Batman Superman ellen - Az igazság hajnala

A rajongók számára életük legjobb szexe, alkalmi nézők számára pedig nehézsúlyú és emészthetetlen. Nolan Batmanjének a valóságba történő elhelyezését Snyder szétterülő képregényes univerzuma váltotta fel. A szereplők sokasága és még több motivációjuk miatt nyugodtabb tempóra és még hosszabb játékidőre lenne szükség. Ennek ellenére hatalmas, magával ragadó élmény, Az acélember filmből ismerős zenével (nyoma sincs a Nolan-trilógiából ismert Batman-témáknak). Az utolsó harmadban a néző figyelmét igénylő igyekezet lankad, és elérkezik a stréber finálé. Szuper nyitó összekapcsolás Az acélember filmhez. Affleck rendben van. (2016.03.23)

Three-hour Ultimate Edition; definitely a grown-up comic. This film is just like Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises, it's similarly ambitious as an author, it's told on a grand epic scale, it wants to convey a lot, so the usual runtime isn't enough, it's just so sprawling that maybe it's detrimental to it and the average viewer won't appreciate it, which is a shame. Judging by the reviews, I was afraid of Eisenberg's overacted Lex Luthor, and unnecessarily so, I was also afraid Snyder would reveal his other self, again unnecessarily so (the 15 minutes or so of the fight with Doomsday were easily digestible), so my criticisms would be small, for example the reconciliation of Batman and Superman was too rushed, but otherwise it was fine and in the unedited ultimatum version everything made sense, everything fit together. The result was better (i.e. darker, more mature) than most of the overstuffed Marvel films for undemanding teenagers. And in retrospect I now appreciate the previous Man of Steel, though my complaints about the digital clutter remain. PS: A message to those who complain about the film being too dark: don't look at screen rips or low quality dvd-rips (1,5 GB and smaller), fools.... (2016.07.22)

A film so dark that you can’t see anything in most of the actions scenes, and to such extent that it looks as if the cinema was showing a low quality bootleg. The long expected duel between two of the most famous comic book characters unfortunately ends up in a rather uneventful scene (I counted only one interesting moment) where Batman and Superman beat the crap out of each other, only for their conflict to end with an incredibly cheap script cop-out so they can fight together some sort of big-eyed, digital extraterrestrial monkey, created in a weird way for weird reasons (the motivations of the lead villain, hello? Are you there?). Incidentally, you have to wait an ungodly long time for any action to happen, and when it finally happens, either you can’t see anything (as I’ve already said), or it is a confusing digital mess where lightning flashes around the aforementioned monkey, explosions are followed by explosions, and the experience equals zero. And on top of that, Lois Lane gives the right answer to a question form Batman she didn’t hear, or throws a spear into the water so she can dive for it later and almost die, without any dialogue that would reveal its importance or enough information to allow her to figure it out for herself. Disappointment. Probably the only positive thing in the end was Affleck as a grumpy Batman, I would love to see him in another film. PS: I gave Man of Steel 5*) (2016.03.23)

Reading all the nerd theories and analyses of how far Snyder's vision actually reaches is fine. It clarifies a lot and provides the opportunity to look forward to the DC version, but on the other hand, it indicates the fact that it doesn't give a damn about the average viewer because if you don't get on the geek bandwagon, those characters without proper motivations will eventually beat you to death in 2.5 hours. The digital finale is fine. But the futile relationship with the (foster) mothers? Not so much. PS: This is the most boring music from Zimmer in 15 years. PPS: In the Ultimate version, I especially appreciate Jena Malone's 20 seconds, which paradoxically adds a more meaningful dimension to Lois Lane. The rest of it is rather subtle directional cues for viewers to clarify motivations, but there is no epic sweep. It’s just a more sweeping comic book movie that wants to set a more mature tone with its Nolan-esque bleakness but gets too overwhelmed with unnecessary visual gluttony and is stripped of perspective. (2016.03.31)

What could Batman vs Superman possibly have offered? Most of all, a stupid story full of nonsense and nothing the viewer could grasp onto. Be ready for the fact that there is and there always will be just one Batman – Christian Bale. Also, Henry Cavill will never be a successful Superman no matter how hard he tries. I feel as if DC had already combined two very different worlds back then in the comic simply because they didn’t know what to do anymore. Personally, I think it doesn’t make sense at all and I pity all the people involved in the movie, because it’s a completely pointless comic-based piece that came out during a time when the whole world is already full of those and a mediocre one simply won’t do anymore. (2016.08.27)

