It Came From The Cineplex: Sinister, Silent Hill: Revelation, The Man With The Iron Fists

It's Fall at the cineplex, so you know what that means! The summer blockbusters are over and all the big Xmas films are still a couple months away, so it's Mediocre Movie Time!

Things are really busy this month so I'll be as brief as possible with my reviews.

Sinister

A disturbing, but ultimately not very scary horror movie that combines traditional cinematography with the dreaded found footage technique. If you like watching snuff films then this is the movie for you.

The Plot:

A true-crime novelist with the unlikely name of Ellison Oswalt moves his wife and kids into the home of a recently murdered family, hoping to solve the mystery of their deaths and write another best seller. He finds a box of old Super 8 snuff films in the attic, each depicting the graphic and gruesome murder of a different family. Eventually he notices a mysterious figure in the background of each film, which turns out to be an ancient demon called Bughuul (pronounced Bug-Ghoul), who likes to cause children to murder their families and then feed on their souls.

Pros:

• The "found footage" movie clips are very effective, and very disturbing. They're accompanied by some odd music though. I'm assuming the music is there for atmosphere and not actually part of the Super 8 film reels.

• The deputy character was very well written and acted the way you'd expect a normal person to react if they were in a horror movie.

• A surprisingly grim ending that I didn't see coming.

Cons:

• Why, why, WHY did Ellison not contact the police the second he discovered the mysterious box of snuff films in his attic? I get that he was using them as research material for his book and didn't want the police to confiscate them, but he copied them all to his computer. There was no reason not to turn them over to the authorities after that (as a normal human being would). Also by keeping them he was probably guilty of some sort of concealing evidence or obstruction of justice charge.

• Exceeds its quota of "jump scares." Having a door burst open or someone suddenly pop into the frame, accompanied by a loud musical sting, does not scare me. It's a cheap and hackneyed technique that stopped being effective years ago.

• "Bughuul" is probably the dumbest and least effective name for a movie monster ever. Did George Lucas name this character?

• Bughuul looks a LOT like that white-faced puppet thing in all the Saw movies. 

• The "snuff films" were a little too realistic. I kind of felt like I needed to take a shower after the movie was over.

• Somewhat derivative of The Shining. Washed-up author moves his family into a new home, strange happenings occur, writer starts hitting the sauce, audience wonders if the happenings are real or a figment of the author's booze-fueled imagination.

• How do movie families manage to move from one home to another (and back again) as easily as I change my shirt? Has anyone in the real world ever got up in the middle of the night, roused their family and said, "Get in the car! We're moving!" Where's the realtor, the bankers, the inspectors and the six inch high stack of papers that need signed?

A somewhat effective horror film with an unexpectedly unhappy ending (which is a good thing in a horror movie). I give it a C+.

Silent Hill: Revelation 
I used to play the various Silent Hill video games and generally enjoyed them, however the movies are another matter. I didn't much care for the first film and unfortunately this one is no different. They definitely look good, capturing the creepy atmosphere of the games, but plot wise... I couldn't tell you what happened in either one if you held a gun to my head. 

An example of the confusion: At the end of the last movie, Rose and Sharon/Heather were in the same room with Christopher (Sean Bean), and although they could see him, he couldn't see or hear them. I got the impression they were supposed to be ghosts or still trapped in Silent Hill or... something. Then at the start of this movie, Christopher and Sharon/Heather are together and can communicate, while Rose is still trapped in the town. Did I miss something? How'd Sharon/Heather get back into the real world? Did it happen offscreen, or did I doze off?

Carrie-Anne Moss plays the leader of the Silent Hill cult, and is completely unrecognizable.

 Twice in this movie the Pyramid Head character saves Sharon/Heather's life. The second time he does so you can almost feel the director hoping the audience will pump their fists in the air and yell, "YEAHH! AW ROIGHT!!!" I got the impression they were trying to make him into a hero of sorts. He's definitely the most iconic character in the movies; I wonder if they're hoping he becomes the next Jason or Freddy Krueger? 

Another movie with the wretched "3D" in the title. Fortunately I was able to find a 2D showing of it.

The Plot:

Young Sharon/Heather (who escaped from the otherworldly town of Silent Hill) and her father Boromir are living under aliases, hiding from Silent Hill cultists. Boromir is captured and Sharon/Heather goes back to Silent Hill to rescue him. She finds out she's really the good half of a demon girl named Alessa, who rules the other dimensional city or something, and... you know what, forget it. I have no idea what the hell this movie was about.

Pros:

• Very moody and atmospheric. Love the shots of the ash falling on the fog-shrouded streets. They've really captured the look and feel of the game. Too bad they didn't put as much effort into the script.

• The Blind Nurses were very effective, and very creepy. Repulsive and yet somehow alluring at the same time (did I really just type that sentence?).

Cons:

• Convoluted script that doesn't make a lick of sense. After a while I stopped trying to figure it out and just watched the pretty pictures.

• Sean Bean does his best to affect an American accent, with mixed results. It just sounded weird to hear speaking like he was from Jersey.

• Pyramid Head needs to think about finding himself a smaller axe. He acts like it's all he can do to pull it along behind him.

• Another sequel with a "colon-followed-by-a-generic-word" title that doesn't tell me anything about the order in which I should watch them. Just like the Resident Evil movies.

A nice looking, but completely confusing mess of a film. I give it a D. Let's hope they don't try for a trilogy.

The Man With The Iron Fists

A love letter to old school Kung Fu movies, co-written, directed and starred in by RZA (former leader of Wu-Tang Clan).

For the record, Mr. RZA's name is pronounced "rih-za," not R-Z-A. 

There's a ton of exposition and plot in this film, but fortunately it's fairly easy to follow.

The film was shot entirely in China for only $20 million, an incredible achievement in these days of $200 million blockbusters. You'd never know it was made for so little though, as it looks gorgeous. Must be that dollar to RMB exchange rate.

Good: A cameo by Pam Grier! Bad: She looks like someone's grandmother now. Man, time sucks!

The Plot:

In the 19th Century, a former slave makes his way to China and becomes a blacksmith, making deadly weapons for various warring clans. Eventually one of the clan leaders decides to take over the Blacksmith's village. With the help of various locals the Blacksmith fights back, becoming The Man With The Iron Fists in the process.

Pros:

• Great cast, including Russell Crowe and Lucy Liu. RZA does an OK job acting wise, but may be a little too sleepy-eyed and laid back to be a Kung Fu hero.

• Bronze Body was an awesome character with a pretty cool armored skin effect. How do you kill a guy who's body turns into metal whenever its touched?

• Lots of cool action and fight scenes, which of course is the reason films such as this exist. And they were filmed coherently for the most part, which is unusual in these days of "shaky cam."

Cons:

• Since RZA is a rapper, I suppose it was inevitable that his music would be featured in the film. Not sure hard core rap works in a Kung Fu movie though.

A fun throwback to Kung Fu films of the past. I give it a B.

I'm A Grown Man And I Bought This: NECA 1/4 Scale Iron Man

For the past couple of years toy company NECA has been releasing a series of highly detailed 1/4 scale action figures. I'd seen their new Iron Man figure online and coveted one for a while, but pesky real world things like paying bills and buying food kept me from buying one. I finally found a deal on them at ThinkGeek and decided to take the plunge.

A few days later Iron Man arrived on my doorstep on a muggy August evening (I must be the last house on the UPS guy's route) in a box that was easily two feet high!

Once I freed Iron Man from his box I was shocked to see how big he really was. Sure, he's advertised as being 1/4 scale, but you don't realize how big that is until you see it in person. I definitely didn't expect him to be the size of a newborn baby.

Iron Man stands a whopping 18.25" tall. If you multiply that by four you get 73" (or 6' 1"), so that really does work out to 1/4 scale. Here he is standing (actually he's leaning against the wall) next to me for scale. He comes to just below my knee!

He's also pretty darned heavy. I don't have a scale lying around the house, but if I had to guess I'd say he easily weighs three or four pounds.

For those who keep track of such things, this is the Mark VII Iron Man armor, as seen in The Avengers film.

Sculpting-wise he looks pretty darn good to me (with one exception that I'll cover in a minute). The details are sharp (as you'd hope it would be on a figure this size) and the nature of the subject matter (an armored suit) works to hide the mold lines and joints pretty well.

The paint job is very well done and the red and gold parts actually look like real metal. The silver parts, ehh, not so much. They look more like gray plastic, despite their metallic paint job. Fortunately there aren't very many of them.

The biggest complaint I have: I'm gonna have to try and find a stand big enough to support him. Once again we have a ferkakta action figure that can't stand up under its own power! 

This has been a pet peeve of mine ever since I started collecting action figures as an adult back in the 1990s. I honestly don't understand it. Action figures are shaped like people, right? People stand up by themselves. Ergo, action figures oughta be able to stand as well. I don't get why so many of my figures constantly topple over. Does my house slope at an angle? Was it built on one of those Mystery Spots?

One other complaint about the figure: the shoulder pads. They look like they're sitting wayyyy too far from the shoulders to me. 

To illustrate my point I took the liberty of Photoshopping the shoulder pads and moving them farther in. See? They look much better in this shot. He looks much more compact and his shoulder pads are actually protecting, you know, his shoulders. There you go, NECA. I fixed your toy for you.

I'm not sure why the pads sit so far out; I assume it must have been some kind of engineering problem with the figure; the only way they could get them to work or something like that. Or they came from the factory botched like this and NECA shipped 'em, hoping no one would notice. Well I noticed, NECA. I noticed.

Here are a couple of extra closeups of Iron Man's head and shoulders for your viewing pleasure.

One of the best things about 1/4 Scale Iron Man-- the cool light up feature! His eyes, palm repulsors and chest arc reactor all light up.

I'm not sure why his palm lights are a dim orange though. They weren't that color in any of the movies were they? I though they were bluish white like the arc reactor. 

There isn't one main switch to control the lights, so it takes a bit of doing to get him lit up. There's a series of tiny, and I do mean TINY switches all over him. There's a switch on the back of his head for his eyes, one on his back for the chest light, and one on each forearm for the hand lights. They're hard to find and even harder to switch on and off, especially if your fingers are larger than the width of a pencil lead.

Hey look, I used the J.J. Abrams filter on Iron Man!

You can have hours of fun recreating Iron Man's "I ate too much shawarma" deleted scene from The Avengers!

Iron Man also comes with flip up air brakes on his back, to recreate flying poses. At least I think that's what they're supposed to be. Maybe they're part of his courting display, like when a peacock spreads its tail feathers.

It feels like there are other parts of his armor that are supposed to swivel or open as well, but if so I can't figure out how to get 'em to work, and I don't want to pry too hard lest I have to break out the glue.

Iron Man comes with 2, count 'em two accessories: closed fist hands. You can pop off his repulsor blast hands and replace them with fists for punching poses. That's it! Two extra hands. Would it have killed them to have included an unmasked Tony Stark head? 

I suppose I shouldn't complain. It's an 18" tall figure that lights up, so I suppose that's sufficient.

By the way, the fist hands don't light up, which is as it should be. It wouldn't do for him to fire his repulsors with his fists closed now, would it?

From what I've read online Iron Man here is more articulated than most of these large scale figures. That's great and all, but he's still not articulated enough. He also has mid-foot joints, which are a plus. He has double-jointed knees, which is always a good thing, as they allow his legs to bend until the back of his feet almost touch his butt. However his hip articulation is extremely limited, making the knee joints pretty much moot. You're never going to be able to put him in a sitting pose; the best you can hope for is a kneeling or walking up the steps pose.

