I dislike Batman V Superman and all of Snyder's films...

I dislike Batman V Superman and all of Snyder's films, and I tend to have a high degree of tolerance for the MCU as a fun, dumb exercise in filmmaking.

That being said, I really hated Civil War purely because of the lack of real conflict. The whole thing felt contrived and artificial while also suffering from the same lack of "superheroic" aspects BvS had. Both films are fundamentally about an inability to communicate and compromise, but while Bats and Supes didn't know each other Iron Man and Cap did, and that makes it feel even more insubstantial and false. I think there is a redeeming filmic and storytelling aspect to BvS insofar as the stakes felt huge and so did the personal drama despite Cavill's wooden acting and Eisenberg's manic and quite frankly baffling performance, and Snyder admittedly can pull off a big shot now and again. If one completely ignores the whole extant idea of the superhero as we know it, BvS is almost good whereas Civil War is just killing time waiting for a bigger story arc that never comes, although the last minute revelation of Bucky's crime does lend a human element and should have come sooner.

I still don't like BvS but I'd put it at a 5 to a 6, while Civil War is a 4 to a 5. A self-conscious BvS with better dialogue and casting would be the perfect superhero film.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ACL8nKOUoxk
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

all marvel flicks are shit. period.

Nice blog post, tldr.

Forgot anything besides "MUH Marvel" and "capekino" aren't appropriate.

>Sharon reading Cap's speech at the funeral to give him motivation to take on Govt
>Tony tells Steve that UN oversight is just PR
>He still runs out
>Bucky tells Cap to call in the Avengers because there are 5 other Winter Soldiers
>Steve says Cap would never believe and proceeds on
>Civil War is yet another Tony-centric movie

At least we got Secret Avengers I guess

Also
>Taking the UN seriously
Literally who does this. Not even in real life is it taken seriously. They just send out strongly worded letters and show their disapproval of shit. Fuck, they've got warlords on the council.

>>Steve says Cap would never believe and proceeds on

You mean to type ''Tony would never believe'' and I agree, its dumb, what reasons does Tony have to not believe him?

Yeah, my bad. Took a sleeping pill and my eyes are killing me.

Have the movies not established that Tony is an emotional impulsive asshole well enough? They've gone over this in almost every movie he's appeared in.

BvS was a disappointment

Civil war wasn't horrible, but I literally couldn't give a shit at all about the conflict

I'm just confused. At what point did Cap know Bucky killed Tony's parents

>If one completely ignores the whole extant idea of the superhero as we know it, BvS is almost good


See I hate people like you, that believe superheroes need to fit within certain parameters of storytelling or tone. Superman and Batman saved people in BvS, Batman saved a whole group of chinese prostitutes and Martha, and Superman saved tons of people from various disasters, and he even smiled (though I'll admit they could have shown more smiles to appease the masses that so demand it).


How, pray tell, does BvS not fall into your definition of Superhero.

In Winter Soldier.

Civil war would have been better without the Sokovia Accords. They take up screen time for no reason and subtract from the real conflict which is Cap protecting Bucky.

all those people batman killed for one

Not OP.
But to me what's wrong with BvS isn't how many people they save. The problem is personality- Clark has an unlikable personality. I just want Superman to say things like "You're going to be ok" or "I got everyone out that I could." But he doesn't, he's so aloof and distant from everyone.

I get that Superman being godlike and above everyone is a recurring theme of the movie, but it shouldn't be because of the way Clark acts- it's because of what he can do in spite of how human he actually is.

This silent badass version of Superman is what's wrong with DCEU. And now that he's dead for a little while it may get better.
Though I don't like sperg Lex either.

So what? They were murderers, rapists, etc.

The moment Batman kills like a mugger begin for his life like Punisher might (MIIIIGHT) do, then we can talk.

This is the kind of dialogue I wanted Batman and Superman to yell at each other.
"You don't get to decide who lives and who dies!"
Ya know- a clear ideological difference between the two so they can fight for more reason than the title of the movie.

I like that BvS can only ever be defended when compared to Civil War further cementing that no one actually cares about defending BvS, they only just want to tear down Civil War

>That being said, I really hated Civil War purely because of the lack of real conflict.
I genuinely don't see how anyone could actually believe this, considering it was VERY good at establishing both interpersonal and political conflict. So much better than BvS, which made both heroes out to be complete hypocrites.

