Batman v Superman: Dawn of Criticism

A review of the film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Criticism

Well, it has finally arrived. The most hyped movie of the past decade, excluding The Force Awakens, has hit theaters. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Not exactly the most nuanced title is it? As a lover of both comic books and movies, I felt as if I had something of an obligation to not only see this film but also share my opinion of it with the world. So, after over a year of build-up, does Batman v Superman live up to all the hype manufactured by Warner Brothers and its many sponsors? Or does this film deserve to be burned in effigy alongside the likes of Green Lantern and Batman and Robin?

            Before I get into the thick of it, I should mention I saw Batman v Superman in an IMAX theater and I would highly recommend anyone who has not yet seen the film should do the same. I am also writing this review without having read or watched any reviews by other, more qualified, analysts. My ultimate goal here is to discuss my personal feelings about the film and discuss specific aspects I either enjoyed or disliked. And while I plan to do my best to avoid major spoilers, in order to give this film justice (pun intended), I will have to discuss certain, specific plot details that might influence a first time viewer’s expectations going into the theater. Consider yourself warned.

            Let’s get the bad news out of the way first. What did I not like about the movie? The flaw that stands out most in my mind is the characterization of Lex Luthor. To better understand my beef with this movie’s Lex, allow me to offer a brief lesson on the history of comic books. Superman debuted as the first true superhero in 1938, beginning what is now known as the Golden Age of comics. Heroes born during this time period spent their time either participating in World War II or dispatching street level criminals. As World War II came to a close, so did the American public’s desire to see their comic book heroes decimate the Nazis on the battle field or foil the plans of a Japanese spy ring. These changes, coupled with public outcry over the supposed effects comic book violence might have on the minds of American youths, lead to dramatic changes in the industry.

Thus, the Silver Age of comics began. From the mid-1950s to the early 1970s, staples of the comics industry, such as Superman and Batman, experienced significant changes in the style of their stories. Today, comic fans look back and laugh at some of the campy, ridiculous plotlines that came out of this time, including stories where Batman was turned into a crime-fighting toddler and Superman destroyed an entire solar system with a single sneeze.

Lex Luthor’s first true origin story was told during this era of silliness. Lex was depicted as an egomaniacal mad scientist who hated Superman because, as a child, Superman accidentally knocked chemicals onto his head, making him permanently bald. Yeah.

As time progressed and readers’ tastes changed once again, Lex began to evolve into something much more terrifying than a mad-scientist: a business executive. As the CEO of LexCorp, Luthor traded in his green and purple jumpsuit for a black Armani. Shady business deals took the place of death rays and gravity guns. The new Lex, while still an egotistical genius was more level headed and manipulative, usually opting to send others to fight his battles for him. Seen as a successful business man in the public eye, this Luthor even briefly served as the President of the United States. His reverse-Rogaine origin story was completely scrapped. Luthor’s baldness was now organic, as was his hatred for Superman. Luthor now saw Superman not as a childhood rival, but as a threat to his and mankind’s way of life. In Luthor’s mind, a being that powerful could easily wipe out all of human existence. But more than that, Superman challenged Luthor’s own self-image. Despite his status as a self-made billionaire, his unrivaled intellect, and all of his hard-won achievements, Lex would always appear inferior next to Superman. This complex, interesting version of Lex Luthor is the character I, and most modern comic fans, have gravitated towards.

This was not the version of Lex Luthor presented in Batman v Superman.

            While I can not knock Jesse Eisenberg’s performance, his Lex Luthor is almost entirely unlikeable. It’s as if the writers of Batman v Superman were trying to combine the mad scientist and the business man, but ended up going overboard on the madness. His motivations for wanting to eliminate Superman are all but lost in the midst of his manic soliloquies about God vs man and “the greatest lie ever told”. This Lex belongs in a mental hospital, not the board room of one of the world’s wealthiest companies. His interactions with other characters are awkward at their best and cringe-inducing at their worst. Why does anyone encourage this border-line psychotic to run his father’s business while simultaneously plotting the death of Superman? The lengths Lex goes to in his attempts to portray Superman as a villain are further proof that the man belongs in a padded cell, not a board room.