Sadly, he most definitely can NOT recreate this iconic pose from the movies. It just ain't possible.

His arms fare a bit better-- he's got double-jointed elbows, ball jointed wrists and ball jointed shoulders, which is a big plus. He has a ball jointed head which allows for interesting poses and some fairly useless neck articulation which barely moves.

It looks for all the world like his waist and chest are supposed to turn, but whenever I try to do so it feels like I'm about to snap him in half, so I stop. If anyone knows if he's really supposed to turn at the waist, let me know.

Here's the obligatory shot of Iron Man next to a can of Pepsi Throwback for scale. As you can see, he's pretty darn tall.

And here he is positively dwarfing his six inch tall doppelganger. I told you he was big!

So what's the verdict? Is 1/4 Scale Iron Man worth it? Ehh, why not? You get a well sculpted, well painted and fairly well articulated figure that'll dwarf anything else on your shelf. Supposedly production of these was limited, at 7,500 pieces. So if you want one, you'd better act now.

It Came From The Cineplex: Jack Reacher, Django Unchained, Gangster Squad, The Last Stand

Jack Reacher
I only saw this film because I thought it was a horror movie called "Jack Creature." Wakka wakka!

I will confess that I've never been much of a Tom Cruise fan. That said, I don't shun his movies either. I think he's a pretty good actor despite his nuthouse personal life.

So far there have been 16 Jack Reacher novels written by author Lee Child. For some reason this movie is based on the novel One Shot, the 9th of the series. Why they didn't start with the first novel, I have no idea. You'll have to ask Mr. Cruise about that. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the books must all be pretty interchangeable if you can start off with number nine.

Many fans of the novels are outraged at the notion of the diminutive Tom Cruise playing the 6' 5", 250 pound blonde Jack Reacher. Never having read any of the books, this wasn't a problem for me.

The Plot:
An army sniper shoots and kills random citizens in Pittsburgh in a seemingly open and shut case. When arrested, his only words are, "Get Jack Reacher." Before the police can figure out what this means, the mysterious ex-military policeman Reacher appears and investigates the crime.

Pros:
• The film features some good action set pieces.

• The central mystery is well thought out.

•  Despite his sensational public life, Tom Cruise really is a pretty good actor.

Cons:
• The film features an extremely bland title that tells us nothing whatsoever about the film. It's every bit as bad as Disney's John Carter title from last year. They don't call James Bond movies "James Bond," so why use the character's name here? Would it have killed them to call it One Shot, the name of the novel upon which the film is based? Or if that's no good, how about Jack Reacher: One Shot? Hollywood loves titles with colons these days. Anything but the title we got.

• I know he's a male wish fulfillment fantasy but even so, Reacher is just too ridiculously perfect. He's an expert at everything he does: hand to hand combat, sharpshooting, knowledge of civilian and military police procedures, he's an expert driver, and has an eidetic memory. He even manages to draw a military pension while remaining "off the grid." Is there anything he can't do?

• Most of the fight scenes are very realistic and brutal, with one exception. When Reacher is investigating a suspect's home, there's a very odd Three Stooges-like fight in their bathroom. Three burly looking thugs rush Reacher, intent on beating him to a pulp, but they manage to pretty much knock each other out with their own weapons in the confined space of the shower. Reacher ends up having to do very little to defend himself as they beat up themselves. It was practically a slapstick fight and felt very out of place. Was it comedy relief? Was I supposed to laugh in the middle of this deadly serious story? Was the director out sick that day, and his assistant filmed this sequence?

• At one point in the movie Reacher is being chased through the city by the police. He manages to throw them off momentarily and bails out of his getaway car and blends in with the crowd. A bystander even loans him his baseball hat to disguise him as the police race by. 

My question is: why? Why would decent law-abiding citizens help this seeming criminal? They have no idea who Reacher is or that he's a good guy avoiding the police in order to solve a mystery and clear his name. As far as they know he's a low down dirty car thief on the lam. Are you telling me that there wasn't one person in all of Pittsburgh who wouldn't have shouted, "Officers, over here! Here's the guy you're looking for!"

• Throughout the movie Reacher violates numerous laws and commits several felonies in order to keep the plot moving forward, and of course suffers absolutely zero consequences for his actions. This happens in virtually every action movie ever made-- at the end the hero's many transgressions are all magically forgiven.

• The villain of the movie is a creepy old man called "The Zec." Somehow everyone in the film instinctively knows that his name is Russian for "prisoner." Apparently they must teach Russian in Pittsburgh public schools.

Far from the best movie I've seen, but a decent action/mystery/thriller. I give it a B-.

Django Unchained
The latest from director Quentin Tarantino, a Blaxploitation / Spaghetti Western and another entry in his "Alternate-History Revenge" series, in which a down-trodden minority gets to even the score a bit.

There's a lot of controversy surrounding this movie, which I suppose is only natural considering its volatile subject matter. 

Most of the outrage is due to the number of times the word "nigger" is uttered during the film (yes, I said it. I'm not going to walk on eggs and call it "the N-word." I'm an adult, not a ten year-old). By some accounts the word is said 108 times. I will admit that is a lot. It is indeed a vulgar and ugly word, but it would be tough to make a movie about slavery without saying it at least a few times. Plus, let's face it-- it's the way people spoke in that era. If you're uncomfortable with the word and the subject matter then perhaps this is not the film for you. Might I suggest you'd be happier watching the latest Pixar outing.

Director Spike Lee issued a press statement saying he refused to see the film, saying, "...it's disrespectful to my ancestors." Fair enough, but it kind of sounds to me like Mr. Lee decided he hadn't been mentioned on Entertainment Tonight for a while.

