Review – Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

bvsBack in 1986, as Superman star Christopher Reeve was prepping work on the ill-fated Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, he approached the writer of Superman I and II, the late, great Tom Mankiewicz, for advice. Reeve pitched Mankiewicz on his idea for Superman to rid the world of nuclear weapons, a parallel to real-world social issues of the time. Mankiewicz replied with this advice:

Don’t ever get involved with something Superman could fix. He could disarm the world in fifteen minutes. He doesn’t have to go to the UN. If he feels that strongly about it, he could get rid of all the missiles. Superman could feed the world if he wanted to. He could establish agricultural fields in outer space. Don’t bring up things like that.

I would like to add an addendum to that. Don’t get Superman directly involved with real-world issues. Do not twist his mission of peace into a political struggle. Do not bog him down with the ugliness of reality, the superfluity of man’s government, or the problems of democracy, especially at the expense of his message of hope, of inspiring the best in humanity.

I write this, because my many concerns over the past few years with director Zack Snyder’s approach to Batman v Superman were finally realized last month. Not only has the filmmaker indulged in all the above missteps, he’s delivered the most vile, morally reprehensible depiction of Superman and DC Comics on film to date. The film is a brutal assault on our senses, on the spirituality and idealism of these characters, on our intelligence as moviegoers, and on the vitality of quality filmmaking in big-budget studio tentpoles. It’s not just a disappointment; it’s a resolute misstep for the future of the DC Universe on film.

The film centers on a middle-aged Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck getting first billing in a long history of big actors being billed before the guy playing Superman) who after witnessing Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod topple one of his company’s buildings at the end of Manbatman-v-superman of Steel two years ago, grows weary of such dangerous forces being left unchecked.  Rather than blaming the indulgences of the director in the previous film, we are to blame Superman for Metropolis’ destruction. Bruce’s fear is shared by a great deal of the public, who endlessly debate Superman’s heroics and the fact that he “answers to nobody.” Bruce returns to Gotham City plotting to neutralize, and kill if necessary, the Man of Steel, despite repeated claims by butler Alfred (Jeremy Irons) that “he is not our enemy.” “That son of a bitch brought the war to us!” replies Bruce. Blah blah post-9/11 themes.

Back in Metropolis, Clark Kent is living comfortably with fellow Daily Planet staffer Lois Lane (Amy Adams). I guess Lois knowing Clark’s secret identity from the get-go at the end of Man of Steel hasn’t yielded any interesting twists on their decades-long will they/won’t they relationship from the comics. Contrastingly, Superman has been entirely anti-social in public, saving the world yet not really interacting with it in any way beyond that for these two years. Meanwhile, wealthy philanthropist Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) plots to acquire the recently-discovered Kryptonite to control Superman, by manipulating a senator (Holly Hunter) and indeed everyone else around him. Oh, and there’s also other DC characters like Wonder Woman (Gal Godot) lying in the wait for the eventual Justice League movie.

It’s an overflowing plot, but there are traces of intrigue. Chris Terrio of Argo fame uses the characters as players in a larger piece about terrorism, power, corruption, and security, the groundwork of an intriguing political thriller. It is critical of heroes like Batman and Superman, examining their failings and the real consequences of their actions. It’s also a huge deviation from the reverence Snyder and his Man of Steel team showed for the universe in that film. In part to blame is perhaps the director’s long-standing love of Frank Miller’s seminal 1986 graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns; Snyder carts over that story’s older, world-wearier Batman, some talking-head-style political commentary, and perhaps intentionally or not, Miller’s own disdain for the Last Son of Krypton.

Indeed, Dawn of Justice continues the tradition of recent Superman media by placing the hero in no-win scenarios that go directly against the winning spirit the character has always been about. There is a scene wherein (avoiding spoilers) Superman enters a building and a bomb goes off, and Superman just watches somberly as everyone around him is vaporized. Uh, Zack? This is Superman. Not Doctor Manhattan.

That’s an issue I had with Man of Steel too, though to a lesser extent. The Superman mythology isn’t about “well, what if he were REAL? What if a humanoid that had all these powers came to earth?” I don’t care how the real world reacts to Superman’s presence. That’s not appealing to me. Superman is about fantasy, he’s an ESCAPE from the real world. He’s a guy flying around in a red cape who makes a difference in his community and inspires those Batman-V-Superman-Trailer-Fight-Heat-Visionaround him to pitch in themselves. Why is there debate about whether or not he’s doing the right thing? We KNOW he’s gonna do the right thing. He’s SUPERMAN. And yet here we are, watching Charlie Rose and Neil DeGrasse-Tyson (both make brief appearances) debate about a Superman that exists and whether or not his power should be checked. But this is a Superman that hasn’t even begun to build bridges with people publically, so he’s clearly failed in his mission. The Superman of the comics won people over with a smile and a wave as he flew above them. Pity Henry Cavill’s Superman isn’t allowed such joy, regulated to stand and mope idly about how people don’t understand him.

As for Ben Affleck’s Batman, he busies himself in these ridiculous, jarring dream sequences reflecting his fear of aliens from the sky. I had hope after one such sequence, wherein a bat-creature bursts from the tomb of Martha Wayne to attack him. It recalls the jump-scares of a horror movie, a cool new twist that might really transport audiences into Bruce’s tortured psyche. Yet the movie never goes anywhere with it, taking us into even more absurd (and immodestly-budgeted) nightmares, one of which is a full, unabashed teaser for the Justice League movie. Pity Affleck, who’s been suckered into this mess with the promise of redemption after the indignity of 2003’s Daredevil. The actor/filmmaker isn’t altogether unfitting in the cape and cowl, but is also far from the finest performer to fill it.

But I digress. After characters have waxed poetic enough, director Snyder yanks the film’s breaks and yells, “less talk, more EXPLOSIONS!” All political discussions or reflections on real-world politics (clumsy as they were) are gone, leaving all its ideas entirely unresolved, lost in Snyder’s blaring self-indulgence and Junkie XL and Hans Zimmer’s blatant, blaring, borderline parodical score. What of Scoot McNairy’s legless homeless guy? Why has Amy Adams’ role been all but reduced to damsel-in-distress? Shouldn’t Clark be getting in trouble every time Perry White (Lawrence Fishburne) passes by his empty desk? No answers here, we only have enough time left in the already bloated two-and-a-half hour runtime for the movie to live up to its namesake – the bout between Batman and Superman.

And…it sucks. Not only does Snyder fail to build up their conflict in any meaningful way, their fisticuffs aren’t satisfying, nor are they really even warranted in the context of the film. It’s seriously the weakest explanation for pitting these two characters against each other. And it was at this point in the movie, after suddenly becoming aware of the intense grimace on my face, I wondered, “aren’t I supposed to be having fun?”

Apparently not. There’s actually a really ugly undercurrent to Dawn of Justice, boasting such brutality, such bloodlust, such hyper-machismo bullshit that makes for the most uncomfortable, punishing experience. That’s not just during the title fight too, that’s the whole movie. Snyder and his cinematographer Larry Fong absolutely do not know when to stop with the hypermasculinity, when enough is enough, to the point where one starts to feel ashamed at being a man at all. It’s more than enough to build a case accusing Snyder, who also shoots the death of Bruce’s parents with all the slow motion and heavy breathing of a sex scene, of using DC Comics characters to work through his own crippling manhood issues.

The studio is even prepping an R-rated cut of this movie for home video release. That’s right, your favorite childhood comic book characters have been perverted into a movie that, without certain cuts, was deemed too violent and too intense by anyone under 17 years old. Wow.batman-v-superman-the-complete-guide-to-frank-miller-dark-knight

So inevitably, we know Batman and Superman are to resolve their differences at some point. And after all that thirst for blood, all that shoddy build-up, their altercation is capped off in the most mind-bogglingly stupid, overwhelmingly left-field conclusion, that literally any idea you, the audience, could come up with as to why these characters should stop fighting, will better qualify you to write this movie than the filmmakers being paid hundreds of thousands to do so.

And then they’re friends, as if nothing had happened, teaming up to destroy an even more laughably stupid threat. And if you thought this film would be answering for Man of Steel’s destructive climax, you’d be wrong, wrong, wrong. Batman v Superman doubles down on the needlessly high body count. In fact, in one scene Batman has the big baddie in a totally isolated area, but rather than returning to the city to bring the necessary tools to kill the baddie to him, he actually draws him BACK INTO THE POPULATED CITY to get HIM to the tools. Remember how Christopher Nolan’s Batman had that one rule about killing people? Apparently Zack Snyder doesn’t share that sentiment.

So we finally realize, Batman v Superman is a movie about uncomfortable extremes. Snyder has always been an overwrought mess of a filmmaker, favoring style over substance, but the responsibility of pitting together two beloved DC characters has done nothing to curb his sadist, ear-rapingly obnoxious hard-on for destruction. What the hell? Doesn’t this go against everything DC Comics characters have stood for the past 70 years? You bet. Both Batman and Superman are acting totally out of character here. Batman’s a crazy, single-minded bruiser who brands criminals and wants nothing short of Superman’s death, while Superman is totally willing to bend his own moral code if his family is threatened. In the comics, the two have had their quarrels, occasionally even violent ones, but they have never, ever been pushed to the point of foaming at the mouth, hungering for each other’s head on a spike like in this movie. Pity the children who have to witness such overt brutality by the hands of characters who should, ideally, be serving as their role models.

And again, pretty much all the problems posed by the movie would’ve been solved immediately had Superman simply TALKED OPENLY. A simple, “Bruce, we’re being played!” would’ve stopped the title fight altogether. And every single other problem of the movie could’ve been completely avoided had Superman simply stood up in front of the public after Man of Steel and been like, “Hey guys, my name’s Superman, I’m just here to help out with the problems you can’t solve yourselves and really just help everyone to do better. Sorry about that Zod character, he’s a bad guy on my home planet, and I was just trying to stop him. Next time we face a threat like this, I’ll do it in space or something so there’s not as many casualties. Again sorry, still new to the whole superhero thing. Anyway, up up and away and all that!” *woosh*

Boom. /conflict.

Even the other DC characters teased in this movie lack subtlety; they basically appear in mini-trailers for their upcoming solo movies. It’s a sad day when I’m longing for the more natural, thoughtful teases of Green Lantern.

I haven’t even mentioned Jesse Eisenberg, who gives the most abysmally misguided performance as Lex Luthor. Eisenberg, known for his mousy-yet-charming teenage characters in Adventureland and _1436830197Zombieland, is not only insanely miscast as the powerful billionaire, he’s clearly never even glimpsed a Superman comic long enough to know who this character is supposed to be. So he instead plays Luthor the only way he knows how – by going over-the-top awkward, hammy, and creepy, his hands shaking as he speaks about power at a charity event, stumbling over the girth of his words. There’s even a point at the end where he actually hums the notes of the musical score. It’s just uncomfortable, a lot like…well, Zack Snyder’s id – angry, unrestrained, bratty, unlikable, and sadistic.

And that’s pretty much Batman v Superman too, the Donald Trump of superhero movies – loud, blunt, ugly, stupid, fear-mongering, extremist, tasteless, and bearing several cringe-worthy teases of what’s to come. Zack Snyder was always the wrong architect for the DC Universe on film, merely a loud, annoying kid bashing his action figures together. I don’t think Tom Mankiewicz could’ve envisioned anything like it, but if he could see Dawn of Justice now, there is no doubt he’d be shaking his head, collecting his valuables, and leaving the theater. I’d be right behind him.



QUOTE: Rossen, Jake; Millar, Mark (2008-02-01). Superman vs. Hollywood: How Fiendish Producers, Devious Directors, and Warring Writers Grounded an American Icon (Cappella Books) (p. 164). Chicago Review Press. Kindle Edition.



Review: The Dark Knight Rises



This review contains mild spoilers.

Well well, it seems Marvel’s Avengers really have beaten the Bat at his own game this summer. Kudos. But as a DC fan first and foremost, it’s no less disappointing to see a series so close to my heart end on such a dishearteningly average note. The plot of The Dark Knight Rises, the highly anticipated final entry in director Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, could be best summed up as “the shit hitting the fan,” and fans expecting anything more, perhaps something as deeply poetic and immensely powerful as the climax of The Dark Knight, are in for a rude awakening.

The Dark Knight Rises opens eight years after its predecessor with police commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) struggling to continue keeping the truth about Harvey Dent’s death a secret. Meanwhile, a publically reviled Batman is no more, now merely crippled, aged recluse Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), who has left his company in tatters and refuses even to see anyone outside of faithful butler Alfred(Michael Caine). But when cat burglar Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) steals one of his most precious family heirlooms, and the ruthless mercenary-with-a-mask Bane (Tom Hardy) begins to rise from the depths and expose the truth about Harvey Dent, Bruce realizes he must once again take up the mantle of the bat to defend a city rapidly plunging into anarchy, with the added help of new Wayne Enterprises CEO Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard) and idealistic city cop John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt).

Nolan’s third and final bat-outing prides itself on its spectacular action sequences. Finally, Batman gets to stand toe-to-toe with one of his baddies; his fistfights with Bane are some of the most brutal and well-shot fight sequences of all three films. Tom Hardy is perfectly cast as the menacing, hulking (if not towering) beast originating from 1994’s Knightfall arc, in which the villain is able to deduce Batman’s identity and systematically take him down. Anne Hathaway is also surprisingly spot-on as Catwoman, perfectly nailing the villainess’ two-sided behavior. And like its predecessors, the film contains a good deal of nuance, thoughtfully presenting themes of rising; for example, Bane and his followers literally existing beneath the city streets and within its sewers, a repressed part of the city that can no longer be contained, just like the lie Gordon’s kept all these years.

But like Gotham itself, The Dark Knight Rises has glaring problems beneath its surface. Most apparent is how the film misguidedly blows itself up to be this huge, epic conclusion to a saga of Lord of the Rings-scale importance. At its core, this story began with, and should always remain true to, a man broken by the death of his parents and sworn to protect the city at all costs. The Dark Knight Rises can’t be faulted for lack of trying to keep to those origins, but its narrative, heavily reliant on side characters, is simply too self-important, pretentious even, for its own good. It’s as if the filmmakers have been influenced by the colossal hype of the previous film in all the wrong ways.

