Intermittent fight sequences and cinematography cannot salvage Batman v Superman's sinking, disjointed narrative.

Rating: 6/10 (22 April 2016)

"Look at me! Here I am. Love me!" is Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice's cry to the masses. Masses that want to listen to its appeal, masses that want to see a film in which the two most iconic superheroes of all time go head to head in an epic showdown, but also masses that end up disappointed. There are a lot of good ideas floating around throughout the movie too, but director Zack Snyder can't translate those ideas into content that audiences actually enjoy.
The highly anticipated blockbuster couldn't come through for audiences because accomplishing the ideas, themes, and set-up for future DC Comics movies in a single movie longer than two and a half hours is plainly impossible. The Marvel Cinematic Universe would have needed -- and taken -- the span of five movies to do that. Those five movies are distinguishable within Batman v Superman, which would be fine, but those movies don't play well with each other. The connections between them are miniscule, and because they don't flow well from one to the next it ends up as a series of sporadic cuts from one "movie" to the next. There could be a Batman solo movie, Man of Steel 2, a movie about Superman's conflict with Lex Luthor, a movie that tries to set up the DC's Justice League (hence the Dawn of Justice), and the movie that actually corresponds with the title, the Batman versus Superman story. Individually, all of these movies have the potential to be something great, but because they are all jammed into one movie, they all turn disastrous, subtracting from each other. It would seem that with a ton of content, Snyder would be able to fill all two hours and thirty three minutes, but instead it shows beautifully shot and choreographed fight scenes that don't connect emotionally or logically, and are ultimately way too short after cutting to a muddled series of boring conversations.
Any emotional connections that do try to sew the movie together, however, fail in doing so. Kryptonite is the most blatant example, as several key events revolve around its power, but the problem is that Kryptonite is not intriguing, nor is it a good foundation. Regardless of its abilities to weaken Superman, writer David S. Goyer clearly could not find anything that made more sense or was more captivating. Fortunately, Henry Cavill (Immortals) is captivating as Superman, especially alongside Hans Zimmer's (Interstellar) intense score that flawlessly complements him. Superman's motives are intriguing, bringing up a series of philosophical questions about whether or not Superman should exist, and if Superman is justified, and Henry exudes that well on screen. His relationship with Lois Lane (Amy Adams, Enchanted) is beautiful, anytime she is swooped up from danger earning cheers. The problem is that all of this is only touched upon briefly and never expanded upon as it could have been and surely not to the point of emotional resonance. Instead, screen time is spent on Daily Planet editor Perry White (Laurence Fishburne, The Matrix) and his monotonous newsroom for some intangible reason.
Batman (Ben Affleck, Argo) and his butler, Alfred (Jeremy Irons, The Lion King) have the opposite problem. The writing for him is efficient, but the motives are unclear. The opening scene is a neo-noir style retelling of the Batman origin story with cool, precise storytelling, but as it was already seen in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins is also unnecessary. In addition, Bats doesn't have any reason to be fighting Superman (in other words, to be in the movie at all). Batman is a beloved character, and Affleck does bring something new to the table. At the same time, energy is poured into creating something out of a character whose baseline hasn't yet been set in the DC Cinematic Universe. Batman v Superman is too worried about its many other subplots to even develop Batman to the level his character deserves, and because nothing is there to build off of, no fruits can come from that wasted time.
In many cases, it was the erroneous Batman story for which Superman was tossed aside, sometimes even Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot, Fast and Furious 6) and Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg, Now You See Me) taking precedence over the Man of Steel. Seeing Bruce Wayne's face turn darker and darker as Superman destroys Metropolis is perfectly done, Ben Affleck proving himself as possibly one of the most preeminent "Bruce Wayne"s ever. But after those opening thirty Batman heavy minutes pass, Wonder Woman is useless to the story, and Eisenberg's portrayal of Lex as well as the movie on the whole lack intrigue.
In the end, Batman v Superman doesn't accomplish its goals. Superman's story is sidelined by Batman, who, though in the spotlight, gives long and confusing bouts of nothing? A terrible Alfred, especially compared to Michael Caine's take on the character? Random moving pictures on the screen? Snyder also has to set up his future Justice League movie, so he said, "No! Take out those useless moving pictures and put in different useless moving pictures of Wonder Woman!" There is nothing good to say about Jesse Eisenberg's take on Lex Luthor; the filmmakers utterly failed when it comes to him. He just sucks, and it is much easier instead to relax and think, "Wow, the movie isn't sucking right now" while cheering for Batman as he pounds in a thug's skull. Unfortunately, no matter how well-shot, eye-dazzling, or all-out jaw dropping the scenes Snyder creates are, they are in no way able to compensate for the drawn out mess that the rest of Batman v Superman has become.
F: Intermittent fight sequences and cinematography cannot salvage Batman v Superman's sinking, disjointed narrative