The film is sort of a remake (maybe homage would be a better word) of the 1966 Italian film Django, starring Franco Nero as the title character. There were 31 Django movies made between 1966 and 1987. Strangely enough, only the first and last films in the series starred Nero and were considered "official." The rest were all unauthorized and have nothing to do with the character, instead copying the overall look and tone of the original. Apparently copyright laws must be fairly lax in Italy.

Broomhilda's (Django's wife) last name is von Shaft. Tarantino says in his mind he believes that 1970s Blaxploitation character John Shaft is a descendent of Django and Broomhilda. Cool!

Tarantino originally planned a crossover with the RZA-directed film The Man With The Iron Fists. The crossover would have featured Django meeting The Blacksmith character from Iron Fists. Sadly the scheduling couldn't be worked out in time and the idea had to be scrapped. Too bad.

The Plot:
Two years before the Civil War, German bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz buys and frees a slave named Django and makes him a proposal: if he helps Schultz track down and kill the villainous Brittle Brothers, he'll help him free his wife Broomhilda. Hijinx ensue.

Pros:
• I very much enjoyed Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds, and he shines here as well as Dr. King Schultz. He's intelligent, highly articulate and genially funny. I'll say this for Tarantino; he knows how to write for Waltz. Oddly enough I haven't much cared for Waltz in any other films in which I've seen him. He seems at his best when he's working with Tarantino.

• I loved the relationship between Django and Schultz as they learned to work together as a (deadly) team. I wouldn't have minded seeing the two of them in a whole series of films.

 • Franco Nero, the original Django, has a cameo in the movie as the man who asks Django how he spells his name.

• If you like violence and gore, you came to the right place. Throughout the film geysers of blood spray from each and every wound, no matter how slight. Apparently everyone in the Old South had extremely high blood pressure.

• Samuel L. Jackson is great as Thomas, a wily and evil Uncle Tom (hey, I see what you did there, Tarantino) character.

• The film features an excellent and very eclectic cast, including Tom Wopat (Luke Duke), Russ Tamblyn, Bruce Dern (who I could have sworn was dead), M.C. Gainey (Tom Friendly from LOST), Jonah Hill, Lee Horsely, Zoe Bell (a Tarantino favorite), Robert Carradine, Ted Neely (of Jesus Christ Superstar fame), Tom Savini and Michael Parks (another Tarantino favorite).

Cons
• I reeeeally could have done without Tarantino's cameo (as an Australian of all things!). Yes, Quentin, we all know that Hitchcock used to put himself into his own movies too, but A: he limited himself to quick, non-speaking cameos and B: You're not a very good actor. His scenes did nothing but take me right out of the movie.

• Although I greatly enjoyed the film, I'd suggest looking elsewhere for historical accuracy. The movie takes place in 1858 and features a lengthy scene with the Ku Klux Klan. Unfortunately (for the film) the KKK wasn't formed until 1865 by veterans of the Confederate Army. Whoops!

Would you look at that. For once the Pros outnumber the Cons!

Another entry in Tarantino's "Alternate-History Revenge" series. I give it a A-.

Gangster Squad 
A good looking film about an interesting time in L.A. history that ultimately goes nowhere. Full of typical mobster cliches (just look at that poster to see most of them!) and predictable plot twists.

The movie was delayed for several months due to the tragic theater shootings in Aurora, Colorado in 2012. In the original cut of the film, characters in the film stand behind a movie screen and fire sub-machine guns through it and into the unsuspecting audience. The studio cut that scene from the movie and the cast was reassembled for reshoots. The new scenes featured a violent and bloody shootout between the Gangster Squad and Cohen's thugs in Chinatown. So the lesson to be gleaned from all this is: Shooting innocent people in a movie theater– bad. Shooting innocent Asian bystanders in Chinatown– acceptable. 

Oddly enough the film was directed by Ruben Fleisher, who directed the excellent horror-comedy Zombieland (!). He seems a little out of his element here and perhaps should stick to comedy. Or zombies.

The Plot:
It's 1949 and thug Mickey Cohen is intent on taking over Los Angeles. The Chief of Police recruits a team of policemen, secretly known as the Gangster Squad, to thwart Cohen and bring order to the city.

Pros:
• Awesome cast including Robert Patrick and Giovani Ribisi.

• Josh Brolin does a good job as a two-fisted cop. With his permanent scowl and one-two punch I think he'd do all right in a superhero movie.

• The movie is full of stylish production design. I don't know if 1949 Los Angeles really looked like this, but I'd like to think it did.

Cons:
•  "Based on real events." It's a well-known fact that whenever you see that line at the beginning of a movie you should quietly gather your belongings and head quickly for the nearest exit. Most movies that start with that caption have little or nothing to do with reality.

There really was a Gangster Squad in 1940s - 1950s L.A., and they really did go up against a gangster named Mickey Cohen. But somehow I doubt they did it quite the way we're shown here.

•  Sean Penn stars as mobster Mickey Cohen and wears a ton of facial prosthetics to transform him into an ex-boxer thug. In fact every time Penn was onscreen I had trouble concentrating on what he was saying because I was too busy studying his face, trying to figure out what was real and what was foam rubber. He looks (and now that I think about it, acts) very much like a Dick Tracy villain. 

In fact the whole movie has a faint Tracy vibe to it, which I doubt is what the filmmakers were shooting for.
 
• Sorry ladies, but I continue to be baffled by the huge popularity of Ryan Gosling. I recognize that he's reasonably handsome, but he doesn't seem to have a lot of range acting-wise (at least in the films I've seen). I just don't get all the hoopla over him.

Stylish, but fairly predictable. I give it a C.

The Last Stand
Arnold returns to the big screen in his first starring role since 2003's Terminator 3: Rise Of The Machines. 

Now that Arnold's got politics out of his system he seems anxious to resume his film career. Unfortunately this movie wasn't the best way to herald his triumphant return. It's a scaled down, low budget affair, about as far from the mega-blockbusters of his glory days as you can get. 

If he wants to return to making movies, he needs to return in a big way, not by starring in small films like this. Maybe he's trying to slowly ease himself back into films again, like an old man lowering himself into a tub. 

I did enjoy most of his supporting cast, especially Luis Guzman. And Johnny Knoxville even managed to be amusing rather than annoying.

Sadly, The Last Stand appears to be a box office bomb, opening in ninth place in its first week. This surprised me, as I figured audiences would flock to see Arnold on the big screen again. So why did the film tank? Who knows? Maybe the all important 18 - 25 movie going demographic isn't interested in seeing a 65 year old man cavorting around onscreen. Maybe Arnold's extramarital affair is still fresh in the public's mind. Or maybe the public just knows a mediocre movie when they see it.

The Plot:
Gabriel Cortez, son of a Mexican drug lord, escapes from prison and flees in a magical indestructible Camaro capable of traveling at 200 mph. He plans to cross the border into Mexico (and freedom) by passing through the sleepy little town of Sommerton Junction, which is protected by Sheriff Ray Owens (Arnold), an aging ex L.A. police officer. Owens vows to stop and arrest Cortez at all costs.

Pros:
• I've always big a big Arnold fan, so it was great to see him on the big screen again-- even in a less than stellar film.

• Lots of violence, which is what you want in an action movie, amirite? And amazingly it was rated R instead of today's usual watered down PG-13.

Cons:
• What the heck is up with the accents in this movie? Of course Arnold had his usual out of place accent, but it extended to the rest of the cast as well. Swedish actor Peter Stormare tried and failed mightily at a Texas accent. I think. Actually I'm not sure where the hell his character was supposed to be from. Luis Guzman decided to go with an Hispanic accent, which isn't surprising, but it was heavily seasoned with a bizarre lisp. Odd.

• At the beginning of the film we're told that virtually the entire population of Sommerton Junction is heading out of the city to a high school away game. Only eight or ten people remain in the entire town. Well that was certainly convenient! An empty town means Sheriff Owens doesn't have to worry about innocent citizens being mowed down during the numerous gunfights on Main St. Plus if the town's empty, the filmmakers can save money by not needing to hire extras. Brilliant!

• Cortez's escape from prison is coordinated with split second precision and utilizes the talents of dozens and dozens of accomplices. When the FBI is transporting him to a new facility, the van he's in is literally lifted into the sky by a giant electromagnet (which I assume is attached to a helicopter, although we never see it) in a scene straight out of one of the Batman movies. He's then lowered onto the roof of a nearby building, where more accomplices bring him a change of clothing and even more run interference for him as decoys. He escapes in a souped up concept car that was acquired god knows how and heads for the border. As I said, an extremely complex escape plan involving many, many people.

So was all that really easier than putting on a pair of dark glasses and using a fake I.D. to buy a plane ticket to Mexico? Hundreds of illegals get into this country every day. Is it really that difficult for one guy to go back?

• The big action set piece at the end of the film takes place on a makeshift bridge spanning the American/ Mexican border (more on that in a minute). The whole sequence has a strange artificial quality to it, as if it was filmed on a green screen stage. It's just a bridge over a shallow ravine. How hard would it have been to have built that outside? Did Arnold demand to shoot his big fight scene in an air conditioned studio rather than out in the blazing sun?

• Cortez's gang built the aforementioned bridge over the border so that he could drive his souped up Camaro into Mexico and freedom. The bridge spans a gulley that presumably marks the border. The thing is, the gulley appears to be all of about ten to twelve feet deep. It looks like the Camaro could easily have been driven down into the gulley and back up the other side with no problem. I guess that wouldn't have been as stylish and having your own personal bridge to zoom over. 

• In Arnold's previous films none of the other characters ever called attention to his thick accent. In this film though they attempt an explanation for why an Arizona sheriff speaks like an Austrian national straight off the boat. During the climactic fight with Cortez, Owens makes a lame joke about him "making us immigrants look bad." The line doesn't work at all and thuds to the ground like a brick. All this does is get the audience thinking about why an immigrant would be called Ray Owens instead of paying attention to the film like they should be. They actually made things worse by trying to explain it. Note to future screenwriters of Arnold's films-- go back to ignoring the accent situation altogether. 
 
Not a terrible movie, but a far cry from Arnold's glory days of the 1980s and 1990s. I give it a B-.

It Came From The Cineplex: Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice

Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice was written by Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer. It was directed by Zack Snyder.

Terrio previously wrote the screenplay for Argo, which was a very good, if completely inaccurate, historical drama. Goyer is a prolific and very uneven screenwriter, who previously wrote Kickboxer 2: The Road Back, The Puppet Masters, The Crow: City Of Angels, the Blade Trilogy, Batman Begins, Jumper, The Dark Knight, Ghost Rider: Spirit Of Vengeance, The Dark Knight Rises and Man Of Steel.

Snyder's career began in 2004, and it's been going steadily downhill ever since, no doubt a result of him gaining more control on each subsequent film. He directed the Dawn Of The Dead remake (very good), 300 (not bad), Watchmen (good), Sucker Punch (OK) and Man Of Steel (oy). He's very good at composing shots and integrating effects, but not so good when it comes to handling anything that has to do with coherent plots or character motivation.

So let's get this out of the way before we go any further— I didn't hate this film. No one's more surprised than I am by that admission. Based on Warner Bros. track record with DC movies, the various underwhelming trailers and the fact that I absolutely despised Snyder's detestable Man Of Steel, I was expecting to hate it. Maybe going in with absolutely zero expectations helped?

