|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
|
Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.
Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004
|
posted 03-27-2016 09:14 AM
CINEMA: Cinemark Movies 12, Ames, IA
AUDITORIUM: 7
PRESENTAATION: Mystery Meat Digital
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
RATING: One and one half stars (out of four)
What's THIS? The outside ticket window is OPEN? It's been YEARS since I've seen it staffed, day or night. There's also two concession lines open and rhe snake line posts are out at the ticket taker. And when I was leaving, they had the satellite cncession stand open. WOW.
THE PLOT: Martha Kent is kidnapped. Wackiness ensues.
Martha Kent getting kidnapped actually happens about two-thirds through the movie. Everything prior to that is a slow and boring, soul-crushing, no-fun-to-watch building of political tension between Batman and Superman that is supposed to lead to the big fight, which lasts about five minutes and is completely fucking stupid and pointless and there's still a whole bunch of movie after it where Wonder Woman shows up for no reason and hints are made towards the existence of Aquaman, Shazam, and...I don't know...maybe the governor of Colorado?
Superhero movies are supposed to be fun to watch, and the only thing fun here for the first two thirds is Lawrence Fishburne's character. The only laugh moments (there are two) happen towards the end. What DC and Warner need to do is let the people behind The Flash and Arrow handle the movies. Those are two of the best shows on television right now. They know how to perfectly balance action, drama, and humor.
They know how to make something fun to watch .
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Russell
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 142
From: Aurora, USA
Registered: Aug 2015
|
posted 03-28-2016 12:46 AM
Well, with the Warner Bros banking all they got at this chaotic DC mash up, you'd think somewhere in all of this would be a decent script? Well, sadly no, there isn't. Batman v Superman is an all-around disappointment, from it's mess of a script, poor directing, and most importantly, a lacking story. The story should be simple; Batman (Ben Affleck) thinks Superman (Henry Cavill) is bad, Superman thinks Batman is bad, they are set up into fighting each other. While that's there, it's cluttered by many unfortunate faults. Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luther was goddamn annoying, and it just became enough with the whole "let me rephrase this old statement" crap. His chemistry with the senator (Holly Hunter) also felt rather strange. Doomsday was another huge disappointment, as he basically becomes your average one-dimensional CGI monster who looks like he belongs in a Godzilla movie instead. Wonder Woman, while I liked Gal Gadot's performance, just felt a bit forced at times and she only added to all the craziness when it came down to the final battle. Spoiler Alert - Click to Toggle
The whole Justice League set-up felt forced. Maybe a reference is fine but when you have to take time out of movie to show these other characters backstories/uses of power in a way that doesn't serve justice (no pun intended) to the actual story, it just feels unnecessary. And I agree with Sam on the whole "Martha Kent gets kidnapped" sub plot, it felt like the writers decided to merge the Man of Steel 2 script with the Batman v Superman script. and all it did was make the film that more confusing
With that all said, I did like a couple things about the film. Ben Affleck's Batman was pretty decent, and with some better material to work with (and hopefully a solo movie), I believe he can pull off the character on his own terms. Henry Cavill's Superman was decent enough, but I didn't like his performance as much as I did in Man of Steel. Amy Adams also tried her best as Lois Lane with what's there, but I wish she had more to do towards the end. Jeremy Irons' Alfred was also pretty good, no Michael Caine, but still enjoyable. I also liked Batman's "Knightmare" sequence. Spoiler Alert - Click to Toggle
Even though the cameo by The Flash threw me off and was hard to understand, something about Lois Lane is the key?
Superman's encounter with ghost Kevin Costner was also not that bad. Overall, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is not what it should of been. It lacked a solid script, featured a director with way too much control, rarely felt like an "entertaining" movie, and just had lots of annoying and unnecessary characters and situations in it to make you feel the dark and realistic feeling that the movie was trying to go for. Not to forget, but the ending was also ridiculous. I'm hoping this new DC movie universe will improve over time, but as of right now, I'm not enjoying what it has delivered.
Film: 1 and a half out of 4 stars
Presentation: 2 out of 4 stars (saw it in IMAX 3D, and the 3D looked off at multiple spots during the movie, there was an annoying glare on the screen that looked duplicated with the 3D. I'm curious if this was just my theater or if others are experiencing this problem as well? Otherwise, good sound mix, especially during that climatic battle.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joseph L. Kleiman
Master Film Handler
Posts: 380
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 03-28-2016 12:51 AM
Esquire IMAX Theatre, Sacramento
2K digIMAX 3D
digIMAX nXos 5.1 sound with speakers here, here, here, here, and here. And the subwoofer's here (stole that from the old audio preshow at this theater)
I enjoyed this sequel to Suckerpunch. I wouldn't consider it popcorn fare like the Marvel films, having very dark and violent tone and I question any parent that brings a child under 10 to the theater to watch it. Keep them at home watching Supergirl instead. They'll grow up thinking the world's a wonderful place, unlike the San Francisco and Oakland - I mean Metropolis and Gotham - portrayed in this film.
I noticed two scenes filmed with IMAX cameras where the image enlarged and the picture became clearer - both action scenes. Very long action scenes. If Zak Snyder would realize that he's not Christopher Nolan and cut all of his post-Watchman films by an hour, the pace would be much more tolerable.
WonderWoman's reveal was the highlight of the film. Interpret that as you will. I felt Affleck has solidified his place as one of the top three on-screen Batmen, but unfortunately, I have to place him at the bottom of the list for portraying Bruce Wayne. Comic fans will enjoy that at least two (I personally noted two) pivotal comic story lines from the Superman and Batman franchises were integrated into the film.
I really started enjoying this film much more than I should have once I realized that Lex Luthor's appearance is one long homage to Alex, Malcom McDowell's character in A Clockwork Orange - completed through the selection of camera speed and angles, music, costume, props, and even dialogue.
The cherry on top for this screening was when the woman next to me, who turned out to be a counselor at a drug rehab clinic, exclaimed "The Flash looks just like a junkie!"
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark J. Marshall
Film God
Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 03-28-2016 02:02 AM
With all of the bashing this movie has gotten for at least a year, I went in to this not really expecting much of anything from it except maybe some loud explosions and cool looking effects. Maybe that's why I was a little surprised to see that --- I actually kind of liked it. I didn't think it was anywhere near awesome. But it was certainly good. It had some flaws though. So let's discuss those.
The seizure cam really gets on my freakin' nerves. Especially when there is no reason for it at all. It doesn't help tell the story. It stops me from seeing the story that's being told. It's a distraction, for many probably a subliminal distraction, but a distraction none the less. I really wish Hollywood would cut it out. I feel like some day film historians will look back on this period and shake their head at how much decent story telling was completely blown by this stupid technique. I can hear the guy on Turner Classics now, "While this move does suffer from that horribly misguided fad from early 21st century film making of shaking the camera around to make you feel uneasy, it is still pretty watchable. So if it gets too intense, just squint at the screen and enjoy - Batman vs. Superman, Dawn of Justice on TMC." Someone Turner, Jr. may even try to remove the shakes at a later date. But I'm certain it will be frowned upon by later generations as a terrible film making trend that never should have happened.
Another thing that bothered me was the fake 3D looked horrible in some scenes. Several scenes had backgrounds that literally looked like view-master style images or cardboard cutouts or something. This is something else that pisses me off about Hollywood. Let me ask a question here. Seriously... is it really all that much more difficult to just shoot both eyes at the same time rather then spend a huge amount of money for someone to try to create the second eye out of thin air? Seriously. What the hell? Some converted 3D looks ok. But all of it looks converted. Just shoot in 3D for fucks sake. It's like shooting in black and white and colorizing later. Stupid stupid stupid. They were pretty good at it by the end of the 3D run in the 50s. With a 250 million dollar budget why can't you clowns figure it out? Sorry. If you want to do it, do it and do it right.
Next, the action scenes. Ugh, the action scenes. First of all, can we stop with destroying an entire city in every movie? It's old already. I'm not saying you can't blow stuff up. Everyone likes a good explosion and a building coming down. But for crying out loud. Enough with taking out the whole damn city every time. Avengers is guilty of this too. I get it. I'm just tired of it. It's not interesting anymore. Do something else please. It's like you keep trying to outdo each other by destroying a bigger and bigger city - or more of a city. You've become a parody of yourself. Secondly on the action scenes - back the hell up! If the frame is just all white and red for three seconds - you're probably too close. I can't tell what the hell is going on. Also if you're in IMAX and/or 3D - you have to tone down "being in the middle of the action" a little bit. It's not impressive if I can't make it out. I don't feel like I'm in the middle of anything if I can't see it. That to me is a failure in story telling.
Technical failings aside, I actually did like the story and (for the most part) enjoy the movie. I wouldn't pay to see it again in a theater unless I see it in 70mm (I'll be in London for a week starting Tuesday, so maybe!) But if it were on TV I'd watch it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Haller
Film Handler
Posts: 68
From: Rochester, NY, USA
Registered: Dec 2015
|
posted 03-28-2016 09:05 PM
Cinema: Cinemark Tinseltown USA & IMAX
Auditorium: IMAX
Presentation: Digital IMAX 2K 3D
Presentation Problems: None
Rating: 2/5
A dreary, angry movie which mashes two of our most famous comic book characters together as if they're Hot Wheels cars. Tons of issues, in terms of pacing and plot development, but it isn't as bad as Man of Steel. It just tried to put too much on its plate, opening tons of plot threads, and then resolving like two of them. The battle between our two heroes feels forced, and uncomfortable, because instead of exploring the tensions between Batman and Superman, we instead focus on setting up the Justice League movies in the most forced way. A missed opportunity if there ever was one, oh well.
I went and saw this on the same day that my American Cinematographer issue showed up, that covered the film's production. Bizarrely, they scanned the 35mm negative at 2K, and the IMAX and standard 65mm negative at 8K, for a final Digital Intermediate of 4K. This might explain some weird grain issues, and whatnot, with the upscaling of certain sources.
I nearly swore off IMAX digital after poor presentations of Crimson Peak and Star Wars: Episode 7, but I was surprisingly pleased with Batman v Superman in IMAX. The 3D was worthless, as they shot anamorphic for the majority of the feature, but there was some alright detail in the image for how close we all sat to the 2K image. The IMAX 15/70 scenes, presented in 1.90:1, were by far some of the best looking I've seen in digital 2K. That being said, there were only 4 scenes in the entire film presented that way, which is a pretty huge disappointment. Oh well.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic