Confession time.
After bitching to high hell about how we need to use our power as consumers and boycott superhero movies because they've gotten out of hand, I paid $20 for the extended edition of
Batman v. Superman yesterday. I'm not going to defend this decision on any level. Missus RC and I just decided we wanted to watch it. Yes, I kind of got suckered by the all the internet pieces saying that the extended edition fixed a lot of the problems from the theatrical release. (Which I'm sure were written by someone on Warner's payroll.) We also watched the first ten minutes Warner Bros. posted online. Then we had a long, reasoned discussion about whether or not to actually spend American dollars on the digital download. I'm sure we gave this decision far more consideration than some Brits gave their Brexit vote. (Or Americans will give their presidential vote in November.)
This doesn't make what we did right. I'm simply explaining how it happened.
So the movie itself... The extended edition is just over three hours long. The first half of it is sort of good. Not great, not perfect, but good enough that I wondered if the half hour of stuff left out in the theatrical cut really did hamstring the movie.
A quick note about this: two-and-a-half hours is about the max length a movie can be before the theaters have to shave off a screening to make their day. Now, you can argue that a two-and-a-half hours, most of these blockbusters are about an hour too long, and maybe you're right. However, in a case like
Batman v. Superman where *theoretically* that extra half hour of story is where moments are made to sing, you could argue that quality take s a nosedive for money. In fact, there's no need to argue that point. This is Hollywood we're talking about. Quality always takes a hit in the name of larger profits. My point is, how many times to you come out of these two long blockbusters asking, "Why do feel like they cut out important parts to make their running time?"
But I digress.
The first half of
Batman v. Superman is interesting and thoughtful in the way that
Watchmen is interesting and thoughtful. I really like
Watchmen. Most people don't. So while watching the first half of
Batman v. Superman, I started to have elitist thoughts about how maybe the general public can't handle a superhero movie of this sophistication and intellect. By the scene where Superman shows up for a senate hearing (about halfway into the three-hour runtime), I had almost become convinced that I was watching something truly unique.
Then somewhere in the next half hour, Superman is
Spoiler
on top of a mountain talking to Kevin Costner, who you'll remember died in Man of Steel,
, and I wondered where exactly this movie had gone so hard off the rails. It's weird because that was the moment where I went, "Holy shit! What the fuck am I watching this for?" However, I have no idea how I got there. During the Senate scene, I was all in. And by the time Superman is
Spoiler
having his mountaintop heart-to-heart with Dad
, I was hardly paying attention because I was horribly confused and thinking way too hard about the shit show I was watching.
Part of it's the "too many characters" problem, though with a three-hour running time, there aren't *that* many characters to deal with. Part if it is plot convenience, where coincidence and Lois Lane's good old fashioned newspaper know-how propels the plot forward in ways that are utterly unbelievable. But it's a comic book movie, so that's kind of okay too. A big part of it is that Batman is Batman, and Superman is Superman, and they inhabit weirdly different worlds. All the Marvel characters kind of exist on the same weird plane so when you put them together the "colors" don't clash too badly. However, noir detective Batman, and bright colored alien fantasy Superman are difficult to have exist in the same world. This really hits home during the big alien world-ending ka-blooie where Superman and Wonder Woman are fighting Comic Book Monster #45-6H7 with unlimited god-like powers and Batman is just kind of pacing around the peripheral like, "Yeah. I'm just a dude."
Even during the first half where I was still impressed (or maybe trying to justify the $20 I spent), I said to Missus RC, "You know, if you don't know the comic books, you're probably lost." Her reply was, "No shit, because I don't know the comic books and I'm totally lost." The creators of the movie assume too much inherent knowledge, and while some if it is culturally obvious (Kryptonite is bad for Superman. Duh.), a lot of it isn't. Marvel does this *now* but they're twenty movies in to their shared universe and figure very few folks are coming to
Avengers: Age of Ultron having not seen a least a couple of the previous Marvel movies. And even then, they take pains to do the "previously on Chicago Hope" recap. Missus RC's other telling comment was " They're acting like they're seven movies in to their big Avengers style cinematic universe. I feel like I'm late to the party."
I could go into details, but it's such a mess I don't know where to start.
Batman v Superman isn't bad necessarily, but it's certainly not good. I'll say this though, I guess I'll get my money's worth out of the purchase because I'm sure at some point, I'll watch it again just to try and figure out what exactly it's supposed be.
RC says check it out in the way he says check out the stripper who has a dead conjoined twin growing out of her shoulder blade.
