 1:
• BATMAN V SUPERMAN: REA...
PART 2:
• BATMAN V SUPERMAN: REA...
JUSTICE LEAGUE REVIEW:
www.geek.com/m...
Yeah, it's bad. You already knew that. But how did something get THIS bad?
How does a project with so much at stake go so wrong in such a profound, all-encompassing way? At moment when the comic-book superhero genre is at its zenith, BATMAN V SUPERMAN was seemingly holding a winning hand: A celebrated, stylish director. A powerhouse cast. 80+ years worth of cherished American pop-mythology to draw from. Some of the most popular characters of all time. Dumptrucks full of Warner Bros' money to spend. And on top of all that, a moviegoing public hungry enough for an alternative to the Marvel Cinematic Universe formula for a pitch like "depressing, ultra-violent, pitch-dark 9/11-themed SUPERMAN movie" to sound (almost) like a good idea.
And yet, the end result was among the great cinematic calamities of the last decade; receiving scathing reviews, a near record-setting box-office dropoff, enraged notices from many fans and sarcastic "thank you's" from people named Martha. Even today, the shockwave from the film's negative reception are being felt as the studio continues to reshuffle the slate of films it was meant to inspire, JUSTICE LEAGUE continues to be transformed in post-production and the word "reboot" begins to fill the air. While not unprofitable or without its own unironic fans, the film seems destined to go down as one of the most infamous releases in the history of the genre.
In PART 3, we close out on a close look at director Zack Snyder's career and relationship to the superhero genre and ask whether or not there was ever a chance for this project to work out, if the DCEU franchise it was meant to establish can still be salvaged and look into the future of the superhero genre itself.
"Black Vortex", "Disco Lounge", "Marty Gots a Plan", "Oppressive Gloom", "The Curtain Rises", "Ultralounge", "Wizardtorium," "Inspire"
Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons....
Some FX footage courtesy:
Footage Island
Royalty Free Tube
BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE is a licensed property of Warner Bros Pictures.
REALLY THAT BAD is a work of film/media criticism created for education and journalism purposes and makes no claims on any media that is discussed in any individual episode.
For me, the cultural vandalism wasn't just to Superman, but to Batman as well. My grandfather was a war vet thoroughly affected by what he saw in the Korean War, and he struggled with alcoholism for decades following the war due to those experiences, but he was able to overcome it due to two things, his religion, and his ideological admiration for Batman, a character that never killed and looked at the horrible things that happened in the world and said its still worth fighting for. There's still good in people. He shared that love of Batman with me as a child, when he had become so much like the hero he idolized. He was kind, forgiving and so strong of will that he quit smoking cigarettes cold turkey once little 4 year old me found out they were bad for you and asked him to stop. He died a few years later, and losing someone who was basically a second father to me felt awful, and it made me obsess over the one character I felt the most kinship with at the time, a man who, as a little boy watched his parental figures die in front of him when he was not much older than I was. Batman. My goal in life is to write comics, Batman in particular, so I can share what my grandpa Bruce saw in that character. Batman v Superman is the film I hate most in this world because it injects into pop culture at large a version of that character that is antithetical to everything my grandpa and I believed him to stand for.
Donovaneagle2098 +
Your grandpa sounds like an amazing man, thank you for sharing your story of him with us. ;u;
That’s beautiful man
As a fan of The Hulk with a similarly personal connection, I get all too well what it feels like to have mainstream popculture boil down your hero to the antithesis of what you believe they stand for, and I'm rooting for fans like you to one day shape the way their favorite characters are being portrayed and understood. Hulk is not just a smash-happy rage monster, and Batman is not a depressing killer who gives up on his MO when shit goes sideways. I got my Hulk on the big screen, more or less. I hope you get to see your Batman, too.
Thank you for sharing something so personal
I've always said that "All Star Superman" Lex is the perfect dichotomy to Superman: a self made man who is a perfect mix of ruthless, intelligent, arrogant and driven that could so easily be admirable if only he wasn’t so obsessed with Superman. He could be the Earth’s greatest hero but he feels like he is living in Superman’s shadow, and for Lex that is simply not an option. Lex sees Superman as the ultimate hindrance to the human race. His superiority makes humanity's achievements look tremendously inadequate. He's just BETTER and that kills Lex.
Agreed. Lex Luthor is such a complex character that he could be the star of his own solo movie if you found the right writer who was ambitious enough to tell that story.
That's why one of the best lines in All-Star Superman is "You could have saved the world years ago if it mattered to you, Luthor." It perfectly tears apart all of Lex's motivations, and encapsulates why Lex is a villain. It reminds me of a line from one of the 52 comics, "So where's the cure for cancer, Lex?" but less dickish and more mentorish.
PS: The best line, of course, is, "You are stronger than you think you are." Which perfectly encapsulates why Superman is a hero.
KRJayster exactly!
Oh my god. You just made me hyped for a Superman movie we'll surely never see. Thanks Zack Snyder!
All Star Superman would also be a beter version to adaptat
No "Objectivist" will ever make a good Superman movie because they hate the idea of using power for good with no reward.
Pugiron it would be almost impossible to view Superman through the lens of Ayn Rands thinking.
Pugiron - That's a good point, but I think "material reward" is a little closer to describing it. Superman's "reward" for doing anything was just doing good and inspiring others to do the same. The Randian ideal is quite soulless in that regard which actually makes it a Bizarro parallel to Nietzsche's idea of self-betternent for a better world.
It's not that they "hate" the idea - it's that they don't believe that's possible. That it can't exist. It's like asking an Atheist to believe in God.
No Objectivist will ever make a good movie because Objectivism is a mentality all about lying to yourself to make you feel better about being a self-obsessed sociopathic asshole.
And self-obsessed sociopathic assholes don't make very good movies.
@@shingshongshamalama Hah! Wow! ...yeah! I mean, you're right, but I sometimes feel like we're not supposed to say that, since it's rude.
But seriously, fuck objectivism.
When the gritty grim cynical deconstruction became a cliche, optimism became revolutionary and avant garde.
butchdeadlift10 what does that make an optimistic deconstruction, then?
I dunno, could you point me towards one?
I kind of thought about that while watching Thor ragnarok. Wouldn't say optimistic but certainly joyful and self aware
It’s funny. I had an author who just got through writing a very long, detailed book about Superman on my radio show around the time Man of Steel was coming out. I’ll never forget how he said how excited he was about this new movie and how “a positive face” will become prevalent after three grim, dark “Dark Knight” films had ruled the box office.
...funny (or rather not funny) how these things turn out, eh?
@gammaWALLE Phrasing. I am not sure if you are asking me to explain what an optimistic deconstruction would be like or if you are implying that I was against deconstruction itself and that using optimism to fight the cynicism would still be deconstruction, thus no implied escape from the deconstruction.
It is the internet. You know how many people jump on how many different meanings in any given question or statement in text, so my senses at to "common sense" and "Of course. That is what he meant by that" have burnt out ages ago.
"Taking Spaceballs, cutting out the funny parts, and releasing it as Episode Nine, because that's what they've done here"
You just earned a subscriber.
Why do I get the impression that Bob just predicted how the actual Episode 9 will go? Shall we reconvene here in two years for a revisit to this question?
Shhh! Lucasfilm might be listening, you don't want to give them any ideas.
Actually they have been since Rogue One. Watch th-cam.com/video/pdb8Vxo2roE/w-d-xo.html he starts listing them off 6 and a half minutes in if you wanna skip straight to it.
That's what they did with Episode Eight.
@@Werrf1 Amazing every word you just said is wrong
My jaw hit the floor when I realized that cutting Batman and going all Lex sounds like a movie I would have ABSOLUTELY LOVED. It seems so obvious but it's GENUIS!
Danthemanwithaplan7 yes! It's amazing.
I thought that was a pretty amazing idea too. Honestly, letting the Superman story mature before adding in too much of the other heroes would probably help the palatability of this version of Superman, of which I have never been a fan. I wanted to like it, and this might have been a way to show an evolution into a version that I did like, instead of trying to cram in spectacle.
Yeah, out of the DCEU movies, only "Wonder Woman" caught my interest (skipped the rest), but Bob's pitch had me intrigued.
wonder women could work too cause she unlike superman or batman isn't keen on being a superhero. in fact you can have lois whole arc be about figure who is this mysterious women in that ww1 photo. That she discover in lex computer and has the exact likeness of the women that show up in lex party. You can then have lois plead for wonder to help superman as he is battleling doomsday. It would also trim the film down like the studio wanted.
