Zach Snyder’s “Batman v Superman” is the latest superhero
extravaganza, this time courtesy of Warner Bros and DC. It’s a follow up to
Snyder’s 2013 Superman reboot “Man of Steel” and Warner’s attempt to jumpstart
a DC superhero universe (ala the Marvel Cinematic Universe) that will
eventually lead to two “Justice League” movies. Unfortunately, Warner Bros is
trying to establish this universe too quickly (the “Justice League” movies, as
well as a few other standalone DC hero movies are in varying stages of
production) and as a result this latest picture suffers dearly. Simply put:
there’s too much going on in “Batman v Superman.” Snyder adheres to the
“quantity over quality” philosophy. The picture is a disorganized, unfocused,
overstuffed and emotionally stagnant mess that turns into a nonstop barrage of
mind numbing action.
It’s a shame because the concept at the center of this mess
is somewhat compelling. I know I’m in the minority in saying that I’ve grown tired
of all these superhero movies, primarily because most tend to follow the same
derivate cookie cutter plot involving a one-note villain and a major city being
leveled. So, the idea of two superheroes having a scuffle is far more
interesting to me than a superhero having to face yet another super villain
hell-bent on world domination/destruction. Yet, because so much is crammed into
the movie (including cameos from additional superheroes. In terms of the main
narrative, they serve zero purpose. But hey…Aquaman!) the conflict gets lost in
all the noise and commotion. I guess it’s not enough to simply have Batman and
Superman fight.
As far as plot is concerned…there’s a lot of it (and it adds
up to squat). We’ve got Batman in Gotham City and Superman in Metropolis…both
in the same universe! Batman, aka Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck, unshaven and
grouchy) is older and more cynical this time around; his senses are dulled,
he’s tired of fighting crime that never seems to end and he’s a cold blooded
killer. He’s also been directly affected by collateral damage due to Superman’s
silly tendency to destroy buildings during his fights with baddies in Metropolis.
For what it’s worth, Affleck’s jaded, washed up Batman is by far the best, most
refreshing thing about the movie because it’s at least distinct from other onscreen
incarnations.
As for the Kryptonian himself, Superman (Henry Cavill)
is…there too. He’s still flying around
in his red cape and blue tights, at times resembling a wax figurine and posing
as a reporter for the city newspaper by day, doing a lot of intense staring and
brooding either way. That’s pretty much it. He’s the same old Superman. Cavill was
so charming and funny in last year’s spy comedy “The Man from U.N.C.L.E,” but
here, he has about as much personality and charisma as a block of Kryptonite.
The conversations about him (by
various supporting characters and Batman) are far more interesting: is Superman
a god? Is he the savior we need? Or is he a false prophet? All thought
provoking questions, except the movie only grazes the surface. We get Holly
Hunter as a Metropolis senator giving heavy-handed speeches in front of
committees and a media montage where various commentators discuss the “Superman
Question.”
What else? Well, Superman’s main squeeze and fellow reporter
Lois Lane (the lovely Amy Adams, doing the best she can with thinly written
character) runs around in a pants suit doing some investigative journalism and needing rescueing from Superman (seriously, she gets captured like three times). We
have the mysterious Lex Luther (Jesse Eisenberg, essentially doing an exaggerated
version of his standard fast talking/wise ass persona with a smidge of The
Joker thrown in. His performance feels forced most of the time and the
character never quite cuts deep enough) that wants to get his hands on some
powerful Kryptonian artifacts. There’s also Batman’s faithful confidant Alfred
(Jeremy Irons) and…Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) is also shoved into the narrative, only because
she’s got her own movie coming up soon (don’t worry, she was shown front and
center in the trailers. No spoilers here). I guess it doesn’t matter that she
doesn’t fit in with the central narrative. But one thing’s for certain: she has
a neat costume.
OK…I’m exhausted.
“Batman v Superman” is overkill in practically everyway.
There are too many characters and too many plotlines, which causes the first
twenty-five minutes of the movie to be nothing but tedious exposition. It has
to tease plot lines and characters for future movies. There are multiple glowing objects that are recovered and/or change hands
throughout, a bizarre dream/simulation sequence that feels like it was left
over from a first draft of the screenplay, and powerful beams of energy that
shoot out of various facilities (powerful beams of energy have become common
place in superhero movies for some reason). The movie even manages to go overboard on symbolism
and social commentary. We get some 9/11 imagery, lots of Christ symbolism (it is Superman after all), allusions to
bitter and disillusioned war veterans, all handled with the subtlety of
Superman’s fist and shoddily inserted into the rest of the proceedings. There’s
even an homage to “King Kong” near the end because, why not? In other words,
the picture tries to cover so much material that it can’t really explore any of
it in any real depth or nuance. It has to keep chugging along to shove in even
more stuff.
What’s most frustrating is that, despite the convoluted plot
and overabundance of material and characters, it adds up to virtually
nothing. Like most other superhero
movies, it all comes down to a dull final clash between heroes and a power
hungry super villain (again, apparently, Batman fighting Superman isn’t good
enough) in a climax that goes on for what feels like an eternity. There are
about four fight scenes crammed in to this single sequence, a surprise bad guy,
ticking clocks, two damsels in
distress and lots of city damage. Seriously? Was there any sort of editing,
either at the script stage or in postproduction? It’s the cherry on top of this
chaos sundae.
Even from a technical standpoint the movie is a dud. The action
sequences are horrendous--poorly shot using a mix of shaky hand held cam and
disorienting crane/dolly work. The editing is muddled and nonsensical; we
constantly lose track of what’s going on. And of course, there’s too much
action. The cinematography by Larry Fong is simply atrocious, using dull, murky
tones of grey and muddied, phony-looking CGI backgrounds. Meanwhile, Han
Zimmer’s thundering orchestral score is overbearing and obnoxious. It’s used
much too frequently and occasionally drowns out the dialogue.
The bigger issue here is that “Batman v Superman” wants to
be big and epic in every scene, as if the filmmakers were worried they would
bore the audience (well, they bored us anyway). Rarely does it settle down and
let quiet, more intimate moments between characters play out. The few romantic
scenes between Superman and Lois feel cheesy and forced. As is the case with most
of Snyder’s movies, “Batman v Superman” is ultimately more committed to style
and spectacle rather then character and narrative substance.
The longer “Batman v Superman” went on (and the more stuff
it introduced) the more I grew to despise it. I walked out of the theater
seething with rage, angry that I had to sit through such a long, hollow,
bloated mess that wants so badly to be about everything that it’s not much
about anything in the long run. It’s one of the worst superhero movies to come
out in a while and I never want to see or think about it again.
D
No comments:
Post a Comment