>The whole thing felt contrived and artificial while also suffering from the same lack of "superheroic" aspects BvS had. Both films are fundamentally about an inability to communicate and compromise, but while Bats and Supes didn't know each other Iron Man and Cap did, and that makes it feel even more insubstantial and false.
Bullshit, the fact that Iron Man and Cap have known each other for so long makes the conflict feel far more real and genuine than whatever the hell the conflict in BvS was supposed to be. Cap and Iron Man have ALWAYS disagreed on matters, since pretty much day 1. They've always argued and practically been at each others' throats, though while still having a mutual respect for one another. That's why there was nothing like Batman suddenly being cool as fuck with Superman right after trying to kill him. CW felt like absolutely the culmination of everything that had happened up to then, regarding Cap and Iron Man's history, everything that happened in Avengers 1, TWS, AoU, and the beginning of CW.

>If one completely ignores the whole extant idea of the superhero as we know it, BvS is almost good whereas Civil War is just killing time waiting for a bigger story arc that never comes, although the last minute revelation of Bucky's crime does lend a human element and should have come sooner.
Bullshit, CW WAS the big story that they'd been building up to. It's pretty much the 'real' Avengers 2. CW shows exactly why WB needs to slow their role with hurriedly trying to catch up to Marvel. Everything in CW feels natural.

They were leaning far too heavily on that established conflict in those other movies due to their shared history. It didn't ring true. The conflict didn't quite ring true in BvS either, but since Supes was unwittingly established as a misunderstood villain there was at the very least the barest understanding that Bats was experiencing fear in the face of the superhuman. Fear that incidentally Lex failed to show even if it was part of his motivation.

It's definitely not about how many people got saved. There's an existing conception of the superhero as a demigod, a heroic, aspirational, and inspiring figure that even Nolan got in his films with notRobin and the copycats. Batman and Superman in the Snyderverse are presented as figures beyond human understanding. Now, that's actually a really cool idea, but you can't have a movie where even the most human moments are pulled away from that humanity because they need to feed the audience platitudes about heroism or to punch each other. It turns into a film about ideas punching other ideas, and while that's more interesting that people being dumb (Civil War) it's still far less interesting than people with ideas talking to other people with ideas.

>They were leaning far too heavily on that established conflict in those other movies due to their shared history.
As opposed to? The conflict in CW worked because there already WAS an established conflict between them.
>It didn't ring true.
Uh, yes it did? Everything that happened in CW is a consequence of Cap, Iron Man, and Bucky's actions in the prior MCU movies. Everything feels so genuine because of everything that had happened up to that point felt like it happened for a reason and weren't just weak justifications to make them fight.

Almost as if s the core of Batman's whole character arc in BvS is that he's lost his way.

Oh i see, you are one of those people that needs characters to clearly speak their motivations, and can't infer from actions.

Cap kinda lost a lot of credibility for me in this film. He believed Bucky that his days of killing people were over, then in the stairway fight he tries to kill a guy who Cap has to save.
Then there was the whole "Only I can bring Bucky in without being killed" which just sounds like complete arrogance when Vision exists
He took a lot of choices into his own hands without consulting his own team and for a guy who is supposed to hold to American values he isn't very democratic

>there already WAS an established conflict between them.

No there wasnt.

He is still learning to BE that beacon of hope. The entire point of BvS is he doesn't quiet know how to be the icon he needs to be, so everyone is projecting religious ideals that he isnt comfortable with. The one time he tries to talk to people, the senate got blown up. If you haven't noticed, MoS goes through roughly the first third of the hero's journey with Superman, BvS does roughly the second third (ending with his literal death) and from what we have heard about JL it would complete the arc, and he will be changed as a person.


Just be patient user.

Batman and Superman saved more people than the Avengers did in Civil War. But it's only Batman and Superman that get shit for not saving enough

I don't know how you could misinterpet BvS so much man. The point isnt that they are above humanity at all, the whole point is they are all TOO human. Batman falls prey to his fear, he has lost his way, and he learns to be better thanks to Superman's example. Superman is just trying to do the right thing, like the good kansas boy he chose to be, but everything he does has unprecedented repercussions (people praising him like a god, the senate building getting blown up) so he tries to be as neutral as possible-- just saving people and leaving.


These are human flaws, and these people have different ideas. The reason you think they are just ideas punching each other is because instead of just exposition explaining what they think and why they do what they do, they let their ideas inform their actions.

Just because people say that doesn't mean they executed well.

Snyder's inability to explore his characters outside of blunt symbolism kills any attempts at deeper emotional connection or investment the audience has. Instead of actually developing or exploring Superman or Batman he layers on copious and even self-conflicting symbolism instead.

This is why the Martha sequence utterly fails. The movie refuses to explore the lead characters and thinks a tossed-off bit of trivia can somehow paper over the non-characterization we've been fed the previous 2 hours.

And the "actions instead of words" argument is a joke. The entire first two acts before they actually fight consist of neither character doing anything important other then having portentous conversations with their sidekicks and engaging in pointless action setpieces.