WDKaze I really don't see Affleck as Luthor. They would have had to shave him bald (unless they go the Jesse Eisenberg route and keep his hair), but that would just look weird. Affleck is a great Batman though. If only he wasn't such a drainer about it.
I shouldn't care more the fact that Captain America is currently shieldless,
than I did about the Death of Superman.
That takes a special kind of Snyderness.
When I started watching Justice League, I realized that Superman was dead and I had forgotten.
When you are More excited to Watch this third part than The next DCEU movie...
Nicolás Riveros shows how delusional most are. The same people that flock together to bash anything related to DC films, are the same that dismiss people that didn't like The Last Jedi as "bigoted trolls," while they mimick the same behavior.
+Allern,
The comparison of The Last Jedi to BvS is about an apt decision as the one to prioritize & push a release date for the sake of a year-end bonus being paid to an executive who is already one of the highest paid men in Hollywood or the world.
A critical & massively commercial success, TLJ was released as part of thriving & evolving franchise by a filmmaker with understanding, appreciation & goals for the story. His efforts would subsequently be rewarded with the captaincy of the entirety of the next trilogy.
BvS is a mess of unremarkable messages, misplaced in the ‘Comic Book’ cinema genre and forcibly crammed into a movie in order to prop up the climactic action sequence that turned out to be the inconsequential & needlessly violent fist-fight representation of a conflict that should have been an argument. BvS was directed by a man who had publicly & proudly voiced his distinct lack interest or understanding of the titular characters in the previous promotions of his own stand-alone comicbook movie. His efforts & decisions on BvS would be rewarded by giving him 2 new superiors to whom he would report, under increased levels of scrutiny while the general executive oversight was also increased on all the other franchise productions currently under way.
The complaints against these two movies have about as much to do with each other as the central conflicts in World War II and the 1997 release of Starship Troopers. Or about as much as your comment is related to the one to which it replies.
Allern
-Assuming any and all people who dislike DCEU for any reason would also love The Last Jedi
-Assuming any and all people who dislike DCEU movies dislike DCEU movies for the same reason
-Strawmanning the defenses of TLJ as though anybody have called somebody a bigot unless the person is a bigot.
-Strawmanning the defenses of TLJ as though there aren't legitimate misunderstandings and all around moronic nonsense in the criticisms of the story.
Hoo boy, look at all these fallacies in a single comment. I guess it's an accomplishment on it's own to write so much stuff and still not make a single point any way.
Riley Jones yeah that must have been quite the accomplishment for you. Congrats
Seriously Allern, where do they breed people like you? Did you seriously spend 3+ hours watching all three "Really That Bad" entries concerning BvS just so you could run to the comment section and attack strawman critics you created yourself? It's amazing this is still happening now that just about everyone concerned, including WB and DC consider the current DCEU a tragic misfire. You're, like, a priest of Snyder.
The two minutes of Ironman vs Thor vs Captain America put more thought into what fans would want to see than this movie put into its big fight.
Jesus a huge part of the reason for the fight IS because Batman had a scary dream.
Thinking about it only makes it hurt more.
It's kind of funny when you also realize that Batman only forms the Justice League because he believes in half of a confusing dream and a crazy murderer and ignores the other half of the confusing dream that says Superman is a complete monster.
@@Bluemew1234 exactly, he never thought that both parts of the dream may be true.
In order to deal with his nightmare, Batman decided the he must murder a person. This is something a psychopath like Joker would do, not Batman.
My brother summed it up like this. Batman vs. Superman was like Marvel doing Iron Man then jumping right to Civil War. They didn’t want to put in the work and wanted the characters and our history with them to do the heavy lifting.
And even then, instead of their Iron Man being a surprise smash hit like the actual Iron Man was, Man of Steel was received as pretty eh.
Your brother was spot on, because l said the same thing to a friend.
If we were to release Marvel Films in the way the DCEU have released Thiers it'd be something like this;
Iron Man.
Captain America Civil War.
Thor.
Guardians of the Galaxy.
The Avengers.
This is a flawed comparison because neither Iron Man nor Captain America have the cultural cache of Batman and Superman. You don't need solo movies to setup a showdown between them.
@@RegularGuyism while generally true, I'm not sure that's true here since snyder seems to have gone for a non-standard depiction of these characters that deviate from their comic book counterparts.
Due to that, I'm not sure you can really just expect people to just "get it".
Almost everything Bob said about Lex Luthor is what should have been in Man of Steel.
Man of Steel's nemesis was Zod.
nn alan Yeah, cos we've never seen a Superman film that had both Zod and Lex in it 🙄
lmao but to be fair Gene Hackman's Lex was really more of a supporting antagonist which probably wouldn't be possible with Bob's Lex idea.
I actually had the idea too and I put effort into making it happen... Check below.
Using the almost the same framework for Man of Steel, the ship that was found in Canada in had bodies in the pods. Why were the bodies in the pods? Let's say there was a radiation leak on the ship and there was nowhere else for the ship's inhabitants to go, but what was that radiation? I'm sure we all know.
Let's say this version of Lex actually likes Superman, so when Lex acquires Kryptonite, he only wants to use it to protect the planet from Zod, but Superman refuses to kill Zod so Lex builds a Kryptonite prison instead.
Zod is imprisoned and the world celebrates Superman for saving them, but why is the world not celebrating Lex for his part in it? Lex is even putting his money up to repair Metropolis but still, they celebrate Superman and not him.
The final straw comes when the statue is unveiled at the end and Lex is asked to reveal it, but again he is forgotten. Lex wants his praise but the crowds are again cheering Superman.
Supes flies into space, winks at the camera, credits roll, movie done.
I kind of feel like finding Bob and buying him a drink, almost as an apology for him having to go through this for our entertainment.
jabman025 Seriously. I mean, my mind went into care package territory, but they're pretty much the same thing.
Bob's got a Patreon. I send him a few bucks; that's basically buying him a drink once a month.
Granted that's not as personal as an actual care package, but it shows appreciation.
Beretta249 True enough.
Nah. For some reason, I’m like Bob. I hated this movie. Its genuinely one of the worst movies Ive seen at the cinema. I’d rather watch Batman and Robin.....and yet......I’m fascinated by it. How did this movie get made the way it was? How did WB just keep going back to the same well, after so many failures. Why was such a huge cooperation, reacting with knee jerk sensibilities , and not just trying to make a good movie? I still cant get my head around how WB are so consistently screwing up the DCEU movies. I kind of cant get enough of finding out about this movie etc.
Anyway, keep up the good work Bob, and maybe cast your insightful eye over the DCEU as a whole, and try to get to grips with why is just keeps getting it so wrong (Wonder Woman excepted, although, I personally thought it was a pretty good movie, but nothing more)
He's too narcissistic to not have needed this and furiously enjoyed it
0:00 - Prologue
4:20 - You Had One Job
13:48 - World’s Finest: In Praise of Zack Snyder
17:30 - Our Worlds at War: Was Zack Snyder Wrong for the Job?
22:00 - I Am Pagliacci: Did Zack Snyder Understand Watchmen?
31:25 - Kill Your Gods
38:50 - Salvage?
45:46 - Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?
51:25 - Kingdom Come
No problem. (:
Bob, pin this please :)
58:50 Coming Soon...
You, sir, are the man.
The titles Bob put in were cute references.
"taking Spaceballs, cutting out the funny bits, and releasing it as episode 9."
That still sounds better than what we actually got as episode 9.
Too many people think _Watchmen_ is meant to be like Nolan's take on Batman: a more mature high-art reinvention of the superhero genre.
The reality is, it's got far more in common with Paul Verhoeven's film adaptation of _Starship Troopers_ : a political-philosophical satire and deconstruction of the material it's working with.
Alan Moore didn't set out to make superheroes more mature, he set out to undermine them as a concept and use them as a tool to explore the nature of power, whether that power is political, economic, ideological, or cultural. The argument being, giving people (superheroes) this kind of power can only end in tragedy if applied to the real world of social injustice, war, poverty, and state authority. It's a fundamentally anarchist thematic, just as _V for Vendetta_ is, only less explicit.
So when guys like Zack Snyder saw it and thought "Yeah! All superheroes should be like this!", they're like the guys who saw the _Starship Troopers_ movie and didn't realise it was an anti-fascist satire.
