What am I missing?

I watched BvS, never saw it before because it got shit reviews. I watched the extended version, don't know if that matters at all, but... I thought this movie was pretty darn good (not super great).
Why does it have 27% on Rotten Tomatoes? That's incredibly low! Surely I don't expect everyone to like all movies, but this doesn't seem right from what I just watched. What am I missing?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8AO19XY2rqc
twitter.com/AnonBabble

see You'll find many like minded individuals there, brother.

Thanks for the tip, but likeminded individuals may not have the answer I'm looking for. I'm asking what I'm missing, why is it so terrible in the eyes of critics and many of you, while I'm watching it and see a good movie? What is your opinion on this matter? It's weird.

I agree its a good movie, I enjoyed it a lot. If I am to guess, it's the pacing throwing people off

they pretty much answer all your question in there if you bothered to look

Too highbrow for normies.
Too comic-booky for critics.

Then I guess I will look

Its fucking wank, theyre fighting & hate each other, then all of a sudden because of a name they suddenly are best mates. Its shyte

You also described civil war just now, but surely there is more to it than this.

Seems like they are only discussing similarities with America's society.

It has some good ideas about the way our culture engages with superheroes and whether ubermenschen can be bound to the laws of mankind it's just that anything intelligent the movie has to say is bogged down on an unfocused and messy script that wastes so much time on useless subplots and spends way too much time trying to set up other films that it loses its own ideas in the process. Wonder Woman didn't need to be in the movie at all, and Lois Lane gets way too much screen time. The Director's Cut doesn't solve anything, it just adds another 30 minutes of more filler plot.

the problem with "MARTHA" is that the delivery is objectively clumsy and it inspires no change in Batman. He learns that Superman is fighting to save his mother, that makes Batman equate himself with the man who killed his mom, realizes he's turning into what he hates most, I get it. But immediately after sparing Superman he immediately goes and kills like 20 more people, and Superman doesn't care, even though their entire conflict started because Superman was trying to stop Batman from murdering people. They LITERALLY forgot all about their past conflicts and become friends because their moms are both named Martha.

At least in Civil War, the equivalent mother reveal serves to cause more conflict between Cap and Iron Man

I thought the Martha scene was clumsy too, but it only bothered me then and there, the rest of the movie was very nice overall, with some unfortunate scenes here and there. It's obviously not a GREAT movie or anything, I just have a hard time seeing how it's as bad as 27%. That's on the level of some really fucking ugly and bad movies.

What else was bad about it?

you're not missing anything. you just have some actual taste, unlike 99% of this board. good job, bub

I was waiting for it to get bad but really it's fine all the way through. It's "bad" in the sense that people would prefer a happier Superman we're everyone loves him.
I'd assume that's from people who don't read comics though.

Has to be bait.

BvS isn't bad for what it is, it's bad for what it so desperately wants it to be: a superhero movie transcending all other superhero movies, the logical conclusion to Nolan's nihilistic, the next step in the evolution of blockbuster cape kino. because it miserably fails at that. It's no masterpiece, it's not even a decent movie, it's an edgy autistic man child bashing two superhero figurines against each other while reciting his favorite entry level philosophy. Embarrassing movie, embarrassing fanbase.

I'm high as fuck so if this comes off as rambling forgive me (dude weed lmao)

The movie just really doesn't know how to handle its core ideas or themes, or how its characters should be portrayed. The movie is inconsistent in its backstory for Batman - he's simultaneously a 20 year veteran who's done battle with all of his greatest supervillains and lost a Robin, but the police treat him like an urban legend and Superman has never heard of Batman before even though he's a journalist and Metropolis and Gotham are virtually right next to each other. It's like Snyder wanted to adapt imagery and themes from the Dark Knight Returns (even though he doesn't understand what that story was about) but he also had to awkwardly try to insert Batman into this universe.

Lex Luthor's entire plan is to discredit God to the people or have him destroyed by its strongest man, but for all of his grandstanding his plan boils down to "build monster to kill Superman" because they needed a big CGI dinosaur to fight instead of making the climax that Batman v. Superman fight, in a movie called "Batman v. Superman"

Seriously, I WISH Batman v Superman was good. They're my two favorite characters in all of comics. But it's a shit movie made by a hack director that was further ruined by executives rushing to set up a shared universe with no creative oversight.

>He learns that Superman is fighting to save his mother, that makes Batman equate himself with the man who killed his mom, realizes he's turning into what he hates most, I get it. But immediately after sparing Superman he immediately goes and kills like 20 more people, and Superman doesn't care, even though their entire conflict started because Superman was trying to stop Batman from murdering people. They LITERALLY forgot all about their past conflicts and become friends because their moms are both named Martha.

Batman only changed with Superman's death. He was still very much an asshole right after learning about Superman's mom, and Superman teamed-up with Batman out of necessity.

>he's simultaneously a 20 year veteran who's done battle with all of his greatest supervillains and lost a Robin, but the police treat him like an urban legend
What's inconsistent about this? Batman fights in the shadows and is a hero without being seen as a hero by the public, in fact he works so much in the shadows that he still has the urban legend myth to him. That's exactly how they wanted him to be, it's not a mistake and it does make sense to the character of Batman.

>and Superman has never heard of Batman before even though he's a journalist and Metropolis and Gotham are virtually right next to each other.
Superman is new to his profession, he is also new to being a superhero. His whole life has been about finding himself in a very small town named smallville, of course he doesn't know about urban legends in gotham, at this time he is JUST getting to know metropolis. This makes sense too. In fact, even tho nothing about batman was news worthy (anymore at least), he as a jounralist picked up on the existance of Batman very quick into his career, which is great.

>Lex Luthor's entire plan is to discredit God to the people or have him destroyed by its strongest man, but for all of his grandstanding his plan boils down to "build monster to kill Superman" because they needed a big CGI dinosaur to fight instead of making the climax that Batman v. Superman fight, in a movie called "Batman v. Superman"
I kinda agree with this one. I never liked this, even tho I was entertained by the action followed.

What else do you think doesn't work with this movie?

>he as a jounralist picked up on the existance of Batman very quick into his career, which is great.
Oh, but I guess he had lexes help to that.

Fuck off brainlet

>Lex Luthor's entire plan is to discredit God to the people or have him destroyed by its strongest man, but for all of his grandstanding his plan boils down to "build monster to kill Superman"

Lex never believed Batman would be able to kill Superman. He wanted Superman to kill Batman.

I quite like the extended but the theatrical was shit it was horribly paced/edited, no character had 2 scenes in a row and they were generally short with no good transitions

Extended fixed all that and added heaps of superman scenes that should have been in the theatrical

>At least in Civil War, the equivalent mother reveal serves to cause more conflict between Cap and Iron Man
Is that why they end becoming best friends at the end of each movie?

It's much more believable that two guys who have been friends for nearly a decade would be willing to forgive each other than two strangers suddenly deciding they're friends because their moms are named Martha

He wanted Batman to kill Superman to prove man's superiority or for Superman to kill Batman to prove that God isn't all-powerful or all-good. Either way, he would have won.

>two guys who have been friends for nearly a decade
What?

Time passes slowly when you're watching shitty Marvel flicks.

>It's much more believable that two guys who have been friends for nearly a decade would be willing to forgive each other

Captain America and Iron Man are hardly friends. They hated each other in the first Avengers movies and by the end of it barely tolerated one another, and they fought against each other again in the Age of Ultron movie and by the end of it had barely made up.

That's why their friendship in Civil War felt flat to me. I just couldn't understand why Iron Man was so butthurt about Captain American siding with Bucky, his real and oldest friend, when he and Cap were at most comrades that tolerated one another.

>than two strangers suddenly deciding they're friends because their moms are named Martha

Superman and Batman weren't friends. They teamed up out of necessity. Batman only started to really respect Superman after his sacrifice. That's when his guilt over his actions hit full force.

>He wanted Batman to kill Superman to prove man's superiority

He really didn't.

You're right, for some reason I thought Avengers came out in 2008 when that's when Iron Man 1 did.

I'm a brainlet

The main issues i had with it was the pacing and editing, but after seeing it a few times more i can honesty say it was one of the best capeshits ive seen

>a superhero movie transcending all other superhero movies
It came close, a few minor changes and it would have

Go back to /r/movies

>BvS isn't bad for what it is
So what it IS isn't bad?
>it's bad for what it so desperately wants it to be
So what it wanted to be, but ISN'T, is bad?

In other words, it isn't a bad movie?

Err... yes i guess

CHECK FUCKING MATE, BvS needs an oscar now.

The story was shit. Noone's motivations made any sense except Superman's.
>Hurr durr but Luthor had his daddy complex and that perfectly explains why he thought it would make sense to create a human/kryptonian hybrid to kill Superman
Then, the whole payoff was shit. Batman stops fighting because Superman has a mother (as if that would change anything or be a big reveal). Then Superman dies but everybody already knows he comes back anyway so he just as well may have gone on vacation.

>Batman stops fighting because Superman has a mother (as if that would change anything or be a big reveal).

Dumb people will always complain about this.

>Alright, this dude has power beyond imagination and could be a threat to humanity
>I have to kill him so he never tries to conquer the planet!
>Oh he has a mother and she has the same name as mine. Better stop fighting then. Also he is my pal now and I have no problem with superheros that are just as powerful as him and turned their backs on humanity once already!
If Batman was supposed to be a complete maniac they captured that pretty well.

>Alright, this dude has power beyond imagination and could be a threat to humanity
>I have to kill him so he never tries to conquer the planet!

See, those were merely justifications. The real reason he wanted to die killing Superman is because he felt his life had amounted to nothing and all his sacrifices had been for naught. He hated himself for it and viewed Superman in the same light for the same reasons. He was pretty much trying to slay himself.

>Oh he has a mother and she has the same name as mine. Better stop fighting then. Also he is my pal now and I have no problem with superheros that are just as powerful as him and turned their backs on humanity once already!

It was not because of the name connection, but because of he got triggered and said trigger made him realize Superman was nothing like himself, Superman was a much better man. Batman started to see Superman the same way he saw his father while at the same time realizing he had become like Joe Chill.

>If Batman was supposed to be a complete maniac they captured that pretty well.

That was the point, yeah. Finally you're getting it.

and here i thought people "not getting bvs" was a meme

I never saw the original and enjoyed the movie when I finally saw it. I think it fell victim to its own hype. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't in tune with the eaaily enjoyed superheroes movies that have become the norm, and a lot of people probably found its symbolism and brooding tone to be pretentious.

Personally, I loved Eisenberg's performance and would love to see him play a villain again. However I also would have preferred a direct sequel to Man of Steel before trying to rush out a Justice League movie. Supes deserved his own shot at a trilogy, and Man of Steel laid a pretty strong foundation that BvS did away with.

Welcome, brother. Now sit back and let the medicine do its work.

>See, those were merely justifications. The real reason he wanted to die killing Superman is because he felt his life had amounted to nothing and all his sacrifices had been for naught. He hated himself for it and viewed Superman in the same light for the same reasons. He was pretty much trying to slay himself.

it's shocking to me that people didn't get this. people have become so fucking cinematically illiterate

The fucking movie isn't even subtle about Bruce viewing Superman as a projection of his worst traits, but in a much bigger scale, up to til the very last moment when he realize that Superman share more in common with his father Thomas, that he idolizes as a true hero. Thus he begins to slowly view Superman as a true hero as well. Specially after Superman sacrifice.

I agree with this post. Always when people are poiting out "flaws" in the story, it's shit like this that they have overseen. LOL

Pleb

Because literal Disney chills..

...

exactely this

It's a movie that women will never understand

Batman spares Superman because he doesn't want to become a cold blooded murderer. But he's still in crazy PTSD mode. He hasn't had time to reconsider his whole position on people and his actions as a vigilante. He just knows that he's wrong about Superman. And then he has a chance to save Martha from criminals who want to murder her.

After Superman's sacrifice, he believes that people are good again. Inherently good, possible of being better.

Their conflict is one thing, but Superman went to Gotham that night to ask for Batman's help. That's what he was there for. Not to stop Batman from anything. Lex had Martha and Superman needed Batman's help. That's what he was there for. So when Batman stops fighting and agrees to help, that's what matters to him.

And you can't really say they "forgot" everything. They didn't really have time to work out their differences. Batman realizes he's wrong, Superman trusts him to save his mother because he needs to, and then Superman dies.

It might very well be the greatest pleb filter of our times

It's a movie that knows what it wants to say about Batman and Superman but doesn't really know how to go about it. For Superman, I get that the guy is meant to be portrayed as this godlike figure who is feared and loved by humanity, I don't get that until the very end with Lex's rant about god and the super obvious allusions to christianity, like fuck, it's like snyder couldn't illustrate his point without pandering to the worst of pseudo intellectuals.

then for bats, he's just sort of all over the place as a character, his motives for killing superman feel very forced, his whole character flaw and arc of 'learning to have faith in humanity again' is very muddled and once again not something that's really evident until the third act, so on. So you have these two monoliths with these vague themes they're meant to represent along with a story almost solely driven by the absolute worst incarnation of lex luthor I've ever seen (and that retarded cripple and senator subplot), and it overall comes out to be a mess. this isn't even bringing up the fact that lois, wonder woman, albert, and many other characters are more set pieces than anything for a grand majority of the film, or the atrocity that is the actual fight, etc.

Someone else fucking understands me wtf maybe i dont kill myself yet.

They only seem vague because you're dumb as fuck. Batman arc couldn't be more straight, The same for Superman for an extent, but i can excuse his case because the theatrical release cut his scenes.

>I get that the guy is meant to be portrayed as this godlike figure who is feared and loved by humanity,
WRONG!

They are portraying the full implications of a Superman presence, including those that would worship and hate him as a God. That's why the film only portrays him as such a figure as a perception of those seeing him.

The point is that Superman isn't a god, just a man who looks god-like by virtue of what he can do. The imagery, both Christian and otherwise, is to indicate how many people are looking at him and starting to see a god instead of a hero.

These movies have a recurring motif concerning the perils of false gods, and it starts all the way back in Man of Steel's earliest scenes.

Yes, the Batman arc couldn't be more straight, but they only barely alluded to it until near the end of the film. Up until then Bats is researching Supes and dicking around with Albert and doing really nothing

That's nice, don't see how it proves the film executed that element well though

That's more or less what I said. The thing is that the Christianity imagery (which is done in so many fucking flicks and joints to show how 'deep' the writer's trying to be) feels so forced, the lex luthor speech sealed my hatred for what they were trying to do. I get what the film was trying to say, but it didn't bother really discussing it up until then, and did so by forcing it down the viewer's throat. for what it's worth I think MoS was a lot better at handling it

How does any of that ultimately matter?

>say something ignorant
>say why it's false
>that's nice
Can you tell me how much of your life you spend in BvS threads doing this tiresome bullshit act?

Perception of Superman. Perception of good. Perception of evil. Perception of God.

That's what the film is about. Superman becoming the vessel of our hopes and nightmares.

With any other movie, plagiarizing Renaissance art would be a sign of hackery.

Only here is it praised.

Not to mention that the whole issue with Superman in the movie is that he can't escape becoming a political figure. It's much more that than anything else. Every action he takes becomes a political nightmare. Even his inaction is turned into a political controversy.

That's also what Lex speech was all about. People confuse Lex use of mythology and theology simply thinking that he's angry at Superman for being godlike, when in truth Lex is trying to point out that Superman can't escape being turned into a political weapon, the reason for wish the tribe fight one another. Superman can't escape taking a side with every action. Even the act of saving Lois is a sign of how Superman is selfish and is taking his very OWN side. That's why Superman can't be all-good nor all-powerful. Because the moment he chooses to save someone in Metropolis, he's also deciding to let others die all over the world at that very moment. He's picking a side.

That's the thing Superman doesn't know how to deal. He doesn't know how to handle being a public and political figure. He doesn't know how to feel about people using him that way. The unintended consequences of his existence in that spectrum.

Like Lex say: power can't be innocent, by its very nature.

So it's not about just Superman being godlike or Christ-like. That's a very simplistic and dumbed down way to see things.

You didn't even know that art piece existed until we told you. Stop pretending you know art. Snyder does. He graduated in art studies. You don't know shit but to leak butthurt in every BvS thread with your gay act.

>HURF U DIDN NOES DA SYSTEN CHAPELS EXISTED TILL UR TOLD

wow

BvS is much more about politics than it is about anything else. Once you start to see the movie that way things become much more clearer.

>Superman becoming the vessel of our hopes and nightmares.

How is that functionally different than:

>godlike figure who is feared and loved by humanity

long story short: people where trained at the time that all comic book movies had to be like marvel movies. TDK trilogy had been out of theaters for a while and with 3+ marvel movies a year, peoples expectations where set.

Sorta how cartoons use to be prime time family sit down, sitcom heavily sponsored levels of shit in the 60's, 70's and early 80's (scooby doo, flintstones, jetsons, etc) and most people now only remember them as those things kids watch in the early mornings or on sat (which sat morning cartoons hasnt been a thing for almost 5 years).

conditioning does a lot of bad shit.
Mad max 1 gets a lot of shit because people are conditioned to see mad max = 2

Marvel gives critics tap water and critics compliment the fine taste

Snyder gives them the finest wines and they look at each other in disgust and criticize the year it was made in.

I mean to superman. How does any of that matter? Ultimately, what do the perceptions of the ants mean to him? Why bother with this half-assed exploration of what would amount to little more than white noise due to the sheer volume of different opinions/perceptions? Why focus on the people who would start flailing about about "HE AM GAWD!!"

Because you narrow it down to Godhood. His perception is more than just that. He's a political figure, a weapon to be tamed for national security, a savior, a destroyer, a gift of the heavens. The Superman perception reflects the world that perceives him.

The political interpretations of BvS say more about the people interpreting the movie that way than the movie.

I'm one who actually liked this movie, and loved MOS. But I must admit that Lex was done really bad. It's the writer's fault, why did they make Lex a clown? Fuck them.

It matter because it feels more geniune. It matters because it's how filmmakers sell us that these superheroes exist in a world that I can take seriously.

Did anyone in Marvel give two shits about Asguardians existing? Or aliens of any kind? No not really. That world exists without consequences or reactions. It exists only as a vehicle to the razor-thin plot that is there to drive up hype for the long-teased Thanos appearance.

One story is giving you a world, the other is giving a simple plot of A to B with nothing in-between and where B is really more of A and where you're expected to go watch the sequel for the actual B.

this is childish

One, I'M not narrowing it down to anything. I'm just someone who likes watching BvS threads because they're dumb.
Two, God, and religion in general, is just a vessel for hopes and fears.
Three, you're not really saying anything when you keep reiterating nouns that sound important. Every single character ever sees other characters as different things. Trying to pin down such an implicit and basic thing as some important theme for the movie, as though it somehow elevates it, is retarded.

People see Batman as a hero. A vigilante. A killer. A bored rich boy. A scared little boy.

It's an implicit thing in just about every story. The fact that BvS fans love to talk circles around hamfisted symbolism Snyder strings together in the clumsiest fashion possible is really a great sign that the movie is actually as bad as everyone says.

He's not a clown. What you're seeing is person on the verge of having a nervous breakdown upon realizing that he's an ant in an ocean of Gods. This is why his speech at the library is so awkward. He's trying really hard to sell himself as this super-person who does charity and is really smart but at the same time he can never shake the feeling that he is so little. He is so little compared to all that greatness in the universe he sees through the ship.

His hate towards Superman is his frustration of being sidelined so hard by a being so much more powerful and so much more good than himself. While Joker is driven on chaos, Lex is driven on ego.

>Why does it have 27% on Rotten Tomatoes?
The Mouse money and brainwashed normies

>Fuck them.

Why? Because not muh Lex? What's wrong with this Lex in isolation?

Superman in BvS is much more simply a figure of power than whatever bullshit you might think. The movie isn't about Superman playing Jesus Christ or acting as a stand-in for God. Sure, there's a bit of Christ figure in the movie, but that's mostly to address the fact that some people view him in a religious way. The real role of Superman in the movie is of a figure of great power and how humanity as a whole deal with power. Some grow greedy and want it for themselves, others fear it and want to destroy it, and a most just worship it in awe.

That's all that Superman represents in the film: a being of power. Superman whole arc is him dealing with this. It's like he had become a major celebrity/politician over night and everything he say or do now is blown out of proportion sparking constant sensationalist news and a few wars. Superman doesn't know how to deal with that. He just wants to keep helping people, but things aren't as simple anymore. That's also why you have his subplot with Lois where he's pretty much using her as a means to hide from the world because being with her is the only time he feels comfortable anymore and Lois is being conflicted about maybe their Clark over-reliance on her maybe being detrimental to his role as Superman.

If you don't believe me that the movie is mostly about the nature of power, check the ultimate edition trailer:

youtube.com/watch?v=8AO19XY2rqc

Damn good post. I agree that the film is largely about Superman's self-deception of what he is becoming in the eyes of others. He was raised a farmer boy in Kansas. He wants to save people and try to make the world a better place. But suddenly he has to come to terms with consequences far beyond his control, that he will be held accountable for. In many ways Lex is actively working to debunk Superman because he wants to render him powerless by using the dilemma of being Superman.

Being good is easy. Once you know what good is.

>hat's all that Superman represents in the film: a being of power.

No, that's wrong. It's about the coupling of superhuman capability with human frailty. It's a much more personal arc than how you describe it.

>I get what the film was trying to say, but it didn't bother really discussing it up until then, and did so by forcing it down the viewer's throat.

They'd been hinting at these things for two films. Pa Kent talked about it and so did Perry White. The world was never going to be ready for a Superman, but at least Clark could be allowed the time and space he needed to be grounded, mature, and "human" enough to reject the world's reaction.

Imagine a spectrum ranging from silly to serious. Batman '66 and the shumacher batmans being on the silly end, TDK and BB being near the serious end, and most marvel movies being near the middle, with a huge jump towards silly after disney started writing the scripts.

The goal behind the DCEU was to take whatever made the nolan trilogy successful and turn it into an endless franchise. But nolan dropped out, so they got a bargain bin replacement who'd just be happy for the work and willing to do literally anything hes told.

So the intent was to be near or beyond the nolanverse level of seriousness. But despite all their attempts at being thematically complex and realistic, the movies are ultimately just as silly as batman '66. Complete with mustache twirling villains lacking any self-awareness, characters with huge amounts of character development so as to establish motivations of "I H8 U SUPERMAN!" As it really doesn't matter how much structure is used to build up to "AH H8 U SUPERMAN!" its comic book level motivation.

Mouse money is largely to blame, plus Snyder is a Chad and beta reviewers hate that

What's funny about Not Much fags is they fail to realize there will always be Superman films and cartoons and comics coming out. With that in mind how could you ever punish a film director doing something interesting that isn't 100 percent like Muh Racially Ambiguous Bruce Timm Lex straight out the gate

Excellent post, fellow DChad.

>They'd been hinting at these things for two films. Pa Kent talked about it and so did Perry White. The world was never going to be ready for a Superman

I hope you kill yourself you phony

I really cant tell if you're being sarcastic. I cant tell if anyone actually isnt being sarcastic on here when talking about this movie.
I liked the movie but am fully aware it has problems. Like being too melodramatic at times and poorly explaining certian things. But it it was like 70% good.

You're missing the point, possibly because you have no counter argument, and attempting to deflect by whining about marvel.

If you're going to try to create a realistic spectrum of how people would react to the existence of godlike individuals operating under their own agency in a realistic world, why focus on the people falling to their knees and going "AYAYAYAEEE HEYZEUS CHRISTO!" Why strip the godlike entities of all agency in favor of having them mope about how people think they're biblical figures?

Would DCbros say this is the moment Superman learns "not to be perfect"? I think previously he was really hurt by the fact that his actions were being falsely portrayed as hurtful. He says he doesn't care what the media says but then you also see him visibly shook when the media keeps talking about what a reckless person he is.

Then he takes a meditative journey to the mountains where he can in calm and peace ponder on his life. Jonathan tells him that no matter what, you'll always do harm even if it's the last thing you want to do. Instead seek support in how those you love judge your actions. Let them guide you and support you.

Is that what you got from this? I do believe that after this, Superman comes back changed.

It has no cohesion. Just a bunch of scenes without a clear connection. The plot is trying to fit a trilogy's worth of story into one movie. Characters have inconsistent motivations. Superman goes from a villain to a martyr that everyone loved with zero arc. It thinks it's a smarter film then it actually is. The exploration of the hero myth and the deconstruction of the superhero is not new or interesting at all. The only way to be impressed by that concept is if you pretend you've never heard of it. Also, really stupid CGI-fest final battle, but that's every movie nowadays.

>Lex was done really bad
>Lex a clown
You do know that it's Lex's son Alexander Luthor, right?

>be superman
>care about rejection

The big problem with BvS and MoS is superman, by definition, is power fantasy. The movies failed to depower superman to a point where that fantasy could fall apart. The character itself is just extremely weak and prone to mopey bullshit for no good reason.

Marvel movies are feelgood movies basically. And I love them for it.
But I also want superhero movies that make me feel intrigued, like MOS did and BvS to some extent did. What I really want, more than any Marvel movie, is what DCU is giving us(but not all successfully imo). The theme is right, and the depth is much more satisfying than anything Marvel does. But I admit I would want them to do it a bit differently. Exactly how I can't really say. Better editing, some of the scenes are awkward, some of the lines too. I just think the style of Snyder is a bit off. The way he use CGI just looks wrong. The world, and its backgrounds look awfully fake and CGI-ish. The fight with doomsday was unnecessary, but it did entertain me. But again, it was too much of that same weird CGI. It's just too messy in some parts. MOS was extremely good imo, but I also had some issues with the final Zod fight, it had too much unnecessary effects. It feels like those two fights serves to squeese the last drop of the CGI budget more than to serve the story. I know that may not be the case, but it feels like it.

I already explained it to you but I was maybe too naive thinking a Marvel shiteater would comprehend the value of building believable worlds of consequences and reactions.

You do know that obscure comic book trivia has no bearing on the quality of a film, right?

All of this is factually false based on buzzwords meaning nothing. It is perfectly cohesive to anyone posessing IQ over 60. Maybe learn to self-criticize before criticizing?