            Lex Luthor’s flaws as a character might have been forgivable if a solid plan had been born from his insane machinations. Luthor’s main goal in the film is to push Batman and Superman into conflict so that Batman will do what Lex is unable to do: kill Superman. While the film did its best to justify an all-out fist fight between Batman and Superman, I couldn’t help but find myself thinking, “If they had just sat down and talked about their problems over a cup of coffee, that whole mess could have been avoided.” The two main characters of this film meet in person only twice before they resort to violence: once when Clark Kent briefly interviews Bruce Wayne at a party and once when Superman wrecks the Batmobile and warns Batman to end his one man crusade against crime. Batman’s whole motivation for stopping Superman is his fear that Superman is too powerful to be left unchecked. If he were to turn to the dark side, Superman could conceivably conquer the world and cause the deaths of countless people. Luthor plays on Batman’s fears by tricking him into believing Superman has already begun using his powers for evil. Superman, on the other hand, sees Batman as a menace who takes the law into his own hands by brutalizing criminals. As an audience member, it is easy to see that both characters are more complicated than they first appear. While they may have ideological differences neither Batman nor Superman would ever deliberately harm an innocent in their quests for justice. One conversation was all it would have taken for Batman and Superman to realize they have more in common than they first realized. In fact, one commonality is all it takes for Batman to see the error of his ways near the end of the film. If either of these men had been a little less macho and had tried to work things out in a non-violent manner, maybe they would have figured out that Lex Luthor was up to no good a little sooner.

            Perhaps the biggest, overarching flaw of Batman v Superman, however, is not with its characters or the conflicts between them but rather with the story as a whole. In simple terms, the creators of BvS bit off more than they could chew when they sought to accomplish all of the following in the span of two and a half hours: explore the aftermath of Man of Steel and Superman’s struggle to be accepted by the people he has sworn to protect; develop a story that organically introduces this universe’s versions of Batman and Lex Luthor; establish an ideological conflict between Batman and Superman that culminates into a physical confrontation; and find time to shoehorn in the likes of Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Cyborg, and the Flash (all characters that deserve and will eventually receive their own stand-alone movies). It is apparent that with the development of BvS, Warner Brothers hoped to accomplish in one movie what the Marvel Cinematic Universe has accomplished over the course of six. But what Marvel Studios understood with the release of Iron Man in 2008 is that a quality cinematic universe needs to be built from the bottom up, not the top down. Imagine if the Avengers had been the first movie produced by Marvel Studios. Fans would have spent most of the movie asking, “Why should I care about these characters when I know almost nothing about them?” In Batman v Superman, all we know about Batman is that his parents were murdered in front of him when he was a child and he has spent the last twenty years using his money and skills to fight crime in Gotham with the help of his butler Alfred. Without any more background information, viewers are left to wonder how the average citizen of Gotham feels about their city’s masked vigilante, why Batman feels the need to brand his enemies, why he moved out of Wayne Manor before letting it fall into disrepair, and why he keeps that Robin costume on display in the Bat Cave. It takes time to flesh out an entire world and an entire cast of characters. Splitting Batman v Superman into two or more full length films may have been the answer to develop a more concentrated, satisfying story.

            Aside from these major, overarching issues, there were several smaller problems with the film that I feel the need to also discuss. The first of these problems concerns the Big Blue Boy Scout himself. People who enjoyed Man of Steel will be happy to know that Henry Cavill’s Superman has about the same personality in Batman v Superman. I am not one of those people. Superman in both of these films is a morose, reluctant savior who doesn’t seem to find any enjoyment in saving lives. You would think someone so dedicated to giving hope to the people of Earth would manage to crack a smile every now and then.

            Another character who managed to carry over their personality from Man of Steel is Amy Adams’ Lois Lane. While I enjoyed Lois’s willingness to chase the truth at any cost and stand up for the man she loves, Lois’s character, much like Lex Luthor, also seems to have been inspired by her Silver Age counterpart. In Superman comics from the Silver Age, Lois Lane was almost always in some sort of mortal danger at the hands of some unsavory villain of the week and the responsibility to save her always fell on Superman. In some storylines, Lois managed to cut out the middle man and deliberately placed herself in harm’s way just so Superman would show up to sweep her off her feet. In Batman v Superman, Superman had to save Lois’s life from situations she put herself in on three separate occasions. The worst of these three instances takes place about two-thirds into the movie when Lois directly approaches one of Luthor’s henchmen in a public location and essentially lets him take her to the top of a skyscraper to meet his boss. And wouldn’t you know it; Superman has to rush in at the last second to save her life. Maybe this Pulitzer Prize winning journalist should value her life a little more and be a little smarter about choosing her battles. Even though I understand her desire to help, Lois only seemed to make things worse in this film.

            This being a comic book movie and I being a comic book nerd, my review of this film would be remiss if I didn’t air my grievances with this film’s loyalty to the source material. This film draws its inspiration from such storylines as The Dark Knight Returns, 2011’s Justice League Volume 1: Origins, and Superman: Doomsday, all landmark works in the field of graphic storytelling. These stories were written by different authors at different times with no real connection to each other. Any one of these stories could have been adapted into a great film on their own, but trying to mash them together into one film was never going to result in anything satisfactory. While I liked the fact that many of the film’s scenes and character designs were ripped straight from the comics, I found other designs to be disappointing when compared to their original comic book versions (e.g. Doomsday).