Four days after the screening, all I remember of it is Amy Adams in the bathtub and that it was very colorful. Never again. (2016.03.28)

Except for the fact that for the first hour they talk with the attention and style as if someone ate the Bible and drank it down with horse sedatives, except that for almost two hours one tries to understand why those two hate each other so much that in a few seconds they began to love each other, except that almost all dynamic shifts are done by gossip and dream sequences, except that the motivation and actions of the characters follow the logic of the perverted screenwriting god of lobotomy, except that it (again) does not have full-fledged characters, but only square voices, except that Jesse Eisenberg plays a very low-cost version of Heath Ledger, except... what did I want? I don't know anymore. Actually, I do. Nice pictures for comic fanboys and excellent directing of contact events. I think. I have a dull feeling that Man of Steel pissed me off more than this Dawn of Randomness. If DC has chosen to make their films as a genetic conglomeration of highly comic stylization and very rhetorical references to serious topics, they are going to have to find a director who will be able to keep it all together. But it's not Snyder, especially when he is working with a screenplay that is more like a set of unrelated ideas for further elaboration. (2016.03.24)

Basically, everything that was true about the first movie applies perfectly this time as well, but it is more chaotic and noticeably less tight thanks to the number of characters and story lines that are only started but not developed properly. The main distinguishing features are contradiction that goes hand-to-hand with divisiveness, where every fifteen minutes of footage include five minutes of enthusiasm (some performances, storylines, specific scenes), for five minutes you look at your watch (the amount of ballast around the lengthy building of the fictional world, which is not properly used, there are unnatural story lines packed with troubles of Lois or a too complicated dull phase of Luthor's plan) and five minutes of desperate beating of the head on a seat (bloated pomp, dream sequences of Clark and Bruce, Eisenberg's childish play, confusing action culminating in a half-hour digital mess like "skyscrapers" are falling again dull finale scene, absent tension between the central duo and especially "Marta"). And the whole movie consists of ten consecutive 15 mins sequences. This is best illustrated by Affleck/Batman. The role of the weary aging Bruce fits him perfectly, but the script makes him a stale naive puppet in the game of smarter people. Like Batman, he is also excellent, but he is useless, because during the final settlement he just dodges the falling building while the super (men / women / mutants) are fighting. So, you have everything in one basket: good intentions and ideas, the realization of which is often not very smooth and sometimes becomes almost an unwanted self-parody. The Ultimate edition montage is then smoother, despite the length. You feel that everything is running more smoothly but nothing more. Yes, it's good for the first two hours, Clark and Bruce's motivations are more elaborate, Lois suddenly has something to do. It all represents Snyder's gloomy vision better. But what's the point of all this if the functional stress is ruined in the last third of the movie (which is still an hour of footage) during "we fight a monster in a CGI way" which is both silly and boring. And it does not fit into the atmosphere set by the first two thirds. Not at all. Which, this montage surprisingly makes even stronger. (2016.03.23)

SPOILER ALERT!! – This anticipated disaster is a blockbuster full of surprises. Zack Snyder skillfully twists what seemed like a nightmare during promotion, namely Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor and Doomsday as the final monster. The former, as a disturbing element of a jumping gnome in the trailers, is a captivating portrayal of a young man with great power consumed by his own ambitions. The latter, despite its visual similarity, functions as a multiple catharsis with an amazing soundtrack in the background of a suitably titanic (and sufficiently impactful) fight. However, what precedes this catharsis is a mishmash where confidence alternates with noticeable hesitation. The most notable aspect is referencing comic events that we have never seen in movies and will not see in the foreseeable future, regardless of how the whole building of the grand universe ended. Why mention the Joker and his deeds when we have never encountered him in this world? On the other hand, the criticized enticement to the Justice League led by Wonder Woman does not end up being an eyesore, even though this is where DC significantly stumbled over its own feet. Now, all it takes is for Gal Gadot to blink a few times, put on an all-knowing smile, and not only Bruce Wayne will be left speechless. Unfortunately, it is precisely The Dark Knight who remains in the background throughout the entire duration, which is the biggest failure given the space he is given. It's not that Ben Affleck is utterly hopeless, as melancholic pondering suits him. It's just that in direct confrontation with Henry Cavill, especially in emotional moments, he is outdone by his counterpart in almost every sentence, and it's a bit sad to see how he unexpectedly fails to deliver such intense scenes. On the other hand, Cavill dominates with every gesture in the role of a descending Messiah, and his bond with Lois Lane is the most magical thread of the entire film. After two and a half hours of proper chaos, I haven't absorbed everything. There is too much noise, insensitive throwing away of potentially gracious storylines, and I dislike how overdone Batman's behavior is considering the fragility of his motivation and its resolution. Nevertheless, this power struggle made sense, it could have paved the way for interesting creative efforts, but everything was overshadowed by the desire to step towards the Justice League. It was more than thoroughly enticing – and still, it didn't arouse any desire, let alone hunger, in me. (2016.03.31)

The film ended up being a little better than the trailers. Still, the plot was a bit too chaotic. I think they chose the actors well, but they kept it pretty tame with the Superman character. Batman was a little more fleshed out, but they could have pushed harder with him too. Or maybe they didn't push on purpose, so that one of them wouldn't be more sympathetic to the audience. Still, we've all got our favorite, haven't we. I have no major problem with Lex Luthor as he was introduced here, and I'm quite interested in his future development. I just hope they realize that if they want to make a Joker out of him, it's going to be rather awkward. Oh, and the music was really good. 3 stars. (2016.04.02)

Not as good as I hoped, not as bad as I feared. Excellently acting by the main heroic trio, awfully bad villains. A screenplay full of holes with illogical motivations. The action digital - as you would expect - but pretty good, even so. It should have been a little slower. The movie wants to say and show an awful lot of things. Not that today’s comic books aren’t overfull too. The intro with Affleck’s Wayne is awesome. (2016.03.23)

I though it was goo (opening for Wonder Woman). Over time, I watched a few reruns, saw the director's cut, and eventually got used to Snyder's concept. It's about watching all those movies starting with Man of Steel as a series. The films don’t make much sense on their own, and without knowing the comics they’re completely useless. (2016.03.29)

Given the incredibly mind-numbing screenwriting filler, I'm also tired of the screaming, visually climactic destruction that Snyder can do. He managed to pull it off in Man of Steel, because he had a solid story where he could afford to do it. It's just that this dark backdrop like in Watchmen with a story like Adventures of the Gummi Bears falls far short of bringing the viewer to satisfaction. There are lots of side characters that are unnecessarily overused and have no business being there, and reprehensibly underused characters that are interesting and you want to know a lot more about (Gal Gadot). The word total bummer then is the actual "sparking" of Batman and Superman, where you don't absorb their motivations for hostility, whereupon two minutes into the duel between the two worlds, they're best buddies guaranteed not to betray each other. The digital mess at the end just tops off the resulting headache. After this ride, you're not too thrilled when Snyder has a couple of skyscrapers demolished or nukes the place. Zimmer only added loops, otherwise it's basically the same soundtrack as Man of Steel, and Ben Affleck is a cool Batman who lacks a more realistic anchoring in a more tangible human world like in Nolan’s films. What he does improve on are the great personal fights, but Nolan never excelled at that, and that's common knowledge. ULTIMATE CUT is significantly better. The film is much broader, with a number of shots added, so the whole feels more whole, with a sense of detail. Definitely a different tone than the one set by the Marvel mashup. Darker, more epic, more fateful. A star up. (2016.03.25)

When I came back from the movie theatre, I wrote that this film probably has everything and I wouldn't be angry if there was even more. And there's even more in the extended version! And the movie is definitely great because of it! Ben Affleck thoroughly enjoys Batman, Wonder Woman is an amazon as she should be, Henry Cavill really looks like he's from another planet (but in a good way, of course), Jesse Eisenberg doesn't bother me, the action knows the measure, and thanks to Zack Snyder it all has a lot of great moments. For example, the scene in which Batman beats Superman with his fist, but who gradually regains his strength, made me want to clap with excitement.___P.S. Just those subtitles by Kateřina Hámová... I don't understand why the good woman keeps translating so strangely (for example, she says "devil" is not "devil", but "demon") and why she puts completely different words in the characters' mouths, many times perhaps in order to explain something that doesn't need to be explained. (2016.04.01)

A logical move for filmmakers yearning since the beginning of cinema for more spectacular forms of classic stories has always been to combine several legendary but originally separate thematic worlds of disparate characters into one plot cosmos. They’ve done it with vampires and werewolves, King Kong and Godzilla, alien and the predator, and now with the two biggest names in comics: Batman and Superman. So far, so good. The satisfaction persists with regard to the initial direct intertwining of the plot with Man of Steel, which makes sense, with the surprisingly smart political context, where the script, perhaps for the first time in the history of Marvel and DC films, addresses the adequacy and potential threat of an all-powerful alien man on Mother Earth, and with the cast, as Affleck, Eisenberg and, of course, Irons are more than solid in their roles. In spite of the long runtime, there is no time for boredom, thanks to the thematic multilayer, something is always happening and the action is satisfyingly extensive. The big disappointment for me, on the other hand, is the instigation of some of the twists, based quite incomprehensibly on mere personal visions or perhaps hallucinations, then the psychology, which is less than zero despite the many motivations of most of the characters, the dark and often poorly creative nature of the fight scenes, and finally the structure of the story, more or less anchored in the second half in safe levels of cliché and predictability. Perhaps the biggest weakness, however, was the exaggerated ambition and bombastic campaign, which simply made us expect more than just another basically ordinary and proven comic book flick. In the hands of the more pragmatic Nolan, this could have been the hit of the century. 65% (2016.05.03)

Batman v Superman is another in a series of comic book superhero movies that certainly doesn't have it easy in these days rich in films of this nature. As far as the technical workmanship is concerned, it's a workmanlike job and I personally didn't notice any blatantly dark or annoying visuals, which many other users have alluded to. But I have to say that compared to other films, this one does stumble behind. Unlike The Avengers, it lacks a humorous side, the slightly lighter approach and playful interaction between the characters , and compared to Christopher Nolan's trilogy, it lacks that more in-depth and thoughtful story and also better character portrayal. In short, a film that isn't outright bad, but unfortunately makes for a rather grey average amongst the competition; it doesn't offend but doesn't impress either. (2016.04.09)

[ultimate cut] I wrote a really great review of this that would change my life and yours; however, then I wanted to switch tabs on my browser and accidentally closed the one with the writing. So I'll just leave the first sentence here, "There was no winning this." (2016.07.12)

A beautiful example of how something magnificent can be turned into something completely ordinary. Batman and Superman are pitted against each other only to shake hands after a dumb scene, properly destroy Gotham and Metropolis, discover more superheroes, and fly into the next movie, even though it looks like only one of them will appear in it. But don't worry, it just looks that way. (2016.07.18)

Seen in 3D – cinema version. This oozes ambition right from the start. Music by Hans Zimmer, Christopher Nolan as executive producer, and a budget of a quarter of a billion. And lo and behold, it doesn't work. I wouldn't give Batman v Superman a Boo!, but in the context of the current boom in comic book adaptations, it's pretty damn weak. For one thing, I can't get my head around the script, which is utterly impotent ("Martha. Why did you say that name?" --- WHAT THE FUCK???). There are hints of Nolan's The Dark Knight Trilogy (the stylization of Gotham, the interweaving with politics), but Snyder, apparently in a state of psychopathic fear of future accusations that he's blatantly copied Nolan, chooses his own path again in the form of a digital orgy. Thus, in the space of 150 minutes, the motivations of the two superheroes are only very sporadically sketched out, whereas the best-drawn character is Lex Luthor, portrayed by the annoying Eisenberg (and I quite like Jesse otherwise). I purposely watched it in 3D to revel in the epic action scenes, but unfortunately I didn't get any. It's all so rushed, uncertain, and underdeveloped. It's the several years and especially the gradual building of the cinematic universe that really counts for something, because the viewer is better oriented overall and understands why a character does what he does. In the DCEU, they go about it exactly the opposite way and it feels like it too. Killed potential and, once again, after Man of Steel a very embarrassing result. A second disappointment. (2018.06.03)

You can only call Batman v Superman mediocre once you take into account its huge potential, which was more or less buried by unnecessary mistakes. Starting with Snyder's routine direction and ending with a rudimentary script without proper emotions, characters and twists, the film is a bore that naively understands darkness as more black on the screen. But rudimentary thinking is also connected with the two main characters. Instead of the chosen guardians of order, we get two little brats fighting over a toy in the sandbox. The only consolation is that Affleck's battered Batman at least looks far more natural during the dull beatings than if Bale was running around in the same costume. DC is floundering and it's only a matter of time before it puts itself out of the game for good. (2016.09.13)