A very mixed bag - some of it is disturbing. Not for children.

Rating: 6/10 (27 March 2016)

This is the very first time I have ever posted a movie review on any Internet forum. B v S impressed me deeply, mostly negatively, to the point that I am writing a review as a form of catharsis. First the big picture: I think it is no coincidence that this movie opened Easter weekend - Superman has always been the messiah figure, and in this movie he actually "dies" to save humanity. Snyder frames his "death" scene like a late medieval or Renaissance painting, with a shaft of light on Superman's body and cross-shaped ruins in a murky background. Martha and Lois are the grieving women at his funeral; it is only the last of several obvious religious references. And yet we are only given the tiniest hint of the Resurrection at the very last moment of the movie. It is as if Snyder thought he was just too cool to give us the kind of joyous payoff (humanity saved, Batman back to his principles, Superman triumphant) that would have redeemed the previous two and a half hours of unrelenting gloom. I guess optimism and happy endings are passé'...
This is a movie at war with itself - it clearly intends to give us a darker, more "adult" take on two pop culture icons, but in so doing it does violence to everything those icons have stood for for the better part of a century. Gone is Batman's "no guns, no killing" rule, along with Superman's buoyant optimism and moral certitude. Both of our "heroes" have few qualms about killing (the African warlord Superman drives through two walls at near supersonic speed surely didn't survive the impact). Plot holes abound - how is Luthor able to create Doomsday so easily? Why did people think Superman was responsible for the deaths of the African villagers when they had obviously been shot? Since when does Superman need to shoot anybody? Come to think of it, why is Superman blamed for the explosion at the Capitol? Would he plant a bomb if he wanted to kill people? And why does he just stand there looking sad after the explosion instead of rushing around to look for survivors who might need his help?
Bruce's visions open another Pandora's box of confusing hints: if his nightmare about Superman turning evil is just that, a nightmare, then why do we see Darkseid's Omega sign? If it is a premonition, on the other hand,then all of Bruce's paranoia about Superman is justified - but the Superman we see in the rest of the movie gives no indication that he might turn to the dark side, and we are supposed to think that Bruce's paranoia is unjustified or at least grossly out of proportion.
Like many comic book geeks, Snyder wants to have his cake and eat it, too. On the one hand he wants to make an IMPORTANT MOVIE that asks THE BIG QUESTIONS about the proper use and limits of power, while on the other he has an adolescent's infatuation with firepower, explosions and preposterous muscles. The Pa Kent speech is borderline nihilistic - is it meant to imply that heroism is futile? But then we are (I assume) supposed to admire Superman's self-sacrifice. Ma Kent's speech ("You don't owe them a thing") isn't much better - no wonder this Superman appears uncertain and conflicted. For all of his power, he comes across as a sad, ambivalent figure, psychologically brutalized by Luthor and physically brutalized by both Batman and Doomsday. Maybe he is supposed to represent our national ambivalence towards the use of power. In keeping with geek culture's current fascination with "darkandgritty", Batman is a more fully developed character, even though his brutality and sadism are off-putting.
Now for the good: there are some stunning visuals, and Wonder Woman is excellent, even though we don't see much of her until the end of the movie. Her physical grace and foreign accent mark her as a creature not quite of this world. Batman's physicality is truly frightening - this is a man who has earned his muscles the hard way and fights with brutal efficiency. His training montage featuring huge, rusty weights and giant truck tires (as opposed to martial arts and state of the art exercise equipment) is emblematic of his brute force approach, but once again we don't get to see much of the martial arts grace and skill that have historically been an integral part of his repertoire. His fight with the Russian thugs looks painfully realistic, except for when he gets shot in the head at point-blank range. Even with his armored cowl, the impact alone should have knocked him out.
In summary, B v S left me with a similar taste to the one I got from Daniel Craig's outings as 007: a beloved character which was also an aspirational figure has been turned into something sad and angsty, on which it is very hard to project our aspirations. Our world needs heroes to look up to, and Zack Snyder has failed to provide them.