            And of course, any review of Batman v Superman would be remiss unless a few things were said about the ending. Without spoiling too much, the ending of this film made me roll my eyes. I emotionally disengaged the moment I saw where this film was heading: towards a cliffhanger that should have surprised no one. Instead of delivering a satisfying resolution that paves the way for the upcoming Justice League movie, this film only manages a weak, unsatisfying ending that failed to excite me for the next film in the franchise.

            Now, I imagine by now those of you reading this have already predicted what my final assessment of the film will be. It must be patently obvious that I despised Batman v Superman and would strongly urge moviegoers to avoid this film like the plague. But here’s the thing: I didn’t hate it. I actually kind of liked it. Despite BvS’s many problems, I couldn’t help but enjoy myself. Visually the film was terrific with exciting (albeit brief) action sequences and solid camera work. I also appreciated the comics-accurate costumes and weaponry for Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. And while this film could have done a better job at exploring the philosophical implications of Superman’s existence, I was glad to see that the film makers did attempt to show the variety of different reactions people might have to the appearance of such a polarizing figure.     

             Although Batman v Superman was intended to be a continuation of Superman’s story, my favorite part of the film had to be the Dark Knight himself. Now, I should admit to some bias going forward: I am a huge Batman fan. He is by far my favorite superhero and The Dark Knight is one of my favorite films of all time. That being said, I have very strong opinions about what a good Batman should look like and what a good Batman story should feature. Batman needs to be serious and intimidating, able to strike fear into the hearts of criminals. He needs to have unwavering confidence in himself and his mission, the kind of man who can stare down an indestructible God without flinching. He needs to be the smartest man in the room, always prepared with a plan (and a backup plan) to overcome seemingly impossible odds. When a portrayal of Batman deviates too far from established characteristics such as these, the results can be uninspiring at best and unwatchable at worst (e.g. Batman and Robin).

While there was initially a great deal of fan outcry over the casting of Ben Affleck as the caped crusader, I did my best to withhold judgement until I saw the man in action. And Affleck more than met my expectations when I finally saw him don the cape and cowl. The Batman of Batman v Superman is a Batman that movie audiences have never seen before. This is a Batman who has been waging his one man war against crime for twenty years, and the toll those years have had on the man is apparent. I imagine some viewers may take issue with this Batman torturing and causing the deaths of criminals. But I would remind those viewers that we have already seen a Batman that kills (in Tim Burton’s films) and a Batman that tortures (in Christopher Nolan’s films). Batman’s methods are not as important as his underlying character.            At the beginning of Batman v Superman we see Bruce Wayne, not Batman, charging into danger to try and save lives as the sky scrapers of Metropolis collapse all around him. This is the first sign to let the audience know that this mortal man, despite his violent tendencies, is a hero at heart. As the film progresses, we also see that this is a man on the brink of instability; a Batman who has allowed himself to sink deeper into the darkness than any previous version of the character ever has. Living a double life, bringing the worst of humanity to justice, and losing his closest ally (the owner of the Robin costume) has left Batman cold and unforgiving. This is why he is so quick to assume the worst in Superman. But in the midst of their final conflict, when Superman reminds Bruce why he became Batman in the first place, Bruce sees how his anger and guilt have clouded his judgment and almost pushed him into a decision he would have regretted for the rest of his life. I hope to see more of this ruthless, troubled Batman in a stand-alone movie sometime soon.

Another character who debuted in Batman v Superman who is also set to receive stand-alone movie is Wonder Woman. Gal Gadot also managed to exceed expectations in her portrayal of the third member of the DC Comics Trinity. In the little time she was on screen, Diana Prince managed to steal the show from her male counterparts by outwitting Batman during their first meeting and outshining Superman during the film’s climax. With a mysterious past, a strong personality, and a comics-accurate costume and weapons, Wonder Woman’s future on film is looking bright.

So, does Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice live to all of its hype? No. Is it an unforgivable dumpster fire of a film? No. Despite its many problems, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was fun to watch. But with such a rich archive of compelling stories and a cast of characters that have endured for over seventy five years, I honestly expected more from the first film in the DC Comics cinematic universe. An overcrowded plot, an over the top Lex Luthor, and a strained central conflict took away from what could have been a great film. Had the film makers spent more time developing a good story instead of trying to kick start a franchise, I believe Batman v Superman could have been much better. Even with all this in mind, I was still able to enjoy the film’s visuals and get my hopes up for the upcoming Batman and Wonder Woman solo movies. Here’s hoping DC learns from the mistakes of Batman v Superman as they move forward with their plans for The Justice League.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice: 6.5 out of 10