Note: There may be minor spoilers throughout, but I will only limit them to what is absolutely necessary.
With all the hype surrounding this movie, and all the expectations that have been either fairly or unfairly put on it, I knew that there would be a lot of divisiveness no matter what the final product ended up being. Having gone on opening night, and taken a couple days to sit on it, I have now come to the full conclusion that I don't understand the hate that most critics are pouring out over this film. In fact, I think I really liked the movie, and am even considering going back to watch it again to catch some of the things that I missed the first time around. Not to say that the movie doesn't have its flaws, because it certainly does have some moments that could have been done better, or possibly left out entirely, but I could probably say the same thing of most movies in general.
First off, the performances by the main cast of characters was for the most part done really well. I know that people want to say Ben Affleck was terrible as Batman, but I honestly think the people that are saying that had already made that decision before the movie ever came out. For whatever reason, people just seem to want to crap on everything that Mr. Affleck does, and as I mentioned above about the movie in general, I don't understand it. I'm a pretty big fan of Ben, especially some of his more recent stuff like Gone Girl and Argo, and so to see people not even giving him a chance makes me wonder just what this guy has done to make so many people upset at him.
Henry Cavill does a good enough job with Superman, though I do somewhat agree that he maybe is a little too down trodden and lacks a bit of confidence that most versions of Superman have had in the past. But he takes it and makes it his own, and for the version that both he and the director Zack Snyder are trying to pull off, he nails the role on most occasions. One argument I may make is that he seems to be so worried about Lois (played by Amy Adams, also doing a serviceable job with the role) and not nearly as worried about everyone else. Superman is supposed to care equally for humanity, but that have really put a huge focus on his relationship with Lois and I think it takes a bit away from his character.
The two main characters aside, everyone else does what they need to do with the screen time they are given. As most critics have pointed out, and one of the few things I agree with them on, is the use of Wonder Woman. I would dare say that when she is fully introduced as Wonder Woman, and not just as Diana Prince, she may well be the highlight of the movie. She brings a certain passion and sense of true confidence that is lacking from Batman and Superman, which really makes her scenes feel that much bigger. I didn't have a lot of interest in her stand alone movie that comes out prior to the Justice League movie, but her role in this film has completely changed my mind.
And now for Lex Luthor. Jesse Eisenberg's performance has been absolutely lambasted by critics, and I can understand why they fell this way, but I once again don't fully agree with them. This version of Lex is way different than anything we have seen before, and for better or worse, Jesse really went all in for it. Was he a bit over the top? Sure. Was he completely crazy and no real explanation given for it? Once again, sure. Do I think he did a terrible job? No, I don't. I thought his performance was okay, I just think we needed more explanation as to why he was crazy, why he wanted to have Batman and Superman fight each other, and how he went about gathering all the information that he had on seemingly everyone in the movie. The focus wasn't as much on Lex as it was the other characters, so I just don't think we got enough background to fully understand the character, and so that is why the character didn't come off as good as we would have liked.
Just to address some of the other complaints I have heard, a common theme was that the story didn't make any sense. I must have been watching a different movie, because I thought everything was explained rather well, and for the most part made sense and fit. There were a couple things, especially the moment when Batman and Superman realize they are really on the same side (I will not elaborate due to spoilers, but it was a bit odd and too quick of a change, I think it should have been drawn out a bit more). I would also argue that the big moment in the big fight scene at the end (again, spoilers) was really unnecessary due to having two other people that could have done it that wouldn't have resulted in the same ending. And for everyone to know that the ending was really just a red herring due to the Justice League being on the horizon, just seems like maybe Zack was trying to do too much unnecessarily. But in the grand scheme of things, I feel that these complaints are minor, and just because we as the audience know what is happening, doesn't mean the characters need to know, so it was just a matter of perspective more than weak storytelling as I have heard it called.
The other big complaint I have heard is that Zack Snyder is just too interested in making big, beautiful set pieces than he is about telling a story. While that can be a bit true, I don't think this movie suffered because of it. I have generally liked his other movies, save maybe one (I'm looking at you Sucker Punch), but he always tells the story he wants to tell, and part of that storytelling comes from the visuals. He is a very visual director, and I think he can convey a lot in those big, flashy moments without having to maybe have the full dialogue that I guess other people are wanting to flesh out the story more. I thought there was a nice balance of his "trademark style" and the other means of conveying the story to the audience, without being too over the top or using too much slow-motion, which he has certainly done a bit excessively in the past.
I won't say that BvS was a perfect movie, because it certainly wasn't, but to say that is was a 4/10 (score on Metacritic) is just absolutely ridiculous to me. Solid performance of the cast, solid storyline, great visuals, several truly epic feeling moments that were really well done, all of these things just tell me that this was not a sub par movie so I don't know why the critics have just gone after it so viciously. I can only guess that a decision was made prior to even watching the film, and so they used that predetermined judgment to magnify all the little things that weren't done perfectly, and use that to say that the movie was terrible. The movie is not terrible, and if you go into without having already made that decision in your own mind, I think you will be in for a real treat.
My rating for the movie is 8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment