im going to preface this post by saying i didn't read the comics like that and only saw the animated version of this previously.
this was a solid movie. is it perfect? probably not. and comic book readers may even be more critical of it. but this is absolutely not the trash film the "professional critics" made it out to be. i saw this in FULL IMAX this morning and i walked away thinking it was great and felt the reviews once again can really be misleading.
its a long film at 2.5 hours but it has to be. if its shorter, it doesn't do the story justice and would feel rushed. in my eyes WB has to play some type of catch up and compete with Marvel, so this movie had a lot to do. with marvel, they introduced characters and overall universe story with mad films...iron man 1-3, captain americas, etc...they've been doing that for some years now. DC wants to go straight to their superhero conglomerate in the justice league in 1 -2 years so there is little time to establish characters.
so thats where batman vs superman comes in. and i think it did a solid job. it would make no sense to do a full batman intro movie because WB gave us the dark knight trilogy...not the same universe, but the intro to batman backstory we needed, and the studio wasn't about to feed america that story again, especially after nolan killed it, just so it fits in this justice league universe.
also i think there can be too many superhero movies. marvel is putting out sometimes 3 movies in a year and if DC jumps in, thats gonna be a lot of comic book movies to move, not to mention other big time movies...it just seems like too much for studios and moviegoers to process in a given period. i could be wrong about that.
story wise, i thought it was well paced and coherent generally. i got a few questions, but overall i was cool wit it. it moved slow in the beginning but it had to establish its footing and i expect a movie of this size to do that. better to start of slow then be rushed and all over the place, and even then to some degree, some things may feel rushed.
for example wonder woman, wasn't well developed in this movie. but thats ok. i think they kind of are working backwards with the wonder woman movie coming out after the fact, but whatever, i think this is due to the catch up WB is doing and wanted people to get some interest in other characters early on. they got it from me for wonder woman, gal gadot is bad AF and was AWESOME as WW. same goes for the other members of the JL
Han lost. gal > any of those tokyo drift broads...
im undecided on eisenberg as lex. i don't think it was bad. i can't decide yet lol. i was expecting a more suave less looney depiction but maybe im expecting something inaccurate. idk.
jeremy irons was refreshing as alfred. i haven't seen dude in a movie in a long time, and he really fit that character well, albeit not that big of a role. affleck also did a solid job of batman.
i think the problem is sometimes we can't see some people be on screen the hero we read, and sometimes that is true. i think after nolan, its hard to live up some of those characters, and i think Jared Leto will have the same scrutiny as he is playing a role, Ledger won the oscar for.
but affleck did a solid job and could ask more from what i saw.
so this was def worth every penny, and im glad it wasn't 3D. and i will be seeing this again (with the gf this time) and maybe ill be able to pick up some stuff i missed before.
thats my review lol. one BIG question tho.
was that the flash in wayne's dream? cuz that **** ain't make sense. i know the flash can travel thru time (flashpoint paradox) but how could wayne dream that if he never met the flash in the first place?