Fight Me: "Batman V. Superman" is underrated.

Looking in the rearview, “Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice” might just be the highlight of the gigantic missteps that defined the DCEU. The year 2016, the year this film came out, was a landmark year of big gigantic budget movies. The only successful Star Wars movie to come out since the acquisition of Lucas Film to Disney was released: “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.” The Marvel Cinematic Universe could do no wrong and was in peak form, this year marking the release of “Captain America: Civil War.” Arguably, a contender for best superhero film of all time. 2016 saw the release of “Deadpool,” a movie that would become so influential it would be forced to carry all of the Marvel Cinematic Universe films on it’s back and provide life support. It was a good time to be a fan of things. Maybe the best time.

“Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice” was DC Comics’ answer to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Quickly establishing the sloppy seconds approach DC Comics was clearly willing to get on it’s knees for. Throw as much at the audience as possible, establish every hero as quickly as possible - and go! With hindsight being 20/20, one could have never imagined the reversal of fortune that has happened. Kevin Feige, the creative lead of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the man thought to be able to do no wrong, has careened the Marvel brand into the toilet. Marvel has pissed away all good will with a mixture of girl bosses, over saturation of content, a global pandemic, the rushed launch of a streaming app, and shows that made you feel like you were in a class you didn’t sign up to take.

DC Comics seemingly is on the come up. Even with Warner Brother’s merger with Paramount, DC Comics is in a much stronger position than it was ten years ago. In comics, “Absolute Batman” has DC Comics constantly in about four different positions of the top ten comic book sales. DC Comics has matured and slowed down. The production studio invested in talent such as Matt Reeves and James Gunn, and has limited the release of films to a steady drip instead of a downpour. Matt Reeves’ “The Batman” might have saved the superhero genre and it’s sequel is the most anticipated superhero property since Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight.”

Even with all of the baggage the DCEU brought with it, time has shown that Zach Snyder’s original vision for what he wanted to do with “The Justice League” and DC Comic’s tentpole characters, would have paid off in droves if the studio had trusted his vision. With the three hour release of the Snyder cut version of “The Justice League,” I would be even interested to see what the Snyder cut version of “Batman V. Superman” would have been had the studio not interfered. The DCEU might be the most egregious example of what happens when studios panic, then interfere with the artistic vision of a director. Even if you hate Zach Snyder and what he was trying to do, even reluctant fans agree that his vision for an “Injustice” type of “Justice League”story would have been miles beyond better than whatever it was that we actually got. Regardless of interference, “Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice” stands above all of the other DCEU films, even if it’s the piece golden untouched corn in the pile of shit.

This movie is incredibly unique. Not an origin story and the first movie to feature an aging superhero. We wouldn’t get Marvel’s “Logan” until the year after in 2017. This is the movie that is both a sequel to “The Man of Steel” and a fresh introduction to the DCEU’s version of Batman. It is also the film that simultaneously introduces us to the DCEU, setting the tone for the rushed and chaotic mess it would later become. This year marks the ten year anniversary of this film and if you haven’t seen it in a minute, watch it again. The movie is better than you remember it being. Yes - it’s still weird. Parts of it are still bad.

Very bad.

Jesse Eisenberg is so weird and cringe.

But there are parts that you might have forgotten about that are really great. It’s not a great movie, but simultaneously the best depiction of Batman ever committed to film. Liberties are taken with the characters (Batman using guns, smh), but also simultaneously still comic book accurate. For example: The council of Krypton outlawing the use of reanimating a dead corpse: brushed over in the dialogue, but strangely accurate to the lore of Doomsday in the nineties comics. “Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice” might be the text book definition of underrated and has aged surprisingly well even ten years on.

I think that this movie is pretty violent. The later streaming and extended versions of it are rated R. I think overall, it’s pretty tame but there are violent, dark and scary moments. The scene where Batman escapes the prison and is hiding in the corner of the ceiling is a bit creepy for a child. In addition to that, tonally this movie is very dark. Batman burns villains with brands and fights human trafficking. Up to this point, Batman has never been depicted this grimly. The fights are more violent than most superhero movies, with Batman dragging Superman by his hair. The nightmare sequence also sets a dark and ominous tone that I think most kids could get through, but at the same time, the movie is a bit too dark and menacing. I find it shocking that there were toys and lego sets made of this film. But if I was a kid when this came out, I would have been all about it and I don’t think it’s any darker than Tim Burton’s “Batman Returns.”

Easily Ben Affleck’s Batman. Brooding, dark, and a great movie Batman even 10 years on. Almost everything about Batman in this movie, kind of rules. The fights still hold up 10 years on. Batman is violent and brutal. He fights like Batman would in the comics. Like everyone going into this movie: I was worried initially about Ben Affleck’s casting. To this day, I have a hard time not seeing Ben Affleck the actor. Over the years, his acting has gotten significantly better since the days of “Bennifer.” Affleck’s Bruce Wayne interpretation is more of a mature version of his character from ‘Good Will Hunting.’ His Batman interpretation is the most bad-ass Batman that has ever been on screen. He takes a licking and keeps ticking. “Batman V. Superman” is the first film that may have gotten Batman intimidation skills down correctly, but Christopher Nolan pretty much struck it on the nose at the beginning of the “The Dark Knight.” I honestly cannot think of another actor that would have been able to pull it off as well outside of casting Christian Bale again.

The casting of Jeremy Irons as Alfred Pennyworth. Seems capable and realistic. Not a pompous and fluffy butler, more of a partner and helping hand in the film. He seemed to be much more ex-military vs. a guy who just polishes the silver spoon. Alfred’s character is really supposed to be a behind the scenes partner for Wayne, a Watson and Sherlock relationship, who is dedicated to fighting the cause even if he thinks Bruce is in over his head; “Batman V. Superman” handled this relationship very well. It is clear they have chemistry in the movie. It’s what you would think Alfred would be like. He is almost what Alfred currently is in the “Absolute Batman” comics continuity. Older, refined, an ex-spy with a military background. Jeremy Irons was great casting although Liam Neeson would be the best fit.

Initially on first watch this scene gave me kind of ‘Meh’ vibes. I didn’t care. Superman was doing what Superman does. This might be the first movie to give gravitas to that. Strangely, “Captain America: Civil War” explores the same territory. What happens when superheroes cause a lot of collateral damage? Who is liable? The opening scene of “Batman V. Superman” gives this movie a sort of “Volcano” or “Independence Day” feeling of doom. Buildings are falling and people are dying. It could almost be it’s own movie. It is an interesting angle, especially if you are going to depict Superman as a villain later in the film. He destroys buildings in all Superman media, but nothing really happens and there are no real consequences. “Batman V. Superman” puts you on the ground level like the street footage of 9/11 where you see regular people suffering as a consequence. When rewatching the film, it gives great motivation to Batman to be cautious of Superman and provides great context as to why people should fear Superman. It’s a great set up to what would ultimately be a Superman “Injustice” storyline.

This movie might not be everyone’s cup of tea tonally. People do prefer a more hopeful and inspiring Superman versus the nihilistic version this is depicting. However, Superman being hopeful is not what this movie is about. Keep in mind: that had already been done. Regarding the tone, comic book movies were still recovering from the tonal and realism shift brought in by Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight” trilogy. If Superman was real, he’d be pretty terrifying. Years ago, when I initially wrote the review for this movie the first time around, I realized the irony of trying to make a realistic movie about a guy that can shoot lasers out of his eyes. With all this focus on realism, people cannot tell that Clark Kent is Superman? Really? But that doesn’t take away from him being scary and potentially corrupted by power. I think the movie depicting Superman as a 9/11 event, acts to further drive home the point that Superman, in this universe, is potentially a villain. Especially given what we know now: Zach Snyder fully intended the DCEU to introduce the “Injustice” storyline.

I think one of the best parts of this film is the excellent cast. Starting with Christopher Nolan introducing A-list actors to star in a superhero film way back when “Batman Begins” was a thing. “Batman V. Superman” continues this as you not only have strong performances from both Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck, but you have Laurence Fishburne as the Editor and Chief of the Daily Planet. A few returns from “The Man of Steel” show up such as Diane Lane as Martha Kent and then RANDOMLY Kevin Costner makes a return (basically his John Dutton character from “Yellowstone”) as Clark Kent’s dad. You forget that you are watching a superhero movie, and in my opinion adds to the seriousness and credibility, when such high caliber actors are cast such as Russel Crowe to play Superman’s Kryptonian dad. It’s nice that this trend continues as when you really look back to the Richard Donner/Christopher Reeves “Superman: The Movie”, high caliber actors were cast there as well, such as Gene Hackman playing Lex Luthor.

This is one of the aspects of this film that has aged incredibly well. Say what you will about Jesse Eisenberg’s performance. It is weird no matter how you look at it. But the idea of him being a billionaire mogul with little to no government oversight has aged incredibly well. With current modern day CEOs laundering money, participating in human trafficking, purchasing nefarious private islands, it is scary how accurate this character portrayal really is. With Jesse Eisenberg eventually shaving his head to fully become the Lex Luthor we all know from the comics, “Batman V. Superman” might as well have casted Jeff fucking Bezos to play the character. Rewatching this movie I have no idea what Jesse Eisenberg was trying to do with this rendition, however, I stand by the casting of this actor. Jesse Eisenberg played Mark Zuckerberg in “The Social Network” (the Facebook movie as shorthand),again, with modern day current events withstanding, it checks out that a supervillain would have also created social media. Profiting off of people’s insecurities where you are the product seems pretty spot on as something that Lex Luthor would at least have a hand in.

Scenes that should have been left in the movie:

If you were going to be one person in the movie and then never be in a movie ever again, which character would you want to be?

Ultimately I think that the unsung hero of this movie is time. Time has proven that Zach Snyder was right. His vision would have worked if Warner Brother’s executives trusted him. The release of “The Snyder Cut” on HBO Max proves this. The idea of trying to copy Marvel’s success was never going to work as DC Comics has always been darker and more nihilistic in nature. Depending on the character DC Comics can be light and fun, or dark and serious. Batman for example is supposed to be dark and serious. Superman and The Flash are more light hearted and hopeful. If the goal was to go for that, the Flash should have been pushed forward and not get stuck in production hell. But even then, time has proven that a light hearted Flash story sucked too. Time has proven that chasing profits over a good movie and a strong vision is a recipe for disaster every time. Matt Reeves’ “The Batman” further proves this point. Nobody thought that Robert Pattinson was a good choice for Batman. The movie comes out and it is the most profitable Batman film since Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight.” The same could be said about the casting of Daniel Craig for James Bond. Even then, movies are subjective and you cannot win over everyone. Unfortunately, Warner Brothers never learned this lesson and that is why it is being sold and stripped for parts. Time, however, remains undefeated.