Indeed, unlike its predecessors, The Dark Knight Rises favors scale over storytelling, backgrounding many of its finest moments in favor of expensive set pieces for Bane to conquer. I’d feared as much following the similarly indulgent Inception, director Nolan’s previous film and further proof that his style is quickly descending into convoluted, overblown action movie territory. Both films are simply far too expansive, to the point where plot details, character motivations, and any sense of intimacy are all drowned out by their bloated second and third acts. Where The Dark Knight was influenced by the work of Michael Mann, The Dark Knight Rises might have very well been influenced by the work of Michael Bay.

And if The Dark Knight had its critics for not focusing enough on its title protagonist (I personally thought it balanced its characters fine), then The Dark Knight Rises is by far the guiltier of the two. Sure, Bruce Wayne’s character arc is a poignant look at a hero dragged down into deepest pits of the underworld, forced to overcome his weaknesses and rise once again to serve his destined duty. These scenes are arguably the most emotional of the film, yet they’re given a frustratingly scant amount of screentime. For a movie supposedly about Bruce Wayne’s return to the mantle of the bat, the character doesn’t receive nearly the attention he deserves. Even the iconic cape and cowl itself is too infrequently a part of the narrative, lost in a film lacking a central focus and too heavily devoted to forgettable, less interesting newcomers like Gordon-Levitt’s cop character.

Simply put, the focus should’ve been stuck squarely on the film’s returning cast members and its villains. Those are the characters that have spawned so many memorable moments that make these films so fun to watch, yet in The Dark Knight Rises, I can count to number of truly humorous, entertaining, or otherwise standout moments of character interaction on one hand. I’m reminded very vividly of Spider-Man 3, a film which also suffers from many of the same problems. Both films have far too many things they want to accomplish with their final time in the limelight that they don’t really succeed at any of them, and especially not at bringing their characters full circle meaningfully.

In a lot of ways, The Dark Knight Rises is simply a victim of studio upscaling. Similarly, writing about 1997’s abysmal Batman & Robin, Roger Ebert identified the film’s crucial misstep: “My prescription for the series remains unchanged: scale down. We don’t need to see $2 million on the screen every single minute.” It’s for that reason that Nolan’s own Batman Begins, which boasted a far lesser $150 million budget, was such a breath of fresh air. Conversely, The Dark Knight Rises was given a massive $250 million budget, a grossly unnecessary amount for a film of this kind. Even the film’s opening sequence, an airplane heist sequence in mid-air, is incredibly overindulgent and not only serves little purpose, but frankly has no place being in a Batman film at all.

I was also rather disgusted with the amount of concessions Nolan seems to have made for fans this time around. Not one to pander up until now, Nolan was known for using his influence to maintain  a consistent, singular vision for the previous two Batman films, a resolve made stronger in its resistance to incorporate fan requests for more characters from the comics. In The Dark Knight Rises, Nolan detracts from pivotal scenes to incorporate pointless cameos from villains past, other appearances from series tropes, and, perhaps most condescending, even taking time at the very end to reveal that a certain hero character is actually a classic character from the Batman mythology, which itself is nonsensical, tacked-on, and heavily deviant from the comics. It’s a new low for Nolan as it is, but to top it all off, we’re given a clumsily handled and horribly written ending so spectacularly lazy and predictable, not only will you guess it within the first fifteen minutes, but it’s so goofy that you’d swear it was written by the mindless masses of fanboys themselves. You would think a director known for shocking surprises and unexpected twists would be able to dream up something several steps ahead of what talentless Internet dwellers hammer out daily in fan fiction circles.

Even Hans Zimmer’s musical score lacks the invigorating bravado of the composer’s previous Batman-related work. With The Dark Knight Rises, he’s adopted new themes and styles for certain scenes, yet none of them really stick. Sure, Bane’s chant made popular in the film’s marketing is memorable enough, but aside from that, I don’t see why Zimmer even bothered to try to reinvent the wheel at this point in the series, when a more traditional score bringing back the themes of its predecessors would’ve been just as welcome.

It’s with a heavy heart that I call The Dark Knight Rises a bit of a disappointment. While the film does hit a lot of the right notes, ultimately it’s more concerned with ending everything in a big, bold, fan-pandering way than doing its predecessors justice and creating a more grounded, thoughtful conclusion to Bruce Wayne’s story.

Recently, I’ve glanced over headlines hailing Nolan’s Batman films as this generation’s Godfather trilogy. I’m inclined to agree, right down to both trilogies’ similarly anticlimactic third installments.