We Need to Talk About Batman v Superman

***MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD!!! THEY'RE MINOR BUT STILL***

So, I finally got around to heading to the movie theater to check out Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and umm....yeah, we need to talk about that.

The movie wasn't that bad, but it also wasn't that good. It looked fantastic. Zack Snyder knows how to create truly legendary looking moments in a way that pulls directly from comic book aesthetic. The problem is that as much as Snyder looks to the artform visually, he doesn't show that much respect for the stories structurally. Most of the actors were perfectly fine in their roles (except Jesse Eisenberg, who I'm convinced thought he was playing the Riddler), doing their very best with this Bernie Sanders hairdo of a script. Amazingly enough, Ben Affleck, who everyone was so worried about, was an awesome Batman. The issue wasn't really the cast, it was the fact that the creative team doesn't really understand the characters they're working with. In fact, I can see how Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman has been lauded by critics since she was the one character that Snyder fucked up the absolute least.  

A lot of the fanboys are on the whole "Batman doesn't kill" thing which we have to accept is bullshit and has always been bullshit in the context of Batman films. My issue is Batman and guns. To Batman...at least since the silver age, guns have always been a symbol of the crime that plagues his city and the thing that took his parents. In many ways, it's borders on a post traumatic experience for him. Dream or not, the visual of him gunning down flunkies is a little weird. Other than that, Affleck pulls off the duality of Bruce and Batman. Bruce Wayne is a damaged old man whose childhood night terrors conjure the Batman, an vengeful armored man-golem who drops down on superstitious villains like the Righteous Hand of God.

The plotline that worries me the most is this "People are scared of Superman" premise. If you're writing a story about how people are scared of Superman, you don't really understand the point of Superman. We're talking about a character who, despite being an alien, is the absolute pinnacle of human goodness. He's a beacon of hope. Hell, "hope" is literally written in a big red symbol on his chest. Superman inspires people to be their better selves. He loves humanity, sees the best in us even when we don't see it ourselves. The guy they have Henry Cavill playing has sad eyes all the time, is almost resentful of humanity (probably because his mother reinforces the antithesis of his father's idea that he owes his gifts to the world..."You don't owe this world a thing"....what the fuck kind of thing is that to say to a superhero?). The fucked up thing is that even with Snyder's Superman being tattooed with all these blantant misnomers and misunderstandings of the character, he still has to fight Batman for a plotline and some decent character development to call his own. In that regard, this movie is quite true to its title. Having said that, it's pretty obvious that Snyder is setting Batman up to be the leader of the impending Justice League which is also bullshit. Why the FUCK would a guy who commonly hides in the shadows, only comes out at night and employs fear and deception as his weapons want to lead what is almost certain to be the most visible, flashy group of peacekeepers their world will ever know?

I mean...what happened to this guy?

And I haven't even gotten to the ENDLESS plotholes left gaping wide by Snyder's compulsive need to have his characters positioned perfectly to play out the pretty scene he wants to see like a six year old setting up action figures in a playset just to bang them together and scream "BOOM" repeatedly. I think that's what I resent most about this movie: It reinforces the idea that just because they come from comics, all these sort of movies have to be is loud and obnoxious with heroes that aren't particularly heroic like Transformers. But in all likelihood, that's going to be this franchise's bread and butter if Dawn of Justice is the measuring stick.

The Week In Geek 1/6/16

This Week In Star Wars (in case you're not sick of me talking about Star Wars yet)....I was scrolling through io9 and I saw yet another article listing all of the "minor" issues with The Force Awakens which, no offense to io9 in particular, has gotten goddamned annoying. The most annoying thing is that, since Force Awakens has been so well received and is well on its way to beating Avatar in worldwide sales (meaning there's nothing to justify an article on what sucks about it), every article you read has to preface it with, "Don't get me wrong...we like this movie, but..." in the same way racists start racist comments with, "Look, I don't want to sound racist, but..." Because outside of Star Wars, the week or so after New Year's is slow news in geekdom and the usual suspects need some shit to talk about.

In this very same week, JJ Abrams was on a podcast where he gave a very reasonable explanation for the naysayer who whine about the movie being a remake of A New Hope. First of all, he shouldn't have and, quite frankly, didn't have to do that if you ask me (I'm going to say that if you're reading my blog in the first place, that counts as you asking me). For one thing, there's the inevitability that if you keep feeling the need to justify your work, you'll say something stupid that will eventually end up as comedic fodder like when Max Landis said he wanted to make American Alien the opposite of AllStar Superman (I'm assuming by "the opposite", he meant "bad" because that's what's happened so far) or when Zack Snyderclaimed to have saved Watchmen from Terry Gilliam or whatever. Furthermore, we all know that, no matter what they say, directors and writers totally listen to the fans. Even the trolls. We know this, but it just looks bad when said creators actually respond because, ultimately, NEVER have these statements ever shut fanboys up no matter how thought out they are. Never. Zack Snyder has responded to Man of Steel criticisms for ages now and yet MoS is STILL the most divisive movie every in the genre. It doesn't even work in politics. Donald Trump could get on the stump tomorrow and claim that Jeb! Bush is a holocaust denier and Jeb! could say something logical and reasonable like, "I'm not responding to nonsensical, unfounded allegations. Let's talk about the issues." Despite this being a completely mature, rational way to respond to a Presidential candidate whose entire political strategy is based around lying and flinging gargoyle shit at the other candidates, odds are good that we would still ridicule him and call him "low energy" or whatever else Trump has convinced him he is. It's not that we want to believe something Donald Trump says. We don't. We know that, in all likelihood, it isn't true. But the fact that Bush is so visibly wounded, you can tell it affects him. Even when he's not directly addressing it, he's addressing it and, ultimately, dignifying the comments. Put simply, JJ Abrams, at this juncture, should just not be dignifying these things that are only being discussed just because the nerd blogosphere needs some shit to talk about. Also, I'm not a director/producer worth millions of dollars or anything, but if MY movie were holding solid at 94% on Rotten Tomatoes, io9 and anyone else who has anything to say about it could go fuck themselves no matter how well intentioned their "think piece" is. But that's just me, so....

My comic review for the week on Invincible Iron Man is up and available on Black Nerd Problems for your viewing pleasure. Outside of that, I may get a little inconsistent with the blog reviews since I just moved a PS4 into my house and will be playing unhealthy amounts of Destiny for both self-care and research purposes. Yes, I heard what I just said. Yes, I know it sounds ridiculous. Yes, I still mean it. That is all.