Batman V Superman: One Fan’s Path to Acceptance

Author’s Note: I want you to see this film for yourself. So I’ve done my best to avoid spoilers though some are unavoidable. Proceed with caution.

Three years we waited. At the first unveiling of the Batman/Superman logo in 2013 fans cheered at the anticipation of two of the most famous and influential superheroes sharing space on the big screen. The roar from the audience filled the room at the exact moment when the Bat symbol layered underneath the “symbol of hope.” Finally, the Man of Steel and Dark Knight together. The only problem, it wasn’t the Dark Knight we’d all grown to be so attached. So with endless hype and of course, many, many Batfleck memes, the excitement and apprehension started to flood the Internet. The question remained, would this film be the movie the fans deserved? Would Ben Affleck forever be left in the legendary wake of Christian Bale’s realistic portrayal of Batman/Bruce Wayne in the beloved Nolan trilogy?

Well the move is officially out, as is the verdict. I refused to believe that one actor would single-handedly ruin this movie, and in this instance, I believe I have been proven correct. In fact, the performances are the most redeeming qualities about the film; performances against the odds. There are so many aspects to film making outside of the performers. The elements that really influence the success/failure of a film are the writing and choices made. These are the two essentials that stained the Batman V Superman film (not to say this film was a complete failure).

Bias

So here is one fan’s honest answer to these questions along with a full analysis of the overall film. However, everyone has biases and I’ll be frank, I have many. The most prominent is my attachment to the Nolan Trilogy. The Dark Knight Rises (TDKR) was featured in my Master’s thesis as a result of its revolutionary inspired aesthetic and themes. I spent hours with that film, watching and re-watching over and over, spending hours transcribing, discussing, and defending. You’d think I’d despise the film after all the time spent with it, but I only grew to love the film more, including its characters. I’m often asked how I fit Batman into a MA thesis of History and the answer is simple; its Batman, he fits into everything. Batman has forever been my everything when it comes to superheroes, another admitted glaring bias.

For those who don’t know, I’m also from Massachusetts. That’s right I “pahk” my loyalty behind our hometown actors, in this case Affleck, but not without good reason. After seeing Argo and some other films from later in his career, all was forgiven (and by all I mean Daredevil). He had stretched not only his acting limits but had also done some impressive work behind the camera. He will also forever be a part of the Kevin Smith clique, and as we all know, Kevin Smith is usually on point with his superhero analysis. I, like Smith, had hope for Ben. So with Benny behind the wheel of the most famous “cah” on the planet, I went into this film open to a new interpretation of Batman and Bruce Wayne while others went in armed and ready to tear Affleck’s performance apart.

However, there was one key thing I needed to find before truly going in with an open mind and heart, acceptance. Do I wish it were Bale on screen? Yes, of course! But guess what, he refused the opportunity. So it was time to separate my attachment and appreciation of the Nolan Trilogy, including Bale, from what I was about to see. I also had to throw my trust into the production since Nolan and Zimmer (music bias alert) were both still a part of this new chapter of Batman’s on screen legacy.

Batman: A Win for Ben

Now what you really want to know, what did I think? Well I think there is a reason I’m opening this review and focusing almost solely on Affleck. A lot of the criticism even before the film was released was rooted in the casting choice of Affleck. From the second I saw the first image of Affleck “brooding” in the new suit next to the new Batmobile, I had even more hope than ever before. It was as if Snyder had taken the Batman right out of Frank Miller’s comic and brought him to life.

  

Bale was actually once criticized by Nolan for being “too big” in Batman Begins at one point, and was forced to become leaner, agile, more practical. In thinking back to our other beloved Batmans, Keaton, Kilmer, and Clooney (not so beloved), we are reminded that none of these guys are “massive” by any means. Fans had not seen a live action broad Bruce Wayne/Batman. Yet Snyder extracted this very imagery creating not only a Milleresque Batman/Wayne but also an image that is also reminiscent of the acclaimed Animated Series. The choice for a broader Batman was novel for film. Henry Cavill (Superman/Kent) even admitted that Ben’s commitment to Bruce’s physique made Cavill step-up his own game. That kind of commitment can’t go unacknowledged. Ben threw himself into this role physically. His chief critics can't even deny that.

However, looks aren’t everything, and Kevin Smith’s defense of Batfleck proved true:

"The hardest thing to nail about Batman is Bruce Wayne, because that’s where you’ve got no mask and you’ve got to be a human being. But that dude is Bruce Wayne, so he’s born to play that role."

