https://youtu.be/1GLqIh9jOf4?list=PLg8Gda_PKkdf0NaoX59KT1oiqoWFGbf37
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz2IcD28FHg&list=PLg8Gda_PKkdf0NaoX59KT1oiqoWFGbf37&index=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIMrnPzjiBQ&list=PLg8Gda_PKkdf0NaoX59KT1oiqoWFGbf37
I personally find TwinPerfect's analysis' of anything other than Silent Hill to be a little pretentious/inflammatory sometimes (hence why I didn't use the original titles...) but I really think this video series' needed to be made by someone. Batman Vs Superman isn't an underrated film, but it got lumped on way too hard by people criticizing it with expectations that the film never sought out to meet.
Original fans of the source material and the vast movie going audience obviously just want good, mostly light hearted superhero flicks, so Batman Vs Superman failed there, but putting that aside and I personally found the vision Zack Snyder had built for the DCEU to be quite compelling. At the very least, one must concede that Zack's vision was consistent and unique, and a commitment to that would have been far, far better than what we got with the Justice League.
Justice League was actually so bad that it made me rewatch Batman Vs Superman and develop this fondness for it, a yearning for what might have been if the already blunder-filled film franchise didn't encounter more and more blunders along the way.
Nope nope nope. I love long autopsies of different media as much as the next guy but I can't bring myself to watch an hour and half long analysis of BvS that's carrying the title "Why You're WRONG about this giant pile of shit of a movie that, even though it might have few minor small redeeming factors, is in the end still giant pile of shit".
First impression couldn't be more condescending even if they tried.
Instead of watching the horse-shit DC releases, I'd rather watch something actually worth my time.
Even something that's known to be hit and miss because of how obscure or unusual it is would be worth it, or something like 'the room' where it's 'so bad its good'.
You know, anything that has entertainment value.
Zack's vision was consistent and unique?
Ha ha ha.
No.
Luthor sent a pack of mercenaries out on a false flag mission, packing state of the art name brand Luthor Corp bullets only his men would be able to get their hands on. Luthor's first scheme in the movie hinged on Superman being able to immediately recognize that one of his loved ones was in trouble and pinpoint their exact location by the unique sounds of their heartbeats continents away, while his hostage plan running up to the climax hinged on Superman [i]not[/i] being able to do that. Batman is designed after the DKR Batman - full of anger over past failures and no longer caring as much about casualties - completely ignoring that DKR was supposed to be about Batman's swan song as it becomes clear that he will no longer be able to carry on the mantle even with all his willpower, instead of his premier into what was supposed to be an endlessly running franchise. Superman's heroic sacrifice has to intentionally forget that there is someone present at the scene who can keep up with Supes but is not vulnerable to Kryptonite to make any degree of sense. Lex Luthor's final scheme also depends on his previous assassination plot to fail, as otherwise he would have created a genocidal being he has no control of and just as powerful as Superman with no Superman to stalemate to the death with; Making it all a happenstance Rube Goldberg machine of a plot more fitting for Heath Ledger's Joker than the traditionally calculative and meticulous designs of Lex Luthor. Which is pretty appropriate, since BvS' Lex is so clearly a transparent attempt to make a Heath Ledger's Joker in all but name at the total and complete expense of the character they were supposed to have been adapting.
People didn't like the tone BvS went with, sure, I can buy that. But that is also a mere garnish on the side of the dish that is BvS being a complete mess, from top to bottom and from any conceivable angle.
No, it got deservedly shit on, rest assured.
I mean, I went into it after seeing all the bad reviews but still with an optimistic mind and I still got served a platter of diarrhea.
Snyder's vision was to look at the pretty pictures in the Dark Knight Returns, steal concepts wholesale, but didn't even read it.
Oh and threw in some fucking terrible dialogue, Lex... and a whole other bunch of trash.
Sums up pretty much what I think about BvS.
Pretty much destroys the most common criticisms heard on the internet if you care to take the time to watch it.
(And if you didn't watch it, don't bother replying, I will not repeat the video's arguments in text because you couldn't bother)
For all the shit BvS has gotten, this little video excursion does invalidate 90% of most points brought up.
Though it wasn't really easily accessible to the majority of viewership at large which is a fault of the movie.
What part the movies failed to get across and which part was just due to blindness of fanboyism,
I will leave that out for everyone themselves to decide.
Yes, a 90 minute video series that insults the viewer right in the title completely redeems one of the worst movies of 2016 and anyone who disagrees is just a blind fanboy who inexplicably doesn't want to spend 90 minutes hearing what will most likely turn out to be the same dogshit defenses every DC fanboy and their mother put up 2 years ago.
Boy, you're sure showing everyone how wrong they are!