Symbolism does not replace characterisation. It can SUPPORT characterisation, but you don't get to pretend they're the same thing, even David Lynch knew that when he made Blue Velvet.

You just really didn't understand the movie did you.

There is plenty of exploration of them as characters, as people, more than any Marvel studios movie. Everything up until the last third is them acting in character, it is the narrative exploring them as characters.

We diving into Bruce's dreams, where we see that he is, at first, semi aware that he is being taken over by his crusade and losing his way.

We see how much Clark has fallen in love with Lois, going so far as to directly interfere with a semi political affair to do so.

We see how much Clark values Lois, how much he confides in her, and how conflicted he is about his role in this world.

We see Bruce sleeping with models he hardly even acknowledges, and constantly drinking when he isn't doing Batman related things. We see how his relationship with Alfred has deteriorated to nothing but wry commentary and jokes from Alfred.

We are SHOWN these characters and who they are, not told. The fact that you think showing us these characters means TOO MUCH CONFLICTING SYMBOLISM REEEE shows how little you paid attention.

Their actions infer that neither of them have any problem with brutally murdering people.

This.

>No there wasnt.
Except that there was.

Even back in the first Avengers movie, Cap and Tony got on each others' nerves. They're almost polar opposites. Cap is a responsible boy scout who has a real, almost innocent sense of right and wrong. Tony is an arrogant playboy who's a former weapons manufacturer trying to right wrongs. They naturally clash.

Tony's father would always compare him to Steve Rogers. For that he always held resentment towards Cap. Doesn't help that Cap knew Howard Stark and more than likely sees Howard in a slightly more positive light.

Cap (rightfully) holds Tony responsible for everything that happened in Age of Ultron.

It's not that much of a stretch that after all the arguments Steve and Tony have had, compounded with the events that set off CW in the first place, in addition to their conflicting ideological views of the Sovokia Accords, that it would all eventually lead to serious conflict between the two. And then there's the later knowledge that Bucky killed Tony's parents as well.

almost as if root media was from 5 cent comics

youtube.com/watch?v=ACL8nKOUoxk
But yeah no it's nothing but quips and memes.

Snyder can't seem to decide if he wants the characters to be flawed and grounded humans or iconic larger than life mythic archetypes and the incongruity between the two makes for neither attempt working.

Honestly though I just want Sup Forums to leave.

>taking three movies to make Superman actually BE Superman
That's pretty fucking stupid though, you have to admit.

I theorise WB take this all on board, then force Snyder to make a Supes sunny and optimistic and smiley when they inevitably resurrect him, which will make sense after the death thing. It's like cheating death makes him happy go lucky.

No point in arguing with Marthas, they're pretty set in their ways.

Yeah, why can't hero learn his lesson at the end of the movie, then forget and relearn it all over again in the sequel, rinse and repeat ad infinitum.

...But that's what's happening with Clark.

And I've yet to hear how him coming back from the dead s going to make him more connected to humanity, given that resurrections are one of those big things that denote divinity or super-naturalism.

Hell, I had to come up with a theory myself as to how they could explain it because nobody was offering.

I theorize that they'll let Snyder do whatever and pay lip service in a desperate bid to sel tickets only for word of mouth to take a huge chunk out of their gross, and you guys will tear out your hear and bellow lamentations about how the competitors have ruined cinema or kinographie or whatever new meme you've come up with, for everyone, and that the casual redditors have stymied a divine artistic vision rife with intellectual symbolism yet again.

Because the only reason WB isn't home to the most incompetent movie studios in Hollywood is because Sony hasn't gone under yet.

>...But that's what's happening with Clark.

Not it's not. In MoS he taking his first baby steps at being a superhero after he figures out what he wants to do with his powers (and life) after discovering his origin. I.e. he chooses to be a hero. In BvS he's facing the challenges from being a public figure who is super controversial and polarizing, and he learns how to deal with the pressures and heavy burdens of the job because even with his powers he cannot save everyone or get everything right all the time.

>Snyder can't seem to decide if he wants the characters to be flawed and grounded humans or iconic larger than life mythic archetypes and the incongruity between the two makes for neither attempt working.
False.
He is showing them being mythic from the point of view of humanity but then we see them as the flawed real people that they are.

Sorry, I forgot. When Snyder does it, it's "character development" But because Marvel only makes quip filled meme movies, they can't possibly have any nuance or character development in them.

Well the important thing is that YOU believe it.

>after he figures out what he wants to do with his powers (and life) after discovering his origin. I.e. he chooses to be a hero.
...But he was doing that as an eleven year old kid. Is it really going to take Clark 20+ years and three movies to come full circle?

...Wait you're the fag that keeps whining about camp, aren't you?

Sup Forumsshitposters. Cant have a BVS thread without CW