Miller’s interpretation of Bruce Wayne at this stage is an aging, heated, tortured, borderline anti-hero. This is the large and angry phase of Bruce/Batman, and Affleck nails it. One Easter Egg (shown in the trailer) is when Bruce stares despairingly at the graffiti-ridden Robin suit while in the Bat Cave; undoubtedly the suit of Jason Todd (here’s hoping). This is the one storyline Batfans have been asking to see in live action for years. The loss of Jason to the Joker defines Bruce in the latter part of his career. This is the Bruce that starts playing chicken with his own rules, the Bruce who is irate and possibly even more vengeful than when he first initiated “The Batman.” This is the Bruce that turns to the bottle, the Bruce that is even more flawed than ever before. Affleck captures this torment and anger perfectly. He’s been criticized for being “sad” or “brooding” in this film, yet, this is a misinterpretation. Make no mistake, he is one pissed of Bat, a theme I anticipate will be further explored in the coming films. When I read “The Dark Night Returns,” “Death in the Family,” and “Hush” the attitude I felt from Bruce/Batman is exactly the same that I felt from Ben’s performance. I believe Affleck did his homework, and my interpretation of Batman at this stage in his life aligns with Ben’s performance.

Snyder got one thing right when it comes to Batman, his emphasize on aesthetic. At numerous points in the film there are scenes staged as if right out of the comics. For example, the scene with Martha Wayne’s pearls and the gun that kills her, that imagery is straight out of the comics. These scenes are the nod to the comic book fans. This is the part of the film that fans deserved. But there is one glaring choice for the character of Batman that went terribly awry.

Batman: A Loss for Synder

I think I speak for all Batfans when I say WHAT IS WITH ALL OF THE GUNS ZACK!? I’m putting this on Snyder because he owned this project. Whether this was his choice or not it was his responsibility to put an end to it. One of my favorite moments in the TDKR is when Catwoman returns to save Batman from Talia al Ghul and Bane, and she acutely points out “About the whole no guns thing…I’m not sure I feel as strongly about it as you do.”

It’s a nod to who Batman is. The shooting of Bruce’s parents is what started this whole saga. It’s a nod not only to the foundation of the story, but to who Bruce is. This element of the story was masterfully explored by Nolan in both Batman Begins and TDKR. Snyder has gone the exact opposite way on this one.

Was Snyder trying to define himself against Nolan? Was this an example of how far Bruce has strayed from himself? Is this a physical manifestation of Bruce’s anger? Regardless, this choice has Batfans justifiably screaming. So although Selina Kyle may not have had a problem with the unnecessarily high volume of gunfire at the hand of the Bat in this film, the rest of us absolutely do. This is possibly the biggest catastrophe of Batman V Superman.

My emphasis on Batman could just be my bias showing, but in my opinion it is through the character of Bruce/Batman that we see the greatest success and failure of this film. But how about this Batfan takes a look at aspects outside of her favorite caped crusader.

Other Misses: Story, CGI, and Luthor

The overreliance on dream sequences is an artistic choice that, in part, resulted in a terribly muddled story. While Marvel took the time to have independent films for each of the main heros and then with calculated intent brought them together for Avengers, Warner Brothers has made the fatal decision to prioritize keeping pace with the success of the Marvel franchise over building a comprehensive story and developing our beloved DC characters. I guess one could say in this case Snyder was setup for failure. Trying to cram in three characters’ storylines with only one prequel (Man of Steel) while establishing the foundation for the inevitable Justice League films is in short, impractical. Despite an admirable performance by Gal Gadot, the audience barely gets to know her before she ends up suited up ready for an overly CGI’d battle. Ah yes the over use of CGI. Massive explosions and destruction left and right (if you like that), but Doomsday was more loud an obnoxious than terrifying. As a monster he was genericized an impersonal. Why? Too much CGI. If you’ve read the comic you know the significance of Doomsday, and to the audience, it was just another computerized, and therefore impersonal, alien/monster.

If the film had stayed focused on Superman’s story in terms of the relationship with Lois (one of the more touching aspects of the film), the U.S. Government’s philosophical debate of governance surrounding Superman’s powers/intervention, and the kind of hero Clark wanted to be, it could have been a focused and stimulating follow-up to Man of Steel. Yet when recreating the death of Thomas and Martha Wayne within a dream sequence at the beginning of the film, paired with explaining why Bruce is so peeved with Superman, while also sporadically exploring Diana’s origins is just too much to cram into an already too lengthy film.

Which ushers in the next part of the story that I personally had a hard time swallowing, Lex Luthor. Amidst all the other “cramming” we are introduced to who is supposed to be one of the most brilliant and evil masterminds of all time. Instead, we are presented with Eisenburg. Not to say this portrayal wasn’t interesting, I dare say I think Eisenburg would have a made a superb Riddler or even the Clock King, but Lex Luthor he is not. Luthor has a certain finesse, explosive yes, but there is always a calculated calm before the storm with Luthor. Eisenbug’s Luthor is troubled, twitchy and frankly bothersome. It appears that Eisenburg maybe tried to do for Luthor what Ledger did for the Joker; in short this was a risk that did not pay off. Though this is the only performance in the film I severely struggled with.

Other Wins: Performances & Score

Cavill again makes an amiable Superman. Not quite Bale-level awe from the newer interpretation of Superman, but he is the newer face of the hero and his clean cut yet slightly besieged psyche plays out just fine. What is undeniable is the chemistry between Cavill and Adams. Lois and Clark are one of the great romance stories of early comics. Amy Adams, who didn’t completely have me won over in Man of Steel, stole my heart in Batman V Superman. Both a cut throat reporter, and at times heroine, while Adams was on screen she really stole the show solidifying her role in the franchise. Lois was not only helping Clark navigate through the tough political waters in Metropolis, she was really taking an active role in helping Clark become the hero he wanted to be while literally taking physical action when needed. Their bond was powerful, real, and engaging.

The unsung hero of the film is Jeremy Irons. All he was missing was the pencil mustache to be my perfect Alfred. He was hands on in the Bat Cave and served in a role akin to Oracle, which seemed to fit nicely. One of the only practical points of the film. On more than one occasion Irons executed some perfectly timed sarcastic provocations, targeted of course at Bruce, for some much needed comic relief.

As mentioned Gal will own the role of Wonder Women once her character is given the room to develop. If nothing else, her fight scenes were on par. One of the highlights of the film is when she is introduced in full armor amidst yet another flawlessly crafted Zimmer score with tribal drums and electric guitar. Her theme is solidified, as is her role.

Again we rely on aesthetics for why I would watch this movie again. These heroes are mythic, deeply-seeded in the American consciousness (and beyond). This movie is large an unapologetic in being so. When Batman is off to rescue a certain someone, one of the best hand-to-hand combat scenes in the film is at play. Affleck admits to studying Connor McGregor’s fight style with the intent of incorporating into Bruce/Batman and this scene is where his studies materialize.

The one thing this film unquestionably did successfully was bring our favorite heroes together to the Silver Screen in an epic way. Seeing Batman and Superman fighting side-by-side, and of course at times each other, did give me goosebumps (again no doubt an emotional reaction to another perfectly timed Zimmer score). If I were ten years old again, I’d see them as untouchable Gods, just because of who they are. So perhaps this film rested too much the laurels of it’s characters. But lets give credit where credit is due, despite some dangerously cheesy lines and cluttered storylines, these performances stayed afloat upon a sinking ship.

Final Thoughts

If you hated Batman V Superman, I suggest you place the blame on three parties:

1. The Studio
2. The Director
3. The Writers

In short, leave Batfleck out of it.

The film was good for what it was; a time sensitive studio-driven project intended to compete with another franchise and therefore overlooked character development and pertinent story details.

The film’s saving grace? Good performances and chemistry, quality hand-to-hand combat scenes, and an attention to comic book-inspired aesthetics. Story snafus, length, and a miss on a few key character points can only be blamed on the money hungry studio who didn’t take the time needed to do this right. Though I am confident of what is to come from the rising dirt off a certain casket, I am unsure of what is to come of the franchise. What I do know is the franchise has moved on from the practicality of Nolan’s interpretation with the sole purpose of obtaining what else but more dollars. So let us take this film for what it is.

If you are OK with seeing an action-packed film that includes some of your favorite super heroes that look awesome, consider this a good movie. If you haven’t accepted that Nolan’s Triology has concluded, you will struggle with this film. The writing between Nolan’s film and Snyder’s film couldn’t be any more paradoxical and there is no “practical” or “real” factor to the Snyder film despite Nolan’s production influence (which is either non-existent or minimal).

So while you’re tearing the film apart, really thank the actors and comic book aesthetics for making this a watchable movie, because lets be honest, the eleven year old inside of us is still excited that these three heroes stood side-by-side, larger than life, on the Silver Screen for the first time. Think again about watching this movie within the innocent perspective of our younger selves, before we became cynical and overly opinionated and lets be brutally honest, snobbish. If we were to watch it purely from this innocent state of awe, than we’d likely watch it again, tying red and black capes around our necks as we battle it out on the playground, as it should be.