Man within the first 3 minutes of a 25 minute video which is only part 1/3, the guy has said so many stupid things that I feel like I'm losing brain cells just by listening to it. His response to the criticism of batman's nonchalance for killing people is basically "no he's killed people before, look at how he killed harvey dent as he was holding a child hostage or liam neeson by letting him die in the train crash". Are you serious? There's a little bit of a difference in killing the main villain (sometimes a bit indirectly) in the climax of a film rather than just casually gunning people down from the driver's seat of your car.
Can we collectively get over the 'clickbait title, must be bad' shit, it is honestly just a part of Youtube now, infact most who haven't watched it yet might consider BvS bad just by virtue of the undeserved shit it's gotten.
Also, you can absolutely put aside the good arguments these 90 minutes make, just don't expect of me to take you serious on that "on of the worst movies of 2016", it wasn't, there are some Marvel movies that are honestly worse then BvS.
The amount of criticism to deconstruct just doesn't fit into a nice 15 minute time-frame, not saying everone has to like it or the film has no flaws, god no
Just that many elements like the goddamn Martha-Meme is an insult to the actual substance the film dives in.
Imply or accuse me of fanboyism, fine with me, just spare me that you don't intend to engage on an actual argument and I am somehow at fault.
I'd love to hear some examples lmao
Um, no. When you're trying to make a point, an argument, try to change a group's point of view, starting off by going 'you're wrong' is tripping straight out of the gate and faceplanting on the ground. It's like deciding you want to seduce that lady over at the bar and starting by telling her she should let you fuck her.
Likewise, don't expect anyone to take you seriously when you bring out the bullshit 'well, people think bvs is shit because other people have told them it is' argument. The Martha scene got deservedly mocked, it hasn't got a shred of the deeper meaning try to ascribe to it.
Ironman 2, Thor: Dark whatever
Not saying these were shit just not as good as BvS but you are free to disagree.
Part 2 at 14:14, go watch.
Honestly don't see the point, your attitude is already clearly displaying you won't budge an inch on your opinion and my goal is not to convince you or anyone here.
Not here to riff on Marvel movies either and at the end of the day taste is also partially subjective.
If you have an open mind you recognize BvS is not as bad as people make it out to be.
It has a lot more substance and finesse then people give it credit for.
If you choose to get hung up just on the title, fine, not my problem.
Thor 1 and 2 were boring and looked ugly but at the very least they didn't fucking break their own characters beyond being redeemable.
BvS is a shitty cashgrab attempt at capitalizing on the success of a competing franchise that's built on an already flimsy and poorly received foundation which very predictably went crumbling within the second film. Any and all qualities this film has is not enough to outweigh the fact it comes off as an inherently broken and unlikable mess.
I'm not sure I want to see through this much video content just to prove that a commonly reviled movie is actually good but I bet most of it is going to be either weak ass "but that's the point though" retorts to common criticism or an onslaught of the pretense that because a movie ascribes to some kind of metaphor, it is automatically good.
Says the guy who not so subtly hinted that people don't like BvS because fanboys or because they're sheep. No, screw that, you don't get to take the high road here, buck-o.
I did go in with an open mind. It was as bad as people made it out to be. It doesn't have any of the substance or finesse people give it credit for.
Okay so I humored you and holy fuck the guy actually misses the whole point of the criticism. His trash use of strawman fallacies aside, he straight up assumes the reason people complain about the Martha scene is because of a really menial semantic aspect whereas people hated that scene because it's fucking dumb and the fact an entire movie's resolution revolves around these two characters coming to agreeable terms on a basic anecdote is ridiculously sloppy and awful writing.
Then he just goes on a tangent that only came from his own faulty perception of the issue to begin with and has absolutely zero relevance.
It's almost an hour and a half long of condescension towards anyone who doesn't agree with him, can you really fault people for not being too into it?
Anyway, I'll address what I watched, which so far is the bit about Batman killing people. First off, "Batman doesn't kill people, period" is one argument, not the only reason why someone would hate the movie for the extent it takes his violence to. Case in point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO1ydIZNaNY
A general feature of the Batman mythology is that Batman doesn't kill. Now, this isn't a core rule, and in many adaptations of the character, Batman either kills directly, and with intent, or simply indirectly, through inaction or leaving people in fatal circumstances. Taken as a whole, Batman has been many different things at different times... which is fine. It simply means that Batman, in any given adaptation, needs to be approached as he exists within that adaptation, before that adaptation can be approached as it exists within the context of the broader mythology.
Yes, Batman has killed people, even as recently as the Nolan movies, which cemented the no-kill rule in popular perception. Yet to every kill, there's a caveat. Ras willingly got himself on that speeding, out of control train, while in the Two-face scenario, the rule being broken is the entire point.
There's room to argue in Nolan's work that simply isn't there in BvS. Batman murders thugs left and right with knowledge, intent, and no hesitation whatsoever. While it's not a crime to make an adaptation that throws the no-kill rule out of the window entirely, the comic BvS takes inspiration from has it as a big thematic influence, that helps set the tone for who Batman used to be, and how broken he is at the point where we meet him. But there's no base point to escalate from in the movie, there's no increase in his brutality. We're left to assume Batman has always been a violent maniac, because Snyder left out pieces that were necessary to turn his recklessness into a compelling part of the character's evolution.
The OP video argues that BvS is putting the characters' ideals to the test, which would be a fine point to make, were their ideals properly established in the first place. Snyder fails to communicate them, though, and it's doubtful, given his portfolio and the interviews he's done surrounding this movie, that the glorified murderfests were actually clever critiques of violence rather than, well, glorified murderfests. That the OP video then tries to strengthen his point by leaning on comics and previously established material, rather than what's actually in BvS, is pretty indicative of the movie's failure to communicate with the audience.
That's about as deep as I'm going. This video is trash
TwinPerfect are pretty pretentious but they're no mindless fanboys, at least not when it comes to movies. Their videos on Man of Steel and Batman Vs Superman are less about promoting how great they are (like their inflammatory titles would suggest) and more about dismantling common misconceptions about the movie, while being informative along the way. It's why these videos are broken up into what amounts of strawmanning the entire internet.
The videos wont be for everyone but I sure learned some pretty interesting stuff about the DC characters, as well as the original intent for a lot of Snyders vision. I wouldn't let the title put you off. Just as a side note, if anyone hasn't heard of TwinPerfect and likes Silent Hill at all, these guys are most known for The Real Silent Hill Experience, a pretty informative watch if you're a fan.
Snyder's consistent and unique vision, in a nutshell:
https://i.imgur.com/isINRmG.png
I'm glad Civil War came out because BvS was so fucking awful that I didn't want to watch another super hero movie
Just out of curiosity, do you think it was an inherently bad idea to explore the Batman character from his aged and jaded state to begin with, even if the movie had managed to sufficiently set a precedence for his brokenness? Because while I don't personally believe the Batman character needs an escalation to brutality in order to explore the aged Batman angle, I do agree the movie didn't really do a lot to establish a backstory for Batman.
I actually kind of like the idea of setting a story where Batman is at the end of his career to begin with, already broken and brutal. It would have been interesting to see how that panned out over the term of a cinematic universe, I think, over what we got with the Justice League.
The source material which BvS very evidently takes inspiration from, The Dark Knight Returns, manages to cement that Batman, even after being a broken, half drunk, old mess, still holds up to his no-kill rule until the very end, and only breaks it once. Despite never showing a majority of this specific Batman's life, it manages to establish exactly why he is so jaded besides obviously just being old, and part of that is also parroted in BvS but to a considerably worse effect.
I'm specifically talking about how Joker, in both continuities, murdered Jason Todd early enough in Bruce's career that it is at the point of the films a distant memory, and a bitter one at that. In TDKR, it's revealed that the death of Jason was so traumatic that he had essentially spent decades pondering on whether breaking his rule by murdering Joker would be a good option, and it takes him just as long to actually find an answer to that question.
Now take this and compare it to BvS' execution of the same concept, complete with Batman moping over Robin's vandalized and everything. It loses most of its weight because rather than use the distant death of this character as the source of the protagonist's anguish, it just kind of drops it in and immediately contradicts anything it may stand for by showing Batman relentlessly and effortlessly kill people. It also does not help that the same continuity of films introduced and showed Joker in what was meant to be his prime and people hated it so much from the very beginning they immediately tried to spin it some other way to justify how genuinely awful it was.
BvS just parrots existing ideas with none of the weight and none of the execution.
Yeah by escalation I mean, establishing that one happened over the years, not necessarily show it on screen. The Miller Batman is cynical and jaded for a reason; he's old, tired, and frustrated with Gotham's tendency to self-destruct. Whether you want to convey that reason by telling the audience outright, or by simply implying it, is up to the filmmaker, but Snyder did a really poor job IMO.
Very first thing you say is that it destroys the most common criticisms heard
What is the point of even saying that if not to try and convince people of its merit?
There's a reason why people started making jokes about Uncle Ben telling Peter Parker to "Kill them All", because that's basically how utterly fucked things are on the DC side of things. No character acts like they should, their motivations are insane, and things are made darker for the sake of being dark. Man of Steel is stupid because it turned the unshakable Pa Kent into a fucking asshole.
You know. The character that is meant to ground Clark as he grows up, to turn him into the unshakable Superman?
who doesnt want to see that?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.