Idea: Direct watchmen, like an episode of Adam West's Batman.
That take on Lex Luthor is one of the best iterations of the character that I’ve heard in a modern day setting and media and is such a completely missed opportunity that I am legit upset that we will never be able to see it. You know how PERFECT that would be, with the audience throughout the course of the film have their opinion about Lex be conflicted to the point where they actually feel that he may be good until a LOGICAL plot twist that not only is he the villain, but we almost feel guilty for being invested and challenges our own morals and how far we’re willing to go. And for a visual standpoint, the archetype of a well fit, well dressed tragic hero, with charm and charisma we associate with the “heroes” of today is flipped on its head. IT JUST WRITES ITSELF AT THIS POINT.
This. When I watched Bob's video and he got to the bit where he talked about dropping out Batman, honestly I doubted he could make a convincing case for it, and then... well, when he got to the bit about Luther doing all the bits Batman/Wayne did... Did anyone else just immediately just immediately go "YES! THIS!" I've seen Bob make some astonishing revelations, but this stacks high for a series already with a very high bar to cross. It's pure genius. The image of Luther's suit replacing Batman's Metal "Knight" suit immediately improved the idea straight away, and that's not counting the myriad ways it improves the narrative. As you say, the idea writes itself. What a shame we didn't get that.
Lex could have been a great likeable anti-hero. They tried to go Joker when they should have gone Tony Stark.
Will Smith should have been Lex Luthor instead of Deadshot.
I actually got excited to see that version of the movie. And then really, really sad. :(
Pour one out for Sexy Lexy, not the villain we deserve, but the villain we need.
Not really. He mistook Lex's motivations for Batman's, in which case is not. Lex is plain jealous of Superman "because knowledge without power is paradoxical!", while Batman is afraid of him "power enough to burn the whole world down" "even if it's 1% chance, we must take it as an absolute".
Which places Bob as one of those guys that misunderstood the movie. Or parts of it.
Coz you know, the movies or atleast the trilogy, was supposed to be how humans would respond to Superman's existence.
In which Lex and Bruce would represent the extremists aspect of that response in both envy and fear respectively.
Cheers.
Around the half-hour mark, I found myself shaking my head in understanding. I get it. I finally have the words for Snyder's failing to understand Superman. If he took Watchment straight, it's no wonder he took Superman crookedly. Thanks Bob, I appreciate it.
That was Princess Buttercup!? Holy shit, I had no idea.
Nick Piers Robin Wright got JACKED.
They had a casting call of all the females leads you loved as a kid and put them through the female version of 300 training.
frank wolftown: I'm strangely okay with that.
I know right? Me neither! Now that movie is somehow even more awesome from that realization alone!
She was also in Blade Runner 2049
"Superman II by way of Dragonball Z" *shows a fast-paced fight that ends in less than a month of footage*
The part at the end, when you borrowed audio from the Infinity War trailer juxtaposed with video clips of all these different superheroes, was chill-inducing. It perfectly encapsulated why these heroes matter to me, and have for most of my life (to the point where I was inspired to create my own superheroes and tell my own stories -- only novels are my medium of choice). If nothing else, your deconstruction of this farce of a film serves as a poignant reminder of what drew me to comic books and superheroes in the first place -- and for that, I thank you.
Also, your essay on whether or not Snyder *got* Watchmen is exactly why I never recommend Watchmen to comic book newbies. Yes, it's a tremendous story, a hallmark of the genre and the medium, but it's not the sort of story I would hand to someone trying to get their feet wet. Then deconstruction becomes expectation, and... well, we wind up with crap like BvS.
You make a good point about Watchmen... it's own reputation as "intelligent" "gritty" "realistic" means that people love to recommend it, cite it, hail it far more often than is probably healthy or appropriate, and as a result it's influence starts to seep into a lot of artistic interpretations where it really doesn't belong.
I believe personally that Watchmens high profile is symptomatic of comic books cultures collective self-esteem problem... somewhat embarrassed by their enthusiasm for an art form proliferated by "magic" people in coloured spandex, comic book fans love to cite Watchmen to show that it is actually mature and intelligent art form.
It made me remember how weightless the MCU is. Especially when they first started... Where in all their films has that quote struck true? I mean it's a pretense of them having to come together in this dramaticized tension filled goal, but they never did. They delivered the Avengers through end credits that had nothing to do with the films. And now it sounded as if they did something great their with the exception of having to have the first big superhero crossover done. Makes you think the BvS emails were more creative.
@@jonathanstarsmoure5791
Every movie. Every single MCU movie, with the potential exception of Thor: The Dark World, is either about how to save people or what is the best way to save people.
Woah. You blew my mind with that Lex Luthor pitch. I thought you were crazy when you first said it, but after hearing you out, damn, that would have made for a much better movie.
I don't think this examination was anything even approaching a waste of time. Drawing attention to the many flaws in this movie can only help avoid the many, many, many mistakes while working on future projects. This has been a learning experience like no other (at least for me) in how even a promising concept can go horribly, horribly wrong, and what can be done to try and avoid this kind of dramatic failure.
Though I think making it so long is actually distracting from the core problem, that WB approached the whole Cinematic Universe aspect with the wrong mind-set from the get go. He makes the point, but it is kind of scattered throughout.
I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time, his concern was that it might be a waste of time because WB may be doing a reboot to try and sweep this movie under the rug. And just like the point he made about Justice League trying to FIX this movie: It can't. The same reasoning applies. Nothing that can be done such as rebooting the franchise or addressing problems with this movie in a sequel to this movie (as Justice League tried to do) can alter the fact that this movie was released in the shape it was released in.
Therefore, this deep examination of all the various things that went wrong is still a valuable learning experience. It's not a waste of time, because no matter what WB does to try and backpedal from Batman v Superman, the point remains that Batman v Superman was still released to the wild as a tremendously bad film, independent of anything else going on in the franchise around it. And that is what this project was, at its core, examining.
I see what you mean and where you're coming from, I just humbly disagree.
Oh, don't misunderstand me, I don't think it was a waste of time either, I just think that it could have used some editing. IE I don't think that it was necessary to defend Zack Snyder because at the end of the day, it doesn't actually matter if he is a good director or not, what matters is that he was uniquely unsuited for the project they had in mind and yet he was picked because WB paid more attention to his nerd cred than what his work is actually about.
i could only wish they would learn from their mistakes but if anyone in hollywood even knows what youtube is they probably only watch vines
How is Objectivism still ... a thing? It's a defense for the indefensible and was laughed at even when it was conceived. How can a grown adult believe in this fantasy version of reality and not choke on the absurd hypocrisy of calling this philosophy objective-ism. Holy shit.
Same reason some bullshit revenge porn anime are thriving: there is a lot of people willing to believe they are the most special, gifted and misunderstood people in the universe, and everyone who is against them is a dumb, mediocre person who is incapapable of grasping their true genius. It´s a really attractive fantasy for a lot of alienated people who would rather believe that their problems are because they are better than others.
I don’t get it either, but at least berating and embarrassment to it makes good entertainment.
Spider-Man and Bioshock, in particular.
When fucking Dirty Dancing says "this philosophy is for assholes" and tears it to shreds in a single conversation, but people still take it seriously...oy vey.
@@BlackCanary87 That moment is so perfect, and is all you need to understand the entire of modern conservatism. Make sure to return it, I have notes in the margin.
You know what this fight should have been?
Batman approaches Superman with the Spear, Superman knocks it away before being gassed. And then the rest of the fight would be Batman trying to use his gadgets and power armor to force Superman over to where the spear is so he won't get away while Superman slowly regains his abilities, adding a ticking clock element to things where Batman has to keep thinking on his feet to beat an opponent whose progressively getting stronger to the point where he'll inevitably out-match him.
Another option to add to that:
Have Batman never have killed before. Have him argue with himself that this may be okay, since Superman is an alien, so it won't break his one rule. Have Lex use red kryptonite(which alters Kryptonian physiology and can even make them act differently for a time), which sends Supes on a rampage. Batman decides "it's time, he has to die". Then the fight happens. And then Lex uses Supermans blood(attained by using Green Kryptonite)to clone a Bizarro. Batman kills someone, namely the evil Superman he expected to fight(the Bizarro bit was stolen from another review on "fixing BVS", but its still better than rushing to Doomsday and the dumb "MARTHA!!!" moment.)
@@phousefilms If nothing else, I just don't want it to end in the Martha thing because the implications of that are just so dumb and weird. I hate the idea that this entire fight boils down to Batman would have murdered a man if he didn't say the right keyword at the right time by pure chance.
@@dracocrusher Its so absurd how mechanical and unnatural most of the plot points in this movie are, what you described is such a straightforward solution to the weird 'put it here and start the fight in another location and hope i end up at the spear' that happens in the movie, I don't understand how professional script writers can miss things like this so badly
You NAILED the part about Snyder not getting Watchmen. He is a libertarian, Moore is an anarchist/leftist/(communist?) they are politically at complete odds which explains why Moore's complete anti-fascist, anti-violence (the point is the violence is UGLY and we should be DISGUSTED by our attraction to both it and Rorschach's PoV) was wholesale lost on the violence-loving, ultra-libertarian, hyper-individualist Snyder.
I don't know why I never grokked this before. It was right in front of my eyes all along. I should have paid more attention to how he'd filmed Watchmen to understand why his takes on the other DC properties were so off to me.
Totally agreed. While Snyder's misunderstanding of Rorschach is often said, I feel like his misunderstanding of Ozymandias isn't said enough! The movie completely leaves out the critical moment where Dr. Manhattan refutes Ozymandias's viewpoint, which I think goes to show that Snyder doesn't get it. A lot of people [and probably Snyder too] come out of the movie thinking that Ozymandias *was right*. And that's completely wrong, obviously, as Moore made clear but Snyder didn't. "Nothing ever ends." Reality isn't a zero sum game. Ozymandias killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of people for a completely slipshod and unsustainable notion of 'peace' that was doomed to fall apart whether it be in a year or five.
I remember being put off by Watchmen right away during the opening fight scene. The violence in that story wasn't supposed to play as "cool."
I actually watched the Watchmen the same day I finished the comic - and I really disliked it. (Not just lacking the squid and the pirates, but Ozymandias was presented as a somewhat sleazy character instead of a handsome "man-god" he was in the comics, etc.) I even loved Jackie Earle Haley from Human Target, but no, that movie was not for me.
@thakatspajamaz
Watchman was good enough at least for its time, and even if Snyder oversimplify it at least it fit his gritty style. Nowadays more honest reboot could happen, nut not back then when genre still need prove itself. But as for Superman he was simply worst pick ever! Superman simply contradict everything in what Snyder believe. And even if he didn't get Watchman (because he clearly didn't) at least some aspects of it were adopted properly.
The worst part of the Batman v Superman movie is when you speed watch it you skip over the Batman v Superman fight and head for the warehouse fight. That never occurred to me but it's so true.
DCEU might be going the way of the dodo, but these videos and your work on them certainly isn’t wasted time. In the years coming these are the documents about a period of time in entertainment bussiness when everyone tried to launch a cinematic universe - and most of them failed with it. These videos are after all part of ”really that good” series, which revolves around movies that are remembered. BvS will be remembered, that is sure.
There is also another thing.. I think that whole case went public specifically because DC have business in that. Why? Because it show how many people really give a shit and DCEU failed because of stiff Werner management and they misunderstanding of the medium. It is a strong argument for creative minds in DC to regain creative control.. after all people may ignore comic and even animation but if legit critic say "why Batman act like idiot and not like in TAS" that mean something. I remind that until recently Superman was basically dead for people and MoS was probanty attempt to reinvent something what wasn't broken, just most people referee to Reeves version and people asking "why they couldn't make him like in DCU" is important. Werner is now aware that thy completely misjudged market and even if they fall even more behind MCU the thing is that they have own race now.. race to regain trust of people who care about them specifically, not piss contest with Marvel. I hope they understand it now.
Tuomas Vainionpää I believe in Aquaman
B
Pretty sure Zack Snyder thinks he's Rorschach and that Rorschach is cool
Hadn't considered this but it's a pretty good summation of him, especially with the smoothing of Rorschach's edges in the movie.
Agreed
Yeah, Snyder is either an Objectivist or at the very least an Objectivist sympathizer since his works have featured allusions to Ayn Rand and he will adapt The Fountainhead. Rorschach was of course intended as a parody of Rand's philosophy. It's safe to say that it flew over Snyder's head in the same way that Alan Moore telling him that his take on Watchmen sucked couldn't penetrate his thick skull. It really just shows just how much of a shallow hack he is.
@Iafiv Iv So basically Snyder thinks the racist, misogynistic homophobe is the hero. Why is that supposed to make me like him? If anything, that adds credence to the claim that 300 promotes anti-Arab bigotry as Bush Era propaganda.
@@milkmyduds FWIW it's inconclusive whether Rohrschach is racist in the comics. He is implicitly homophobic, definitely misogynist, judgmental, emotionally stunted, and antisocial though.
Despite how little BvS will end up mattering to the DC film universe, I still enjoy coming back and rewatching this three-and-a-half-hour odyssey.
1. Damn, Bob is killing me with the comic book titles as chapter headings for this. Love it.
2. Apparently my brainwaves are starting to synch with Bob's because not only did I think it would be a good angle on the FF to make them time lost characters from the 60s, but I totally thought Batman's story arc should have been Lex's story arc in this movie.
I think the F4 "lost in time" arc and the "L v S " arc are two of Bob's best ideas. If Marvel isn't considering this for the introduction of the First Family of Marvel in the MCU then someone should really talk to them. It would be amazing.
How bad is Batman V Superman? A video essay of a single person talking for longer than the director's cut of said movie was more entertaining and enjoyable.
That's saying something because no critical review and responds for The Room, the worse movie ever, is better than and more enjoyable than the actual movie.
ArchOfWinter no joke, this is gonna go up there as the new gold standard for in depth film deconstruction video essay right next to that phantom menace review that’s longer than the phantom menace.
@ArchOfWinter
I say one thing.. BvS is worst disaster then Star War Prequels!
I caught BvS coming on TV once and thought it was super pretentious. I watched a decent chunk of the film, then stopped when the whole Martha thing happened.
Yeah this 3-part takedown of the film is WAY better.
I legitimately hope we see more work like this even if it isn't from Bob.
The Red Letter Media stuff is great at what it does but I didn't realize how much I craved a more nuanced and frankly fair analysis presented on it's own merits with the self confidence to not have a framing device that makes it hard to share.
ArchOfWinter yeah blame Batman v Superman being just a promo to set up the Justice League instead of an event itself. Especially now that Justice League is out making the shallow emptiness of the movie movie stick out more.
I spent 4 and a half hours of my life watching you COMPLETELY deconstruct the problems of Batman v Superman......and I'm glad I did. Can anyone else say anything else about this movie that you haven't already just said? You got a way with words and you're a good dude. Keep it up.
Just rewatched the whole 3-part series for the second time. I stand by my words.
Snyder totally didn't understand Watchmen. To me, it sounds like he just loved the gritty tone, violence, sex, titties, and darkness of it all without the whole point behind that stuff.
That's exactly what happened.
The fanbois of Watchmen are the same ones that think Fight Club is super cool and not horrifying. The point whizzes past them like a rocket and they don't care. They also probably think the Empire are the good-guys in episodes IV-VI. Subtlety is not their strong suit.
Probably the same kinda people yelling about TLJ being the worst Star Wars because of “plot-holes” or “subverting expectations.”
Iafiv Iv We call those people psychopaths, typically. Or at the very least dangerous.
Watchmen fans are probably a little more varied than that, but there definitely appears to be a throng who miss the point of the story, especially Rohrschach. Which adds a strangely meta wrinkle to the HBO sequel series.
Any fanboy of Snyder when it comes to BVS will usually by obvious by their shout of "You just don't get it!", when it comes to the "Martha"scene. And when asked why it was so good, they have no response, lol.
@@kingofthings7929 or because it is just a plain bad movie.
good criticism and examination are never a waste of Time, Bob. Thanks for the great content.
Exactly...and I can hardly complain about it, considering that I did my own lengthy explanation why exactly the DCEU was stillborn:
swanpride3.wordpress.com/2017/11/26/some-thoughts-about-the-dceu/
Except I wasn't as nice about Snyder or the basic concept of the DCEU.
Jesus...the Luthor v Superman fix is actually really compelling, and I would love to see someone flesh that out, maybe in a standalone story (animated?). You could actually keep the "Batman v Superman" title if Lex is actively working to frame Bats, and that would leave the door open to keeping the proto-JLA final fight scene.
Yeah, while I generally don't care about superhero movies beyond the level of "this should be a fun use of 2-3 hours", that whole setup got me kind of excited and interested in seeing that story play out. Granted, I doubt they'd be able to capture all that with trailers (or even care to try) so I and many others might have ended up missing the point, but if it was actually done well, it could have been a remarkably interesting movie.
That is pretty much the Man of Steel 2 you would expect to get anyway in a world either before shared movie universes or one where DC wasn't trying to rush into a Justice League movie as fast as possible.
Actually, when you look at the Marvel movies there were nods to the shared universe in Iron Man 2 but they didn't have other Avengers dominating the film. Even after Avengers, Captain America, Thor and Guardians of the Galaxy each got one straightforward sequel before they tried more ambitious crossovers like Civil War and Ragnarok which tied in more characters.
@mcdrums87
The thing is that everyone expect that final boss would be either Lex or some Sup clone created by Lex like Metallo or Bizzaro. And basically Sup vs Bat fight would be setup to drive Lex from hiding, as Sup probably would investigate Bat way earlier then everyone expected (Bat isn't exactly low profile and he was considering as criminal at the beginning). But noooo.. BvS commit sins what even fan-fiction like The Dark Knight Returns didn't (first of Dark Knight is on Earth-31 with Bat being established as bit crazy and Sup as sellout working for goverment, secondary in TDKR Bat didn't defeat Superman. He staged own death to make point to Superman, when Sup didn't even really fight back because he didn't really wanted.. it was more a psychological fight as real one was ridiculous for even Frank Miller). But no! I can't even put in words how stupid BvS was! And I don't even mention Joker Jr. pretending to be Lex Luthor!
@mcdrums87 -- If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading the "Red Son" superman story. The setup is Superman lands in Russia in the 1950's instead of Kansas. So its the USSR ruling the world, except for the US, where Lex Luthor has helped the US Maintain enough of an edge to stave off invasion and conquest.
Bahruchnik EXACTLY! When Bob mentioned his idea, I thought of Red Son. What an incredibly enjoyable comic. An interesting deconstruction of both Lex and Clark.
Hey bob, I know you didn’t want to turn this into a regular thing, but what if you put a twist on it. Movies you think are good but everyone thinks are bad. Are they really THAT BAD?
Charles Diosdado I like this idea
Charles Diosdado he's done some of those. Most by the name "you are wrong about ..."
But, it would be good as a regular thing.
the first would be starship troopers
He does this already. It's called "Really that good"
When he does that, he usually does it with In Bob We Trust. Or The Big Picture, once upon a time. He did one in 2012 defending Sucker Punch.
I'd disagree that Snyder is a good director. I think the man is an amazing visual stylist and knows his way around a shot, but that makes him a good cinematographer, and make no mistake, the man is a PHENOMENAL cinematographer.
He's a terrible storyteller with a very limited grasp on character, theme, plot and pacing. He knows what looks cool, but he doesn't know how to present it in such a way that it engages an audience on any level beyond "that looks cool", and those are VITAL skills for any kind of half-decent director.
If he's given good material then he can try to rise to the occasion; Dawn of the Dead wasn't great but it was good and most of that I attribute to James Gunn's script; 300 there is a lot thats dated but his largely panel-by-panel approach worked with Miller's fetishistic attention to violence and bodies; Watchmen is entertaining though when you have *that* material and you do decide to just translate it (not so much adapt, though the writers did change some things) it's only a shame it's not better, though it's largely cast amazingly... The Owl movie everyone forgets he did was fine, maybe that childrens film anomaly speaks to what he should do and just stick to animation.
Sucker Punch may be worse than Batman v Superman. It's one of the worst major studio releases of the decade really. If sometimes a filmmaker who showed talent is never the same after one film (Heavens Gate by Michael Cimino comes to mind), Sucker Punch probably was it.
I disagree. I think he just likes telling stories visually and showing over telling so you often have to intuit and interpret things about the characters and themes, and thusly also the plot and pacing will seem a bit different than in most films, but it's not that his grasp is limited. He chooses a different path than you're used to.
I don't think you can fairly say "he doesn't engage the audience on any level" etc. because I was part of the audience and I did feel quite engaged in that way, tho it's fair to say you personally didn't feel that engagement. Maybe you are looking at it the wrong way and it is not he who needs to present something to you in a way that engages you, but instead it is you who ought to try to open your mind and expand your horizons and try to experience something new and different. You might enjoy it.
He lost me when he said that Sucker Punch was a deep meditation on feminism. Zack Snyder's idea of feminism is scantily clad women shooting people. That's probably the most shallow and idiotic interpretation of it one could have. And Snyder taking risk is more of proof of hubris on his part rather than proof that he's some great auteur. Especially since none have been very good. At least Alex Proyas made The Crow and Dark City a long time ago and M. Night Shyamalan made The Sixth Sense. Snyder made two reasonably entertaining but totally mindless action flicks (Dawn of the Dead and 300) which really just puts him on Michael Bay tier since Bay at least made the barely passable The Rock.
Yeah in the defense of Snyder, Bob's fanboy is showing. Only okay thing he did was Watchmen and he still screwed it up. Hard. Though the squid was a good change. Dawn of the Dead was terrible and Sucker Punch had to be one of the most insulting things MEN keep trying to tell me is really totally feminist honey lighten up.
So yeah Snyder is a hack. A hack with some pretty cinematography but still a hack.
@@milkmyduds You're an idiot.
There's nothing shallow about Sucker Punch and none of the actresses felt like they were shaming themselves. There is a message to be found about empowerment and escapism and you either failed or refused to see it. Snyder takes risks and Michael Bay does not. There is no comparison.
Your re-imagining of Lex in the Batman role and Batman out all together is 100% on point. That would have at least been a lot more compelling than the prospect of Bats and Supes punching at some point.
I'd be curious to see Spaceballs with all the funny stuff cut. It'd be an interesting two minutes.
Would it really even be that long?
1987: Superman IV: The Quest for Peace
1997: Batman and Robin
2007: Spider-Man 3
2017: Justice League
See you in 2027.
All those prior movies killed their respective franchises dead. JL flopped, but still Aquaman crossed $1 billion.
Honestly, Spider-Man 3 was the best of 2007. It was better than Ghost Rider or Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer.
Spider-Man 3 is at least still remembered.
As much as it pains me to admit it. You are dead right about this movie. Just terrible in almost every way.
(Three weeks later)
Bob: AND ANOTHER FUCKING THING...
YES! YES! I am so glad you boiled it down at the end there. The main problem with the DCEU is that it doesn't exist for the right reason. It's a reaction. An equation. It has no point or message other than, "We own these beloved characters, we have this talent, and people still don't like our films? We are still losing money?! MARVEL IS WINNING? HOW? THEY JUST GOT HERE! We have to do _something_ right now!" And your fix! Your fix is amazing! It gives this series of films a central theme, even if that theme isn't something i would necessarily agree with. Also, letting "Batman" in the story be Lex makes so much more sense for this particular movie, especially since he was the best thing about the movie. Although, I'm kinda confused how you've done so many hours of this and not once entertained the idea that Doomsday would have been more thematically impactful (and more logical within the narrative) if he was changed to... Bizarro. I mean, yes you lose the fan service (which is a big deal in the boardrooms I'm sure), but come on. The egoist "hero" Lex showing Superman the error of his existence by making him face the version of him that (the rest of the movie has painstakingly assured the audience by this point) he and the rest of the world see. It's a way to introduce Superman challenging the idea of himself, his upbringing, and transitioning into the more collectivist "good for goodness sake" version of Superman that an actual egoist like Snyder could live with, ie. "He wasn't just raised right, or just a good guy, he earned that point of view and it cost him and the world first." But like you say; "these decisions are made before pen meets paper" and "execution over intention" and all that. Still, with Superman being one of my favorite characters, watching this was the emotionally cathartic equivalent to yelling "NO!" tearfully at the sky for 3 odd hours. I appreciate your criticism and what I've learned... and to a lesser extent the validation I got from having some of my initial critiques echoed here in detail... but my heart is still broken. I will never forgive them for bringing a Superman like this to us and expecting it to be good enough. I saw Man of Steel with my mom! I saw BvS with my best friend! This was supposed to be beautiful, but instead it was... this. This thing that was made for no one and existed for no reason except greed and fear. These things matter, and they drug the cultural bastion of *hope* through the muck out of *fear* and *greed* . That will never be okay. That will hurt _forever_ .
Zforce well said sir (or ma'am)!
It's still so depressing.
I still don’t think Zack Snyder’s a great director. Interesting, sure. He’s certainly not a hack, but he’s not great in my opinion.
I said this elsewhere; I'll condense it here: I think he's talented at the visual aspect of directing, and that's important.
However, as a storyteller I think he's mediocre at best; add to that the fact that he decided to take on a character that he admitted doesn't like, doesn't even UNDERSTAND, and that's a recipe for a disaster of a movie.
I don't know why he was hired to direct a movie about a character he admitted to not understanding or liking; I don't understand why he'd *want* to do it.
In juxtaposition to Joss Whedon, who I consider one of the best in the business, getting the criticism that is so misplaced here in regards to JL... He even made a good X-Men comic run, as creator, not sure if you are aware of that. Buffy, cultural icon of the day. Serenity/Firefly. Another cultural icon, and still on so many people's charts of "best single season scifi show of all time", etc. Oh, and the avengers. Oh, and many other stuff that should be considered great, but just aren't as well known, like Dollhouse. That actually treads on darker themes, rape/mind control, questions of existence, etc. But no, despite his serious work being better than any serious work of Zack at any point in my opinion for all of those reasons, so many people want to act like his work is "there is joke a minute Joss, being a bad director as always". For fucks sake, just for the Avengers and Ultron? Of which, the corporate issues far beyond his control fucked up a lot of ultron as it was, and if it was his vision to the start, and the studio would have let him have the length he and zack both planned for, might have even given us the best possible version of the JL, which I suppose doesn't say that much.
He is a legendary director, and his success records prove it; and all are far better than the "success" stories we get from Zack, like '300' or 'Watchmen', and none of them reached the cult-like status Whedon had going for him.
I'm glad I went to college so I can understand moviebob's sentences:
14:51
"300 openly antagonized not only political commentators, thanks to its faithful translation of Frank Miller's deeply uncomfortable obsession with dehumanizing historic middle eastern characters while simultaneously valorizing icons of western patriarchy through celebratory quasi-fascist neo-classical military myth-making, it also practically invited historians to draw their knives on Miller's preposterous revisionism."
College?
Think Highschool is enough honestly+being politically active.
26:32 If you listen closely, you can hear my mind blowing as Zak Snyder's philosophy and his resulting comic book movies finally make sense to me.
And holy shit, mind being blown once again by someone actually addressing the significant merits of the Starship Troopers movie.
I got the notion to rewatch these, and your crack at Bitcoin at about 1:20 was brilliant.
“Because watching a bunch of venture-capital douche bags lose their shirts all at once 3 to 4 years from now is something I expect to be very, very entertaining.”
Holy *shit,* did you call that. 😂
snyder fell into the same trap a generation of comic book creators fell after watchmen was released, getting the message wrong and Instead of doing more sophisticated storytelling with the already stablished heroes they adopted the mentality of "lets make superheroes dark and gritty ONLY for the sake of of dark and gritty'" sometimes sacrificing the essence of this characters, or even making it a terrible movie/comic overall. I have no problem with dark and serious movies, and as the video stated if you are going on that route at least do it good and have it make sense, the nolan movies are batman in a more realistic setting and it works as a movie, it isnt that comic book accurate, but it doesnt matter because even the worst one of the three is a decent film.
Yeah, it's as if Snyder was unaware that the Dark Age of Comics was a thing. Wouldn't be surprised if he read Young Blood and thought "Oh my god, this is genius!" and adapted it with some of the cast of Sucker Punch and some of the cast of Taylor Swift's Bad Blood.
A fine finisher for an interesting autopsy of a train wreck. Hope you're content ID stuff is getting resolved and condolences about your dad.
Oops, gonna grammar nazi myself; *your
Ooh - hey, you could edit that if you want. If you put your cursor on the comment, those three little dots to the right open an options menu. It'll save you from comments like that (not that there's anything wrong with them.)
For me, BVS was dead on arrival the moment they announced Batman would be in it. I busted my ass defending Man of Steel's legitimate flaws on the basis that it at the very least laid the groundwork for an interesting mythos and a sequel that practically already wrote itself. But WB and Snyder decided to toss Batman in there just because some people didn't like a superman that wasn't Reeve. The execs knew that shoehorning in Batman would make his fanbabies see it and defend it to the death no matter what the quality was.
As for the movie itself; it wasn't just bad, it was INSULTING! Its bad enough that it had terrible writing, an awful Dr Facebook Luthor and pointless Wonder Woman, but all the potential character arcs and development from MOS was thrown away just to make way for a shitty batman and even shittier injustice dream. And the doomsday reveal and the death at the end, I wasn't sad, I was seething with rage. Basically WB and Snyder proved the critics right by saying "yeah, that last movie really did suck, but give us cash anyway, Batnerds."
Oh and if anyone thought that BVS was for people who liked MOS, just letting you know that is a goddamned lie.
Hey Bob, long long time viewer here. I just want to take the time to leave a little comment here to let you know that i really appreciate the hard work you've put into your content, weather it's a review for a new movie or one of your incredibly in depth analysis videos. You have a great way of getting me to really think about the topics you're discussing and helped me read between the lines in media. It's also really kept me on my A game when thinking through the details of my own creative work. Anyway, thank you for the years of quality film criticism, and here's to many more.
P.s. I know you're probably sick of people telling you, but I'm sorry about your dad. Losing somebody close like that is never easy and it's a hole that will never be filled again. Just try and keep your head up. Know that we all appreciate what you do here on TH-cam.
When Bob makes three videos on how Snyder doesn't get Batman and Superman; but still thinks Snyder gets George Romero, Alan Moore, Frank Miller, or Feminism... Snyder only gets Ayn Rand and objectivism.
taking out Lois Lane story, emails, dreams and another fillers would already make this movie a whole lot better
dimitreze The plot of the movie wouldn't have existed without Lois Lane.
You know what pisses me off about the title fight the most? The fact that there is a *perfect* Batman/Superman fight and it's from Superman/Batman #78 which involves a couple of kid fans basically trying to work out who would win in a fight between the two. And it is legit some of the most epic fights I've seen in fiction.
Also Bats trolling Supes at the end is adorable.
While I don't agree with Bob that Snyder is a talented filmmaker, we can both agree that he was clearly the wrong person bring the DCEU to life. However, I wish Bob delved into the other aspects that cause this film to fail like the writing staff (Goyer has to take much of the blame for this) and the higher-ups at Warner Bros and DC Entertainment.
Ultimately, I look forward to seeing a documentary on how the DCEU fell apart and who were the guilty parties aside from the director himself. I'd personally like to see Jon Schnepp (director of Death of "Superman Lives": What Happened?) take a shot at that.
"and the higher-ups at Warner Bros and DC Entertainment."
I will always find it funny to point out their only fault was not stopping Snyder.
Before the bad reviews came out, he was super clear that the studio let him do anything he wanted, that he could shove any idea he felt like into the movie, and that they'd even release the cut of the movie he personally approved of over the one they liked (they actually liked a longer version closer to the Ultimate Edition before Snyder made what came out in theaters).
I don't need a documentary...it is fairly obvious what went wrong. A bunch of executives which made decisions based on isolated figures without ever seeing the big picture, and thus coming to the wrong conclusion.
Number 1: The Avengers made a lot of money, so if we put our even more popular characters in one movie, we will make even more money. Never mind that Marvel spend years to make those characters popular not just with the comic book fans, but also with the general audience.
Number 2: The Avengers was directed by a director with nerd cred, so let's take another director who has already won over part of the comic book nerds by doing watchman. Never mind that Watchmen failed to connect with the general audience and that the sensibilities of this particular director are uniquely unsuited for the project at hand.
Number 3: The audience loves the MCU so let's put in as many references to a cinematic universe as possible in our movie. Never mind that exactly this kind of overtly setting up the next movie is the main criticism the audience had for movies like Ironman 2 and Age of Ultron.
And those are just the most obvious ones. Add to this WB usual approach to movie making and their attitude towards comic book properties being totally unsuited for creating an overreaching universe, too, and you get Batman vs Superman, a movie which put all eggs into one basket and immediately sank the whole universe from the get go.
Dear lord, yes. I feel like 2018 can finally begin. This epic and scathing dissection was my most anticipated film of the year, and Mr. Chipman, you didn't disappoint.
The biggest problem with depicting a Batman vs...well any super powered character is that, in order for Batman to even come close to standing a chance, the characters with the powers have to either be written as though they've forgotten how their powers work, or for their powers to be nerfed to such a degree that the fight isn't even all that thrilling anymore because it's essentially just two normal people hitting each other. Superman is so powerful that even following comic book rules, it bends one's suspension of disbelief to near breaking points that Batman would last even a few seconds against him. It doesn't matter what gadgets he has at his disposal, Supes is so godlike that Batman should be destroyed before he even gets a chance to pull one out of his belt.
There was no way this fight was going to be satisfactory, because for Batman to stand a chance, Superman has to come into the fight not even trying to stop Batman from using his arsenal. There are some obstacles even the world's smartest man should not be able to meet head on. It's not fun to watch someone let their opponent win, which is exactly what Superman is written to do every time he and Batman squabble.
Yeah, as much as everyone loves Batman and Superman fighting in DKR, let's remember what actually happened there. First, Superman was weakened from getting hit by a NUKE when the Cold War got not so cold anymore. Second, Batman throws everything, and I mean everything at Superman with the exception of an actually lethal dose of Kryptonite. Finally, Batman doesn't really win outright. he fakes a heart attack and pretends to die. Basically, Batman got the most ideal circumstances he could ever get, and he still doesn't truly beat Superman.
In the DC Animated BvS, the fight lasts precisely two exchanges: Batman throws Superman into a table by using leverage and training, and Superman punches Batman into a wall by being Superman. Then, having established the balance between them, they don’t fight again.
This three-part review isn't a wast of time if someone in the movie industry, especially at Warner Bros. and DC, actually took your criticisms to heart. And even if they didn't, there's still plenty of people that did, including myself.
My body is ready
Nanna Leifa yep. Here we go...
45-min mark and I'm cheering at the idea for fixing a little this movie. BvS Batman as Lex Luthor? HELL YES!
This 3 parter is not a waste of time. Even in the event of a reboot - these criticisms and lessons learnt from the disappointments of these movies will be essential considerations going forward to start again.
What is with his obsession with saying Snyder is some sort of unappreciated genius? This guy got lucky once and is, indeed, a hack.
It's been said a bunch, but it's more fun to watch Bob tear this movie about for 3.5 hours than it was to watch that movie for 2 hours. (Especially amazing because he talks so fast. We're actually hearing 4 hours worth of dialog at normal speed. :p )
And I felt less for Superman's death than I did for Thor's hammer in Ragnarok, or any of the 20 or so times Tommy from Power Rangers lost his powers.
Well now to wait for really that good LOTR
58:54 what a weird lotr font...
Zé Ninguém same with the music, don't remember that from lotr...😅
Isnt the font and music from lotr space remake?
the one with Nimoy as Gandalf?
That would be a six-parter, at least!
Not gonna lie, I was fully expecting a part 4.
spehizle - At that point I'd want to give Bob a hug and just say "hey man, you don't deserve this purgatory" and then pull his parachute so he shoots out of the crashing plane in a salvific gesture while I'm engulfed in flames and I think I've forgotten where I'm going with this.
Basically that sounds like hell and I wouldn't want him to go through that.
Even Bob's not that crazy.
I just barely started watching, but I wanted to answer your question of wether anyone will ever care about this after the reboot.
I think we will as a culture. I think if nothing else I will. This is interesting information provided through a unique lens. It is a cautionary tale of what the DC universe will have to avoid post flash-point if it actually is seeking to improve. It's discovering how passion alone can end up not being enough to save a film. It's going into what not to do for blossoming scriptwriters and effects artists and anyone else who might want to make a film. Yea it's a bunch of worst case stuff, but it's an amazing retrospective of the greatest cinematic car crash of our time. That in and of itself has a certain level of value, regardless of if DC pretends it never happened.
I appreciate both "Really that Good" and this longer than intended side tangent. I think looking back on not just if something is good or bad, but WHY it is good or bad, is important.
Well it is quite simple.. like in cases of Star Wars Prequels it may help avoid similar disaster in future.
Considering Zack has said in interviews that he thinks superheroes are stupid and the idea of them is ridiculous, I think that feeds a lot into his portrayal of the watchmen and his handling of DC. I think he is refusing to get the point behind some of the characters because he just doesn't care.
I haven't gotten through the entire video yet but I just wanted to say that even if these video essays are really long, you shouldn't consider them a waste of anyone's time. This is the most comprehensive study of the film I've come across and you've made a lot of points I hadn't considered.
There's a fairly flawed assumption that the probable Flashpoint (reboot) will fix everything. Everyone is assuming the Warner Bros. has learned from their mistakes. There's no guarantee that they will do any better the second time around.
They're so desperate to be where the MCU is, but they don't wanna put in the work to get there. They want the instant fix, and these classic characters (whether you're a Marvel or DC fan, many of these characters *are* classic) suffer for it.
So true. Reminds me how Days of Future Past gave the X-Men movies a second chance, but then they immediately squandered it with Apocalypse.
Perhaps the forthcoming Disney reboot will give us the X-Men series we have been waiting for.
Re Snyder: I would say that if you EXCLUSIVELY pursue projects that have the potential to bomb as hard as his, you don't get any credit as a risk taker. The poker player who lays it on the line after a string of solid bets can be given credit, but someone who goes all-in every hand doesn't deserve any more praise than other terrible players.
Yeah, his risk taking is more of a sign of hubris than talent. I think his rationale for Snyder being a good director is incredibly forced and silly. Michael Bay self-financed a passion project that he knew had no chance in hell of being successful so I guess Bay's also a talented auteur now. Why not? Like Snyder he's also good at choreographing action scenes and with utilizing special effects. It's so idiotic. Yes, a hack would make something as stupid as Sucker Punch. Yes, a hack would make an animated movie that was too silly for adults but too scary for kids. Yes, a hack would adapt Watchmen and miss the whole point of it and have the writer of it refuse to have his name be attached to it. Not every hack can be as business savvy as Michael Bay or Brett Ratner. Some fall victim to Dunning-Kruger.
The whole question turns on if you view Snyder as a businessman or as an auteur. As a businessman it's folly to keep taking creative risks but as an auteur it's what you're supposed to do to keep growing in your craft. Bob clearly views Snyder as an auteur which informs his conclusion that he's a good filmmaker.
I don't get how you could call Snyder a good director. He's good at setting up scenes and moments in his movies, but he's terrible at making a coherent story out of it. He could probably do a good job as a consultant on movies. Helping setting up action pieces and visual moments, but not directing whole movies.
This comment is late as hell, but I just realized that your summary of Howard Roark in "The Fountainhead" is also a pretty apt description of how Zack Snyder's most hardcore fans view him: as an uncompromising artistic visionary whose grand magnum opus was sabotaged by pedestrian executives who just didn't appreciate it, and who never got the praise that he deserves because the gullible masses were misled by dishonest critics with an ulterior motive. Hence the "#ReleaseTheSnyderCut" movement and the "Disney bribes movie critics!" conspiracy theory.
That's just all sorts of interesting.
This movie just reminds me how much I hate and am sick of the current obsession with "dark"/"evil" Superman. This is not a slight against things like The Boys or Invincible, because they are both excellent and better, more interesting versions of it. I just feel like it's become the boring, easy way WB tries and make Superman interesting while not actually trying to develop him as a character. Not gonna lie, when they revealed the Suicide Squad game and showed evil Superman, my heart sank (even though the game looks cool). I miss the time when you could make Superman an aspirational character who's humanity, not his strength, was his greatest power. If Marvel can get Captain America right, why can't DC and WB?
I've been meaning to reach out to tell you how much I have learned and enjoyed this series. I have probably watched this series no less than 4x (for real). It's made me understand a lot of things not only about the movie but the forces that shaped it. It's like understanding geometry. (btw I died laughing at the Simpsons' Halloween special clip for that reason). I've done a huge deep dive on understanding the DCEU failure as a way of distracting myself from more important news. When I want to relax and not think about the end of the world I turn on TH-cam and try to learn about something that is less important but giving me insight. Thinking more about the mechanics of both storytelling and commerce that went into the DCEU was actually a very insightful way for me to understand a lot of my other career which involves doing advocacy involving women in media. I bought the Extended Version of the movie and now when I watch it (and i have also now watched it several more times) I actually feel like I see all the intention ON PAPER that completely is unseen in my first viewing. This doesn't make it a "good movie" upon multiple watching but the pleasure of understanding "OH THAT'S WHY THEY DID IT THAT WAY" is a genuine pleasure. I definitely will learn what this whole "patreon" system is because I definitely owe you some coinage for your extremely educational series.
And thus, the saga is complete.
This is Zack's legacy. Justice League is an utter failure and will end it's run with probably less than man of steel. It's at 652 right now and with Star Wars and Jumanji out it's run is done. There's no way it will get the 18 or so million required to pass man of steel. Smdh. I completely agree with your points in this video. The reasons for the title fight were so contrived and forced. And can someone explain to me how they buried Clark and Superman on the same day in two different locations?
"Superman's" coffin was empty.
The body was buried in Smallville, Kansas. The coffin buried in Washington DC was empty. This is not unheard of in real life (Genghis Khan comes to mind)
TARINunit9 you're right the dirt rose from the coffin in Kansas. It still doesn't make sense to me how the government could give superman a burial with full military honours but there's no body there
The body isn't the important part, it's the ceremony and what it means. That's how and why they buried an empty casket.
calamity916 but it raises so many questions, why should the government believe the near invincible god alien is dead if there is no body? How were they able to verify the death? Who reported the death? Batman? If so why? Shouldn't someone at the Daily planet be smart enough to realise that as the same time the death of one of their colleagues happens Superman; the guy who looks suspiciously like their dead colleague and happened to always turn up everywhere their dead colleagues girlfriend was has also died? Is there no one in metropolis intelligent enough to see a connection? Did Zack Synder only film the superman funeral scene to milk the death for dramatic effect? Because it makes zero sense from a logic standpoint to have had two funerals...
This is the best thing to come out of Batman V Superman.
For me, the big fight is made unwatchable by it being set up through my two favourite superheroes being immature, petty and stupid. They're so full of hate, I couldn't have enjoy the action even if it had been good. Their brief fight in the animated Superman show is SO MUCH BETTER than this! Even the Dark Knight Returns comic based the fight on an emotional core of regret (and understood that the only way Batman stands a chance is if Superman isn't trying). A few years ago I was dying for a Superman/Batman crossover live action film, but now? I haven't even watched Justice League yet. It's just sitting on my shelf.
I hear ya. I was excited for this movie when I heard the announcement eventhough I didn't care for Man of Steel. Reason being I thought Superman would evolve into the Positive Beacon of Hope he is known for in contrast to the dark brutality of an older Batman. But when he was nothing more than a Kryptonian version of Batman, brooding, dark and dour, everything interesting about this clash got flushed right down the toilet for me! All of his heroism was set through slow motion depression montages, like they wanted to get it out of the way as quickly as possible so they can concentrate more on his brooding. When he died the only emotion I had was, "They're already doing the Death of Superman, are you kidding me", not a single emotion of grief because he didn't deserve it. This movie was such a huge miscalculation that I'm surprised anyone involved in it still has a job. As far as Justice League goes, its not as bad as BvS however its extremely average.
You forgot the part where Batman busts out a regular smoke grenade, then manages to sneak up on Superman.
Superman.
The guy who can see through the smoke, and has super hearing, was snuck up on by a guy in a big clunky metal suit.
What?
Even a fighter in full plate can roll a nat 20 on a Stealth roll, even a Beholder can roll a nat 1 on a Perception check.
The fact that the film would expect the audience to jump through that kind of hoop to justify?
No. The scene was BS.
And the rest of the fight scene was clunky and boring.
"ITS BECAUSE I'M BATMAN!!"
Superman can hold his breath for a long time so why didn't he? Why breathe the kryptonite gas?
He goes to space and spends minutes there.
Easily the dumbest superman I've seen in some time.
While I have enjoyed this series as a examination of what can go wrong in a blockbuster movie, I will be happy when the more positive "Really That Good" returns.
EDIT: I just thought I would add, I loved "Watchmen".
Bob gave it a glowing review, actually. Its just weird that he managed to make such a good individual movie, a good adaptation of something otherwise considered impossible to adapt, and yet he more or less missed the whole point.
Thank you bob. this is great...dont do this to yourself again
It was not a waste of time. It was a herculean task and I imagine very taxing, but nowhere waste of time. It was toughtful, tought provoking, informative.
DEAR BOB,
I have immensely enjoyed these videos, and have greatly looked forward to this last part. Which is why I want to say to you - PLEASE DON'T THINK THAT THIS HAS BEEN A WASTE OF YOUR TIME.
This 3-part video series is shaping up to be my favorite critique and deconstruction of a movie EVER. You've made something that none of the 'Video Essay' crowd will be able to match for a long time. What's more, you've made during some of the most tragic and trying times in your life. Circumstances that would've made lesser men abandon a project like this right at the gate. Yet, you've finished it all for us.
I'm sure I speak for all the fans here when I say that WE LOVE AND APPRECIATE THESE VIDEOS, AND YOU. We'll remember these videos no matter what continuity reboot stunt DC and WB pulls.
Don't be discouraged. Keep making this fine content, friend.
Sincerely,
Fan from India
as an act of classical criticism and journalistic historical perspective, no waste of time spent doing all of this Bob, and impressed how great these have been.
Damn. It's actually finished!
Well done, Bob. Well friggin done. I hope you never have to do another one of these.
(Also, was that a tease for a Star Wars RTG at the end? If so, I am *hyped* beyond imagination.)
With nowhere else to go, the DCEU runs for President of the United States.
I gotta disagree with you about Sucker Punch. It's not a serious examination of the feminist movement; it's a representation of what libertarians like Snyder think feminism should be: individual badass women beating up the individual icky men who are mean to them, without examining (or straight up denying the existence of) any underlying structural oppression or inequality.
Hey Bob, would you please consider doing either a GEM or a Really That Good for Blazing Saddles sometime in the near future?
erubin100 I would also like to see a Really That Good: Blazing Saddles.
That'd be great! Or any Mel Brooks film really
NOT a waste of my time Bob, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way, thanks for these videos!
Me (A few days ago): you know, Bob should really do one of these videos for Star Wars.
Me (After this video ended): pick up the phone because I called it!
Zack Snyder doesn't understand comic books. He just likes: action, violence & gore in his movies. So of course he's going to be attracted to Watchmen (or Spawn). This is why he tried to make Superman & Batman essentially the Punisher.
Wouldn’t expect less from a filthy objectivist.
@kavikiru kavikiru it's basically this far right bullshit philosophy that's all about how it's moral to be selfish.
Systemically, I believe Objectivists support a night watchman state (AKA minarchy) where the state is relegated to only providing a military, police, and courts to protect from violence and protect property rights. Basically the farthest LibRight aside from Anarcho-Capitalism.
@kavikiru kavikiru What?
i dislike Snyder Batman because he is worse than Punisher or Dirty Harry, who don't ENJOY TORTURING. Batman's lines before harpooning Superman is the most macho line since "squeal like a pig" scene from Deliverance
Robin is dead in the movie, brutally murdered by the Joker. How the fuck wasn't that the focus?
"...Snyder's Batman is the superhero version of a guy who stockpiles weapons so he can kill people who 'don't belong here', because he was angry and frightened by 9-11."
fuck, I've never heard Batman's character in this broken down in such direct terms. it really hits hard when you hear it all laid out like that.
You know Bob, I might not always agree with you, but damn you're criticism is always a joy to watch. I always learn when listening to you, and this in depth criticism was great.
Making Lex Luthor a sort of tragic antihero actually sounds like a great idea the way you lay it out.
They sort of hint at the potential for that in some of the comics (e.g. _Red Son_ / _All-Star Superman_ / the _Earth-3_ stuff) and in the 90s animated series, but giving him all of Affleck's material and turning him into a billionaire muscle-bro who's also a genius sounds like it would've made for a pretty good Superman movie.
They also would've been able to say some interesting things about the nature of hero-worship, making people into idols, transhumanism, class (super-powered farm-boy versus super-rich human), and the dynamic of an ordinary human who wants to become a god versus a god who wants to become an ordinary human.
This is the video I've been looking for.
The idea of turning Superman into a Randian hero is "interesting", but the fact that Snyder's world view have been popularly rejected by critics, fans and now the general cinema going public, fills me with something I haven't associated with Snyderverse before.
Hope.
Cymrogogogoch Exactly! Thank God! My faith in humanity has been restored.
Snyder called "Heavy Metal" comics "high brow".
The man is beyond help and should never come close to a super hero ever again! Or a directing chair!