The movie isn't nearly as bad as the critics say. The fans seem to understand this. And I'm not bashing the critics. I probably got to enjoy the movie because I read two dozen reviews that put the bar really low.
The movie suffers for the same reason its prequel suffered: it shits all over the canonical Superman. There are plenty of alternate universe stories in which Superman is evil; this Superman is just kind of a pathetic schlub. The canonical Superman wasn't just super because of his powers; he was super because he was superhumanly noble. He exercised restraint, was not vengeful or boastful, and he always found a way to do the right thing. He even earnestly enjoyed using his powers for good while getting zero props in his actual life as Clark Kent, all things Christopher Reeve captured so well that I feel sorry for every other actor who will ever play Superman after him.
Furthermore, he always found a way to use just enough force to end a threat. In the case of the Kryptonian villains, that meant killing them. But otherwise, he would tone down his application of his nearly limitless strength to restrain an opponent. Superman is not like a little boy who crushes insects just because he can.
Meanwhile, Zack Snyder's "Superman" flies a human opponent through several walls at nearly supersonic speed. We didn't get to see the bloody remains that no doubt covered Henry Cavill's character in the aftermath, and the scene was played for laughs. Maybe the guy didn't actually get pulverized to death, but the film seems to have left it ambiguous enough that it doesn't mind if that's exactly what we infer.
It's not that Superman should never kill. But he is a god. He is so far above most of his opponents physically that he can stop them the way an adult stops a toddler. He only stops pulling punches when the threat is on his physical level of strength and toughness. Yet in BVS:DOJ, we get to see him acting as petty as any of us and smash a relatively very delicate human because he's kinda pissed.
This insult to the character actually works for a movie that is setting up for Batman to kick his ass, however. Henry Cavill's character is clearly pitched as a threat that an extreme quasi-fascist like Bruce Wayne would want to eliminate. So the movie really works as a showcase for a pure version of Batman, one that kills and maims in the course of battle. I was rooting for Batman to beat this pretender to death.
This movie has so much to hate and to admire. It's no wonder the reviews are so thoroughly mixed. What's good in the movie is the dumb, loud destruction, a Batman infused with a Ben Affleck who has something to prove, and the nods to the comic geeks who worship Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns." There were also nods to "The Death of Superman" story line, but nobody worships that because it wasn't that good.
The critics have done an awfully thoughtful and complete job of telling us what the detestable things are and why they are detestable. The detestable things, however, add up to less than their sum. Sure, there were times I rolled my eyes (the shell of a cannon fired in tribute, falling in slow motion?) or sighed in frustration. Sure the movie made a goal of avoiding joy or even sunlight (the outdoor daytime scenes are almost relentlessly overcast, and when there is sunlight, it is harsh desert light in a scene that quickly explodes into executions).
But I just don't think it was as jumbled and messy as they all made it out to be. I say that even though Snyder keeps shoving messianic images of this average man down our throats till we occasionally gag. I say this despite Zack Snyder's Superman floating above flood victims long enough for them to supplicate with grins and outstretched arms (a motif that appears again when he rescues a girl in Mexico from a burning building in a scene that made me cringe).
The film's great sin remains Zack Snyder's insistence on sucking the joy, hope, and nobility out of the Superman mythos, and leaving us with this Elseworld character who has all of the right powers but not the right soul. This Batman is the most logical and simultaneously most faithful adaptation of the icon. This Superman is just some unremarkable guy with Kryptonian genes. I guess his Batman brooding mixes perfectly for Snyder since Jesus never seemed to smile either. And this is definitely supposed to be Krypton Jesus we're watching here.
I say that only to turn around a say that I loved how Henry Cavill played this other Kryptonian, particularly in the final scenes of the movie. That's because the script raised the stakes in the third act. We got to see a passionate sorta-Superman. We got to see him being brave as he faced real danger from a well-prepped Batman and then from a shitty-looking Doomsday.
I don't know if I should be ashamed to admit that a lot of this acting that I loved was done by Henry Cavill's hair. In the final act, his hair is washed out of its severe Eddie Munster comb-back into the the hanging curls that evoked the classic spit-curl that everyone recognizes as Superman's. Maybe I should also be a little embarrassed to admit that my five-year-old self used to pull down a bit of my kinky curly 'fro onto my forehead, then lay face down on my pillow for a few minutes so I could have an African Superman curl for a few seconds, until my hair sprung back into its natural upright position. Either way, Henry's wet hair helped him look more like the real deal as he put his life on the line to save others.
Zack Snyder says he has made Superman more realistic. But making Superman a flawed, struggling human means altering the character into something that's just not Superman anymore. Never mind that a god-like alien that passes for white really doesn't have a hope or need of being more realistic. This modern cinematic Superman is as true to the character as Adam West's campy Batman was to his source material. You wouldn't make Batman clumsy or nervous around violence. You certainly wouldn't make him dance the Batusi. Why would you make Superman so ordinary in bearing and in spirit?
I've said before that in a proper work of Superman fiction, Superman really ought to be able to save most everybody. But I'll admit that a more realistic take on Superman would still allow for an uncomfortable amount of casualties. The depressing fictional death toll of "Man of Steel" isn't the problem with Snyder's Superman. He is simply too brooding, too severe, too conflicted, too sad despite his immense capacity to help so many people.
This Superman does make sense considering the shitty parenting he got. (His earth father suggests that maybe he should have let a bus full of his classmates drown to conceal his alien nature. Then he forces young Clark to let him die to carry on the deception.) But this Jonathan Kent and this Kal-El/Clark Kent are just not the same good people that occupy all the other Superman stories. Snyder might as well have written a scene in which Jonathan caught young Clark burning the paws off of kittens then decide to train him to kill other serial killers.
What a shame that to get the perfect Batman we had to endure the worst "Superman". Along with the rest of humanity, I enjoyed that amazing viral clip of "Sad Ben".
But Ben Affleck has nothing to cry about. He portrayed the shit out of Batman. He has now joined the ranks of Christoper Reeve and Heath Ledger for defining a character for the rest of the existence of the human species in its current form. As long as people talk about these characters, they will talk about how these select actors mustered the skill to play them better than could be hoped for by any reasonable person. I just hope this doesn't mean Ben Affleck has to suffer an early, tragic death. Which seems to be what happens with these things.
A lot of people rave about Gal Gadot as the bright spot of this film. But honestly, I didn't care for her or her accent as the civilian Diana Prince. Yet she electrified the screen when she leaped into action. (I am goosebumping now just thinking of the cheesy riff that played as she lowered her gauntleted forearms to reveal her tiaraed face and flowing locks.) She got the eager immortal warrior right.
Affleck remains the one to watch. In fact, I hope someone re-edits this movie so that it's a proper Batman film. Just remove the solo Superman scenes and all the Lex Luthor scenes and we should be good to go.
Oh, that's right...Lex Luthor.
You know, as much as I go on about how this cinematic universe desecrates the Superman character, I really should save some of that vim for how much they mutilated Lex.
I want to like Jesse Eisenberg. I can't help but think he could play me in my biopic even though I'm black. But this time around he's all bad improv and forced weirdness and ticks. I wanted to enjoy his Luthor, but he never let me forget that I was watching an actor trying to do something interesting.
I was able to enjoy this film even though I knew everything that was going to happen. I wanted to see how a noted visual director brought them to the screen, and I'm glad I did. So I can easily recommend that if you like such things, see the film. If you are a fan of Superman, you will enjoy it more if you can find a way to pass out while Ben Affleck isn't Batman-ing on the screen.
No comments:
Post a Comment