It was alright, but we all walked out of the cinema a bit disappointed.
On the plus side, I felt a bit bad for not going to church on Easter Sunday, but I've basically done the Passion of the Superman instead - that's the same, right?Jumbled thoughts:
I agree with Denster that there is a feeling that DC are trying to catch up with Marvel too quickly. This is only the second film in the saga and they're
almost trying to introduce everyone as quickly as possible via tiny placeholders, and saying "Look, we have a superhero team too!" They basically brought up a menu of teaser trailers in the middle of the film I would have preferred "Where are you going Miss Prince?" to be the first concrete mention of Wonder Woman, rather than doing the big reveal by email and Ancestry.com. Thought she was quality though.That dream within a dream sequence just made no sense at all. I thought they'd skipped a reel... What the strawberry float are they, who the strawberry float are you, what is Lois the key to? That sort of stuff goes in a post credits sequence to make people hyped for the next few films...
And another massive chunk of city gratuitously reduced to rubble...at the start of the Civil War trailer beforehand you basically want Cap and Co to show the SHIELD brass these two Superman films to put all the gooseberry fool they pull into perspective My main complaint though is that it's all just so serious and po faced. I counted three jokes in the entire film. Three. And they barely got a reaction. People like the Marvel films because they can combine action and drama with genuinely funny moments. The first half to two thirds of this are a strawberry floating dirge at times. Even the uber-dark Nolan films had, off the top of my head, Alfred, Scarecrow and the Joker all cracking the funnies. This had nothing like that at all (
apart from Luthor before he goes from being Hank Scorpio to making wheelchair bombs). Alfred is SERIOUS. Lois Lane is JOURNALIST. The editor of the Planet is WHY YOU NO DO JOB. Genuinely, the funniest two moments of the film were the
Incredible Flying Bruce Wayne! in the well, and the four year old behind me
WHO DID NOT LIKE DEAD SUPES, DID NOT LIKE IT ONE LITTLE BIT. Neither of those were intentional...
While we're on the subject of Lois Lane, have DC sorted out some form of non-aggression pact with feminists? There has been OUTRAGE about Black Widow being put in a cage when she's a prisoner, and the ginger woman from Jurassic World wearing high heels to work in an office, but Lois Lane takes Damselism to a new level. She's supposed to be a Pulitzer winner, and all she can do is
cause an international incident because Superman has to rescue her, and interrupt a fight between the nascent Justice League and a huge monster because Superman has to rescue her. I'm not usually that sensitive to these things, but she is truly useless. Martha Kent sits on a chair and waits to be rescued, and gives a better account of her gender than Lois Lane.I enjoyed the title fight, I think they have done really well with portraying Superman's powers on screen in both films,
particularly when Batman's punches were becoming less and less effective as the Kryptonite wore off. The brartha from anartha Martha ending was a right cop out though. As in other posts above, Bats has a very Arkham Asylum feel to his fights. This is a good thing.
It's not bad, I wanted to see what happened, and the fights were good, but the series needs comic relief badly. I suppose it's easier to make comedians serious than turn those frowns upside down.