The (K)Night is Darkest just before the Dawn

Rating: 10/10 (28 April 2017)

It is said that the darkest hour of the night comes just before the dawn. And as Harvey Dent promised you, the dawn was coming. It's here. In other words, It's time to really go and watch this film. No one is criticising it anymore. Because no need for that right now. The ones who intentionally downplayed it, well, they've served their purpose and were pretty good at it. Others are actually misguided or just misunderstood the darker tone as the film overindulging in the morbid atmosphere of "Man of Steel", (and since it's a BATMAN MOVIE!), when in fact it was paving a path for the more humorous Justice League. And in between you get the upcoming epic: Wonder Woman. History was just in the making but in a way we weren't familiar with.
As populist effigies go, the aloof, out-of-touch critic who who dismisses popular entertainment in favour of high-minded so-called "art" that only they understand (or care about) is pretty evergreen – mostly because, like any good myth, it has one foot in reality. The business of entertainment reporting and cultural-criticism are such that critics are required to experience hundreds of films (or books, or games, or whatever other discipline) throughout the year, and thus grow more quickly tired of clichés and more sensitive to technical flaws. Plus, sometimes critics really do get it wrong. It took the "establishment" film press around 3-4 sequels to notice that the Fast & Furious franchise was delivering on diversity and (nominally) progressive post-traditional family-dynamics like few other mainstream films had dared, but global audiences had been rewarding it for that all along. Conversely, the perceived "elitism" of critics makes it easy for some to imagine them as powerful enough (or thinking themselves so) to use their platform to advance a nefarious agenda rather than critique from objectivity (whatever that means anymore(. That's the premise of Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead (which Zack Snyder himself is angling to adapt into a new feature film) where the villain is an architecture critic who uses his influence to ruin the careers of artists in order to advance his own political/cultural worldview, and also of Ratatouille, where Anton Ego takes malevolent pride in destroying Gasteau in part because he objected to the chef's populist "Anyone can cook!" message.
There are more than just a handful of brilliantly realised moments, the acting is mostly strong despite the weak script (Affleck, Gadot, Cavill and Adams were superb but Affleck unexpectedly was the best!), and there's enough mythic raw material sunk deep in every scene that you can piece together a classic in your mind if you're feeling charitable; But Jesse Eisenberg's Luthor. . .
Eisenberg's performance as the villainous Lex Luthor (Check: he was playing Lex Luthor right?) was, you know, not what I'd encourage, he literally JOKER-ed the SUPER out of the Villain! While it wasn't the worst but it did manage to break the film down a little. But was it really his performance that ruined the movie altogether before it even came out?
Look: I get where he was coming from in his approach to his character. After all, he's playing a super-crazy villain with super- crazy mental problems. But every stutter, every tick felt very calculated and clichéd, as if he'd crafted his performance after taking a class in Super-villains 101. Ultimately, though, this one may be on director Zack Snyder. A more nuanced actor's director, like, say, Darren Aronofsky, might have saved the movie by asking Eisenberg to take it down a notch. Letting him run wild just didn't work.
Now, why would you Rip-off of Heath Ledger's Joker? Or if not, why wouldn't you notice the damn fact that you're unintentionally Ripping a Clown off?
Perhaps it was because Dawn of Justice is at least half a Batman movie, perhaps it was because The Dark Knight was just really freaking' good. Whatever the case, it was hard to watch Eisenberg's performance and not think back to Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker in Christopher Nolan's modern-day superhero classic. Eisenberg's speech patterns and mannerisms felt almost entirely lifted from Ledger's iconic performance, to the point where he walked the dangerous grey line between respectful homage and downright thievery. We understand why Eisenberg might have wanted to go that route; after all, Ledger won an Oscar for his performance, and set the bar extremely high for all super-villains to come. Still, the whole thing felt too familiar. In any other movie Eisenberg would've gotten a decent share of praise for his performance but this wasn't any other movie. It was the biggest film DC ever made. It's a Batman movie. It's a Superman movie. It's the best film we've been lucky enough to witness first hand.
While it still deserved it's fair share of praise. Especially due to Ben Affleck's 'badass' portrayal of Bruce Wayne. Batman ruled.
Comic books are, first and foremost, a visual medium. Such importance placed on making a good-looking project should translate over to films that adapt these stories for the big screen. While the phrase "style over substance" holds a lot of merit, it should not impede efforts by filmmakers to translate images to the big screen in a way that resonates with audiences. Zack Snyder was trying to create a visceral experience that would not be forgotten, and he did accomplish this. Love it or hate it. AND the DVD fleshes out subplots and adds the much needed restoration of the cuts and character beats and yes, the additional scenes. Not only did the new cut feature additional footage, it also changed the rating of the movie to an "R" from "PG- 13" as several more brutal story beats were brought to light.
This is a late review for the ones who haven't seen it yet. (Try to get the DVD and go see it now!)