Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice movie review (2016) | Roger Ebert (2024)

"Batmanv Superman: Dawn of Justice" is state of the art epic superherofilmmaking. That's a compliment if you prefer these movies to be ponderous,disorganized and glum, but a warning if you prefer tonal variation from film tofilm and scene to scene, and have a soft spot for storytelling that actuallytells, you know, a story, as opposed to doing an occasionally inspiredbut mostly just competent job of setting up the next chapter in a Marvel-styledfranchise.

Thestory begins with yet another flashback to young Bruce Wayne witnessing hisparents' murder by a gun-wielding mugger, followed by a bracketing trauma, hisencounter with a flock of bats in a cave near stately Wayne Manor. As co-writtenby Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer (“Blade,” “Dark City”) and directed by ZackSnyder ("Man of Steel," "Sucker Punch," et al), thissequence initially plays like one more visit to a dried up well. But it makes sense whenyou get to the next scene, a replay of the Metropolis-leveling "Man ofSteel" showdown between Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod (MichaelShannon) from the point-of-view of Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck), who seeshundreds of members of his adopted professional "family" killed whenWayne Industries' Metropolis office is damaged in the super-fight. (Thesequence also portrays Wayne as a somewhat detached one-percenter who’s ashamedat having taken his work "family" for granted—a thoughtful touch.)

Thisis the film's most affecting and original sequence, in large part because ittakes a persistent complaint against "Man of Steel"—that the supposedBoy Scout from Krypton was callously oblivious to collateral damage—and retrofitsit, so that it looks like something “Man of Steel” always meant to do, thebetter to provide strong, simple motivation for Bruce. Re-traumatized by a 9/11-styledisaster that kills dozens of his employees, including a young girl’s mother, he channels his angerand helplessness into a preemptive war against Superman, to be carried with biomechanical armor and Bat-tech fortified by Kryptonite. He sees Kal-El as a clueless and careless false god whose powers must be neutralized,lest humans get so comfortable with worshiping "aliens" that they setthe stage for a takeover by more Zods.

I keep referring to the cowled hero as Bruce because, more so than anyBatman picture, “Batman v Superman” treats the Caped Crusader as a scary-awesomemanifestation of ordinary neuroses, practically a lycanthropic rodent-beast who emergesat night, summoned by his own monogrammed spotlight-moon. In comparison,Superman seems a more balanced character: aside from the presence or absence ofglasses or a cape and the stress of maintaining his cover story (he gets sopreoccupied by an unauthorized investigation of Batman’s vigilantism that hestarts screwing up his regular duties at the Planet), Clark Kent and Superman are essentially the same guy.

The title promises an even distribution of screen time. But despite thepresences of touchstone DC characters—including a smarmy, psychotic,tech-douche version of Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg, fidgeting and yammeringlike Jeremy Davies); ageless Amazon warrior Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot); acereporter and Superman gal pal Lois Lane (Amy Adams); Alfred the Butler (JeremyIrons); Daily Planet editor PerryWhite (Laurence Fishburne) and Ma Kent (Diane Lane)—this is ultimately anoverstuffed, overpopulated, awkwardly plotted Batman picture that relegates theMan of Steel to a glorified supporting role. (If industry reports are to be believed,this was a last minute decision by Warner Bros., which preferred the financial safe-betBatman to the recently revitalized Supes.)

Unfortunately, the script’s early promise recedes as the movie unreels. “Batman vs. Superman” is a disorganized, lead-footed moviethat carries itself with unearned confidence; you see every card it’s about toplay ten minutes before the movie plays it, yet Snyder doesn’t just slap eachone down on the table with gusto, he keeps pointing to it and telling you what rankand suit it is. We surely would have surmised that the identical first names of Bruce’s deadbiological mother and Kal-El’s adoptive mother—Martha—would come into playeventually, but the film is so worried that somebody might not get itthat it has Thomas Wayne croak “Martha” with his dying breath, then findsways to keep repeating “Martha” over the next two hours, buildingtoward a reprise-flashback of Bruce’s parents’ murder that will bring latecomers up to speed.

There are other repetitious touches along these lines, including multiple,vocal assurances that the characters are fighting in depopulated areas—a clumsy defensive strike against “Man of Steel” hand-wringing. It all seems pointlesswhen you realize how little effort has been devoted to embellishing the charactersin Snyder’s “Nashville”-sized cast, none of whom come alive as they did in Tim Burton’sor Christopher Nolan’s or even Joel Schumacher’s Batman pictures. Eisenberg’slu*thor might have been a fascinating third panel in the movie’s gallery of lonely and haunted man-children (in a harrowing moment, he rails against “daddy’s fistand abominations”), but he mostly comes off as a 21^st centurybrogrammer, all tics and threats and unwanted physical advances. Adams’ LoisLane is once again reduced to a poker-faced damsel in distress. Jeremy Irons’Alfred isn’t a patch on Michael Gough’s or Michael Caine’s. Gadot, a lithebeauty with a musical accent and a steely demeanor, is granted less depth than a typical Bond girl. The movie shows little interest in explaining orjustifying its knotted-up subplots, and its detours into franchise-building areoften self-defeating. The most misguided is a dog-leg near the end: just whenthe story starts building up a head of steam, it pauses for a recitation of theDC heroes we can expect to see in the first full-on Justice League movie.

“Batman v Superman” tries to compensate for these flaws and others throughsheer scale and volume. It’s two-and-a-half hours long, louder than an airstripat O’Hare, gins up “excitement” with shaky-cam footage and hyperactivecutting, and has both figuratively and literally dark images. Even its daylightscenes seem to occur at dusk, thanks to the way Snyder and his cinematographer LarryFong bleed the color out and shroud the characters in smoke. Luthor’s mutant Kryptonian monstrosity Doomsday—spoiler warning notrequired; its presence was revealed in PR photos and promotional footage weeksago—is a generic hell-beast, all ropy muscles, spikyencrustations, and Rancor-like teeth. Reports of a forthcoming “R”-ratedDVD version aren’t surprising: the movie’s juicy stabbings, brandings-by-Batarang,close-quarters gunshots, scenes of sad*stic kidnapping and torment, and generallydespairing tone are Urban Thriller 101. The film is more effective when it’schanneling expressionist horror movies by filming action from disorienting anglesand letting blood seep from strange nooks and crannies. When it borrows iconic designsand situations from its primary inspiration, Frank Miller's politically satirical, meticulously plotted graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns, it’s like a kid stumbling around in dad’sboots.

There are a few brilliantly realized moments, the acting is mostly strong despitethe weak script (Affleck and Cavill are both superb—Affleck unexpectedly so),and there's enough mythic raw material sunk deep in every scene that you canpiece together a classic in your mind if you're feeling charitable; but if youaren't, “Batman v Superman” will seem like a missed opportunity. At times it mightmake you long for Christopher Nolan's delicate touch. Those last four wordshave never appeared side-by-side before. Life’s funny that way.