

I was very disappointed by Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, and I found this. Lol really funny.
Comments
-
@TrueJewBear, as an avid comic book reader and movie goer, I have no idea why it got such bad reviews. The whole time I was baffled because if you've ever read any comics you could tell that they almost did it perfect aside from a few stretches to keep the plot rolling, but I personally thought it was one of the better movies I've seen this year. I would rate it just below deadpool and just above ant-man
-
@Pilsberydoyghman, It was an unfocused mess of a story. I could spot multiple movies they tried to shove in there to rush up to marvel. Dark Night Returns, Man of Tomorrow, Wonder Woman, Luthor, and Death of Superman. But nothing gets proper time to develop because they rush through and jump between multiple storylines without trying to make a movie for each.
-
@OutlawOwl, I do agree with that it always feels rushed and most comic book fans feel like they deserved better, I on the other hand really felt like I followed every single story line they introduced but it did take me about 3 hours to explain it to my friends. I also think Aflek did a good job as batman personally. But a lit of people are saying he was bad
-
@TrueJewBear, No it wasn't. The only issue was the editing. The best description I've heard for it is this: It's like a puzzle. The picture of it completed on the box is amazing, and each individual piece (scene) is awesome, but whoever had to put it together, is really bad at puzzles. The potential for a good movie is there, but poor editing and pacing can really ruin a movie. Non the less, i can see the good movie in there and I liked the tone. It's dark and serious rather than Marvels constant jokes and taking the weight out of any situation (I have nothing against Marvel, I'm just tired of their formula). I didn't care for BvS but I can see what it should have been, and because the problem with it some something so basic, I'm still excited for the rest of DC's universe. PS: I don't know if any of that makes sense, I just woke up.
-
@Pilsberydoyghman, exactly! When they first showed DD(using it as code for main villain to prevent spoilers), I literally stood up and clapped! I think a lot of people are mad because they were just looking for a superhero crackdown throughout the entire movie, but they misunderstood that this movie was a template for future titles.
-
@TrueJewBear, I actually really liked it. The only problem I can see with it is that it jumps from batman's story to superman's story a lot, but that didn't bother me. It followed the comics pretty closely and I thought it was a really good movie. I don't get why people say it's the worst movie they've ever seen and what not. If you haven't seen it yet I would highly recommend you go and see it so you can form your own opinion and not just listen to us :D if you do, I hope you like it!
-
@Pilsberydoyghman, Have you read a comic book? The whole movie was an unapologetic slap to the face of comic fans. Literally every decision was wrong. Both Batman and Superman broke their no kill rule like 100 times, Jimmy Olson got shot in the head within the first 20 minutes, Doomsday looked like a fvcking cave troll, the titular fight was flaccid and underwhelming, Lex Luthor was terribly portrayed, and the whole plot was an exhaustive clusterfvck.
-
@Thatoregonianbastard, which comic book are you referring to I've ready every one they used for batman v superman except the death of superman I never read that one. All I know about it is that Doomsday beats the snot out of superman they both die then superman comes back somehow all the others I have read and own in my collection
-
@TrueJewBear, it's because of people's expectations. It wasn't just an action movie, or a dramatic movie. It was a superhero movie. It took itself back to the earlier days, before Marcel reinvented the genre, and before the Dark Knight. It was a power trip. Weak on story, strong on action and effects. I liked it for the same reason I liked Man of Steel. I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't go to a Batman movie or a Superman movie expecting a compelling story. That's because I don't want to hear about their alter egos. That's not what the comics are about either. Superheroes are supposed to be about watching super powered beings beat the crap out each other, and fantasizing about being one of them. That's why the first Avengers was the best of them, because it was a superhero movie without any origin or introduction (having been done in other films), and didn't screw around with secret identity plotlines. In general, we don't care about Peter Parker or Clark Kent. We want
-
@I Are Lebo, to see Spider-Man or Superman being awesome. So it's definitely worth seeing, and in theatres. But you need to go into it with the right mindset. Don't expect to be emotionally moved, it's not that kind of movie. Also, Batman fans are pretty split down the middle about this portrayal of Batman. *Slight spoilers* This is the darkest on screen portrayal of Batman. He's very Frank Miller-esk. He kills people. At one point he takes a thugs knife from him and then stabs him with it. (I thought in the shoulder, but it might've been in the chest) So is it the best superhero movie? No. It's arguably the best DC movie, though.
-
@TrueJewBear, I watched it recently and I've got to say it'd one of the best movies I've ever watched the action dialouge and the story is amazing the reason it got 38% is that rotten tomatoes think the movie is two dark and not fun despite tge fact that its grittier versions of two suoerheroes I reccomend watching if you have the chance
-
@Hugh J Rection, well now I don't trust them either, Sharknado deserves 100%. jkjk. But how come the great films are reviewed poorly and piles of dung are loved by RT critics? I think they look for an artsy message instead of a good film. Look up 'tropic thunder intro ads', I think they'd be all over Satan's Alley.
-
@Hugh J Rection, is not "they" only like 8 critics reviewed sharknado. Over 300 reviewed BvS. The truth is this movie was dumb and filled with half baked ideas. Because they're rushing to get all the other individual DC movies out. And btw reviews don't matter to this type of movies, transformers were hated by all critics yet there's some of the top grossing movies of all times. And "carol" "son of Saul" and "45 years" were the best reviewed movies of last year and they barely made a million. Reviews only matter for small independent or foreign artsy movies because that way people find out about them. I'm sure Bob in Alabama doesn't give a sh*t about what Manohla Dargis in New York thinks about BvS. So I don't understand why all the fanboys are tripping
-
The reason they stop fighting has to be one of the dumbest ideas in recent history. The action wasn't bad, and Afleck was great as Batman. A couple of scenes were obviously trying to rush the future of their films in, which I completely understand why they did it, but just made for very confusing scenes. Especially for those that went to the film having little knowledge of the DC comics universe. I'm a huge comic book fan, and while it's true I'm a bigger fan of Marvel, that doesn't mean I want DC to fail at what they're trying to do. Superheroes are superheroes and if you're a fan of the genre, the company behind it shouldn't matter. The movie should just be treated as a movie and who cares who the characters are or what universe they're from. That being said, I'd rate this a 6.5 at best. I sincerely believe that anyone that gives it over a 7 is just very desperate to believe it was good, simply because it had so much hype, especially for die hard DC fans.
-
@hollow114, I agree about the humanizing factor. However, this is the world's greatest detective, trying to save his entire species from extinction. Not even Alfred could convince him that Superman was their ally. All it took to convince him was this creature trying to save it's mommy. I refuse to believe that there world's greatest detective who was completely convinced in the destructive force of this creature, didn't consider for even a second that it was lying to save it's own life. Especially when he believes our entire species' survival depends on Superman's death
-
That's because some movies are simply bad and have few redeeming qualities. Just because a movie sets out to do something doesn't mean it did so well. Most scary movies are garbage. Even if Dundee of them are intentionally bad, that doesn't warrant a good score nor does it mean it does so effectively.
-
I've been a devoted batman fan my entire life. I grew up on the graphic novels and The Animated Series (And Batman Beyond). The movie sucked. The action sequences were great but there was hardly a plot and the portrayal of Batman was awful. Also, they seemed to forget that batman doesn't kill people. Especially as much as he did. But Jesse Eisenberg actually played a fantastic Lex Luthor
-
It could've been great, but executive meddling caused them to rush through several plots in a two hour thirty minute story. Batman was good, Superman was meh, Wonder Woman was pretty much all hype and no real substance, Jesse Eisenberg as Lex was probably a bad idea in hindsight, Doomsday was straight up stupid, and the Batman v Superman fight itself was great but way, WAY too short for a movie that spent its first half building up to it. All around it's pretty disappointing, but the only people that can really be blamed for it are the ones who were clearly too desperate to have DC compete with Marvel as soon as possible.
-
@Doughnut Boy, that's because typically the general public has pretty low standards for entertainment. Critics review things based on their quality and what the movie is supposed to do. An entertaining movie can still be a poor movie. Sharknado is satirical. It's supposed to be silly, and it does what it sets out to do well. BvS did not.
-
@Doughnut Boy, I meant to send this as a reply "That's because some movies are simply bad and have few redeeming qualities. Just because a movie sets out to do something doesn't mean it did so well. Most scary movies are garbage, and ever if some of them are intentionally bad, that doesn't necessarily mean they warrant a good score, nor does it mean they do so effectively.
Was it really that bad? I've heard bad things and good things about it