But don't get the wrong idea here. I didn't actually like the movie by any stretch of the imagination. I just didn't loathe it. Maybe Warner Bros. could paraphrase that as a blurb on the movie poster. "I didn't actually like it, but I didn't loathe it." Now that's a recommendation!

The fact that I didn't hate it doesn't mean the film is good, mind you. Far, FAR from it. It's a bit better than Man Of Steel, I'll give it that, but that's damning it with very faint praise. Batman V Superman is a flawed film in every measurable sense. 

The convoluted script is muddled and illogical, as whole swaths of plot seem to be absent or happen off camera. Some of that may be due to the fact that Snyder had to trim half an hour from the bloated runtime. The movie also spends far too much time setting up future films than it does servicing its own story.

Character motivation is largely nonexistent in the film. On the rare occasion when a character does have a reason for doing the things they do, their behavior suddenly changes radically just to move the story along. Early on we see that Batman has good cause for hating Superman, but it's tossed aside late in the movie for the stupidest reason possible. Superman hates Batman because he thinks he's a murderer, yet his body count is just as high, if not worse. And who knows why Lex Luthor hates the title characters and goads them into a fight. Because the script says so, I suppose.

The movie has a dark and dreary color palette that's so devoid of hue it might as well have been filmed on black and white stock. There's nothing particularly interesting to look at either, as the costumes, gadgets and even the monster at the end are all ugly variations of designs we've seen many times before.

It's also just plain no fun. I get that every superhero movie doesn't need to be an action-comedy like Ant-Man or Guardians Of The Galaxy. But even serious dramas need a bit of comedy relief to lighten the tension now and then. Everyone in this film looks grim, dour and miserable. When even the characters look like they don't want to be in their own film, why should the audience bother to stick around?

There's exactly one brief shining moment of unbridled joy in the film, and it doesn't happen until almost the very end. Doomsday backhands Wonder Woman and knocks her into the next county. When she finally skids to a stop, she flashes an "Oh, it is so ON" smile and rushes back into the fray to gleefully kick Doomsday's mutant ass. This is what passes for lightheartedness in Zack Snyder's troubled mind.

Once again Snyder proves he lacks even the most basic understanding of these beloved icons. All the characters in the film act so differently from their classic versions that they're virtually unrecognizable. I cannot emphasize this enough— Batman and Superman are not in this film. At least not the versions I grew up with.

Superman suffers the most here, just as he did in Man Of Steel. It almost seems like Zack Snyder has nothing but contempt and even outright hostility toward the character. For decades, Superman was seen as a beacon of light and hope; someone who stood for decency and honesty. Despite his god-like powers, he was always a righteous, dignified and relatable hero. He saved the world not for personal glory, but because it was the right thing to do.

Apparently Snyder thinks that notion is hopelessly corny and outdated in our modern world. His Superman is an aloof, morose and brooding demigod who actively resents his powers and begrudgingly uses them to save the planet. He constantly floats above us mere mortals, looking down on us with disdain. Even the way he moves is violent and angry. When he deigns to land, he does so with enough force to crack the cement beneath his feet. He punctuates conversations by blasting off into the sky with enough force to create a sonic boom. Compare this to the graceful way Christopher Reeve's Superman touched down and took off in Superman The Movie. No wonder the world's terrified of this version, and seeks to control him.

With Man Of Steel and now Batman V Superman, Zack Snyder has done what Lex Luthor, Brainiac and even Darkseid have never been able to do. He's effectively killed Superman. He's taken him from beloved hero to feared weapon of mass destruction. Talk about character assassination! Well done, Zack!

Further proof that Snyder hates Superman and everything about him— as Lois Lane is interviewing a known terrorist, her photographer is outed as a CIA agent. The terrorist nonchalantly walks up and shoots the man right in the head. In an interview, Snyder revealed that this unlucky photographer was none other than Superman's pal Jimmy Olsen! Yikes! Said Snyder:

“We just did it as this little aside because we had been tracking where we thought the movies were gonna go, and we don’t have room for Jimmy Olsen in our big pantheon of characters, but we can have fun with him, right?”

Jesus Christ! Oh, Zack, that was fun! I laughed and laughed when you brutally killed off a beloved member of Superman's supporting cast! How positively delightful!

Batman doesn't fare any better. Here he's a murdering sociopath who kills indiscriminately as he battles crime. I know there are many audience members who will pump their fists in the air and say it's about time Batman started killing crooks, instead of letting them live to commit crimes another day. But Batman isn't a cop. He's a vigilante who operates outside the law. A Batman who wantonly kills criminals is a criminal himself! Plus this Batman is absolutely brutal in his methods. He even takes to burning his logo into the flesh of criminals, effectively branding them like cattle. Holy crap!

In fact there's little or no difference between Batman and Superman in this film. If you're going to pit two characters against one another, they should be fundamentally different, else why are they feuding? Superman has traditionally been a lighter, more positive character, while Batman was the dark and mopey one. Not so here. These two versions are equally grim and somber, and the only real difference in them is their costumes.

Another example of Snyder's literal character assassination— in the Batcave we see an enshrined costume spray painted with the message "Ha Ha Ha! Joke's On You, Batman." Apparently this is supposed to be the costume of Batman's crimefighting partner Robin, who was presumably killed offscreen in this universe by the Joker. Dang, Robin doesn't even get a brutal Jimmy Olsen death scene! Snyder must really hate him!

Henry Cavill reprises his role as Superman, and once again comes off as little more than a talking slab of beef. He may well be a very good actor, but you'd never know it from his dour, scowling performance here. 

When Ben Affleck was first cast as Batman, there was much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments throughout fandom. Personally I couldn't possibly have cared less. We've had a whopping SEVEN big budget Batman theatrical films so far, and frankly I'm a little Batmanned out. Oddly enough he turned out to be the best thing about the film. His Batman is an older, world-weary version who's seen far too much and has stopped worrying about whether his actions make him a hero or not. Despite the fact that I'm not a fan of this iteration of Batman, Affleck does a very good job here, embracing the role and making it his own. His Bruce Wayne is pretty darned good as well.

Gal Gadot plays Wonder Woman for a grand total of about ten minutes in the film. She seemingly does a pretty good job, but her screen time was so short it's honestly hard to tell if she's a decent actress or not. That said, even though she's one of the best things in the movie, she's completely inconsequential to the "plot." You could remove her from the film altogether and absolutely nothing would change. The only reason she's here is to introduce her into the DC Movie Universe that Warner Bros. is desperately trying to set up.

Sigh… and then there's Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. I cringed every time I saw him in one of the trailers. He's not as bad as I expected him to be in the actual film, but he's still way over the top and he's still horrribly, horribly miscast. He makes Gene Hackman's Luthor look like the pinnacle of restraint.

There've been many versions of Luthor in the comics and movies over the years, from mad scientist to con artist to ruthless businessman. In Batman V Superman, Eisenberg plays him as a cackling, Mark Zuckerberg-like elfin sprite who spouts non sequiters and seemingly goes insane before our very eyes.

One small ray of hope— Eisenberg is apparently playing Lex Luthor Jr. here, as he mentions his father several times during the film. Maybe someday we'll eventually see a proper, formidable Luthor in a future sequel (possibly played by Bryan Cranston). 

For months now I've been snarkily calling this movie Dark Knight V Hopeman, making fun of the fact that both Snyder and Warner Bros. seem embarrassed by the fact they're making superhero movies. Now that I think about it, the film actually works much better if you pretend it's about two brand new superheroes who've never been seen before. Heroes like Dark Knight and Hopeman. Or Armored Bat and God Man. Anyone but the title characters. As a generic superhero movie it's tolerable, but as a Batman and Superman movie, it fails on every level.

The script takes a few elements from Frank Miller's seminal The Dark Knight Returns mini series, puts its own twisted spin on it to make them nearly unrecognizable, and then inexplicably mashes it up with the end of The Death Of Superman storyline. Why they chose to do this, I have no idea. Either of these storylines could have served as the single plot of Batman V Superman. We could have had Batman decide that Superman poses a threat to the world and take it upon himself to neutralize him. Or we could have had Luthor creating Doomsday to kill the Man Of Steel, and Superman calls his friend Batman for help. In the hands of a competent writer and director, one of these plots would have made an epic film. Combining the two storylines only dilutes and muddies what could have been one of the best comic book adaptations ever.

My biggest problem with the movie is the basic premise itself. It's not Batman Teams Up With Superman, it's Batman VERSUS Superman. Personally I don't want to see Batman try to kill Superman. These two characters were my childhood heroes. They were legitimately trying to slay one another here. I cringed every time one of them landed a super powered punch. I don't like seeing either one of them hurt. They're supposed to be teaming up and working together! They're Super Friends, not Murder Enemies!

And who exactly was I supposed to be rooting for during the fight? Was I supposed to want Batman to kill Superman? Was I supposed to shout, "C'mon, Batman! Whoop Superman's ass!" Just another example of how Snyder has absolutely no understanding of the characters, and why the movie works better if you pretend it's about Dark Knight and Hopeman.

One of the biggest complaints about Man Of Steel was the massive amount of death and destruction Superman caused in his battle with Zod. Apparently Snyder was stung by these comments, and took them to heart. There's still a ton of destruction in Batman V Superman, but not nearly as many casualties. Snyder literally has a news reporter comment that the battle is happening after 5pm, when all the workers in downtown Metropolis have gone home for the evening (!). It's such a blatant attempt at deflecting audience criticism that it's inadvertently hilarious. I'm surprised that every time Superman hurled Doomsday into a building which subsequently crumbled, he didn't turn to the camera, wink and say, "Not to worry, chums! That building was empty!"

During filming, many fans were concerned with the numerous announcements that the Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg would all be showing up in this already crowded movie. They needn't have worried. The three of them are included in the lamest, most jaw-droppingly ridiculous way possible. And just how were they added? Wonder Woman sits at her computer, and she honest to god clicks on mpegs of them. I kid you not. That's how they were included— spliced in at the last second. Are you fraking kidding me?

Back in 2008 Marvel Studios began releasing a series of interconnected films starring several of their major characters, such as Iron Man, Captain America and Thor. Five years later, they culminated this plan by taking the characters they'd meticulously introduced and teamed them up in The Avengers. It was the first time a studio had ever done anything like that, and Marvel's patience and carefully constructed worldbuilding paid off in spades, as The Avengers grossed well over a billion dollars worldwide.

Warner Bros. decided they wanted in on some of that sweet, sweet shared universe money, and the result is the laughably subpar Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice. Unlike Marvel though, Warner went about it in the exact opposite way. Instead of setting up their individual heroes and then teaming them up, they decided to team them up first, then worry about showcasing them in their own films later on. As you might expect, the impact is nowhere near the same. There's no thrill in seeing Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman team up when only one of them has been established onscreen (I'm counting this particular Batman as a new character). But hey, potato, po-tah-to, eh? They're just superhero movies. The audience'll lap it up no matter what they put on screen.

According to the website Batman On Film, when Warner Bros. executives saw a rough cut of Batman V Superman, they worried that it might tank at the box office. Not because of the film's poor quality though. No, instead they were concerned that the general public is used to the frothy, "fun" movies that Marvel produces, and wouldn't understand Batman V Superman's "deep" and sophisticated story. Heh. I don't think that'll be a problem, guys. Oh, the audience will have trouble understanding your film, but it won't be because it's deep.

I've heard many fans comment that critics are being too hard on this film, because it's a big, loud popcorn movie and you should just turn your brain off and enjoy it. This attitude angers me. A popcorn movie doesn't have to be stupid and poorly written. The aforementioned The Avengers was most definitely a summer popcorn flick, and it was well written, acted and directed. In fact most of Marvel Studio's output has been fun as well as intelligent. They're not mutually exclusive concepts. 

In the end it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks about this film. Despite its muddled script and the damage it does to the characters' legacies, it'll make billions. After just one week in theaters it had already grossed $500 million worldwide. Imagine all the good that could be done with that kind of money!

Did I say I didn't loathe this film? Maybe I need to rethink that opinion.

SPOILERS, I GUESS!

The Plot:

We start out with a flashback to yet another retelling of Batman's origin story, for the three people on Earth who don't yet know it. Then we get another flashback to the Battle Of Metropolis from Man Of Steel (ugh), in which Superman (played by Henry Cavill) battles Zod, leveling most of the city and killing millions. We see Bruce Wayne (played by Ben Affleck) dodging falling debris as he desperately tries to make it to his Wayne Foundation building and evacuate his employees. Superman destroys the building with his heat vision, causing it to fall and kill everyone inside. Wayne glares up at the reckless Superman with a white hot hatred.

Eighteen months later, many around the world see Superman as a threat, including billionaire industrialist Lex Luthor (played by a horribly miscast Jesse Eisenberg). He somehow knows of a cache of kryptonite inside Zod's world engine at the bottom of the Indian Ocean, and wants it in order to create weapons to stop Superman (never mind how he knows the substance can do this). He approaches Senator June Finch to help clear the red tape involved in recovering the kryptonite, but she refuses to help.

Meanwhile Superman rescues Lois Lane from a terrorist in Africa. He's inexplicably blamed for the massacre, which was secretly staged by Luthor to discredit him.

Bruce Wayne attends a fundraiser at Luthor's mansion, and uses a high tech gadget to copy data from his mainframe. The gadget is stolen by Diana Prince (played by Gal Gadot), a mysterious antiques dealer. Luthor introduces Wayne to Clark Kent, and the two verbally spar for a bit about how dangerous both Batman and Superman are. How clever.

Later Diana returns the gadget to Bruce, saying she only "borrowed" it because it contained a photo of hers that she wanted back. Apparently Ms. Prince doesn't understand how digital photos work. Bruce downloads Luthor's files from the gadget, and sees he's compiling info on other metahumans. He sees the photo of Diana from the upcoming Wonder Woman movie, in Warner Bros. desperate attempt at setting up a DC Cinematic Universe. The photo's dated 1918, proving she's an ageless immortal. He also finds files pertaining to Luthor's experiments with kryptonite.

Bruce then has a weird dream/vision involving Darkseid, in yet another attempt at setting up a shared universe. He wakes up as the Flash's head appears before him. The Flash says, "Lois is the key," whatever that means, then tells Bruce that he must find the others, and then says, "Whoops, I went back too far!" before disappearing. Bruce does everything but look at the camera and say, "That was weird!"

Batman goes to the shipping docks to steal Luthor's kryptonite in the most violent and over the top way possible. He's stopped by Superman, who orders him to stop or he'll snap his neck like he did Zod's. Luthor's henchmen (the ones still alive, that is), get away with the kryptonite.

Senator Finch then holds a Congressional hearing in the Capitol, to discuss what to do about Superman. Right as Finch is declaring how dangerous Superman is, Luthor sets off a bomb that kills everyone. Well, everyone but Superman, of course. He's then blamed for the deaths and goes for a hike in the arctic. There he sees a vision of his idiot father, who tells him a story about how every action has unforeseen consequences or some crap.

Bruce sends Diana the metahuman files from Luthor's computer. She then literally sits and watches a series of YouTube videos of the Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg, because there's nothing better than watching a movie of a person watching a movie. This is the brilliant way the film adds these characters to the cast.

Batman steals the kryptonite from Luthor's lab, which makes his earlier murdery attempt pointless. He uses the substance to build an arsenal of weapons, including an armored suit, gas bombs and a kryptonite-tipped Spear Of Destiny. When Luthor discovers his kryptonite is gone, he goes to his Plan B: entering Zod's abandoned spaceship, which is still inexplicably sitting in the middle of downtown Metropolis. The artificially intelligent ship is somehow still active, and is quite accommodating, as it cheerfully takes orders from Luthor for absolutely no reason. He dumps Zod's corpse into a cesspool in the ship, along with a sample of his own blood. The ship very helpfully combines the DNA of both men to create Doomsday, an unstoppable monster with one purpose— to kill Superman.

Luthor, who's apparently figured out Superman's secret identity, kidnaps Clark's horrible asshole of a mother Martha Kent. He blackmails Superman by threatening to kill Martha unless he kills Batman. Instead of snapping his neck like you'd expect this Superman to do, he obeys. Luthor has somehow intuited that Batman used the kryptonite to build anti-Superman weapons, and will be able to kill the Man Of Steel. So is this his Plan C? If so, why'd he need to create Doomsday? Your guess is as good as mine.

Superman then confronts Batman, and the two finally have their title fight after what feels like four hours of screen time. The battle doesn't last long though, as Batman weakens Superman with his kryptonite gas bombs. As Superman lays beaten and defeated he gasps, "Save Martha!" Why he would call his own mother "Martha" instead of "Ma" isn't clear. Batman is taken aback my this, as his own mother's name was Martha. Lois appears and tells Batman that Martha is Superman's mother. This causes Batman to come to his senses and realize that Superman isn't the real enemy here. Yep, I sh!t you not— the reason these two titans stop trying to outright murder one another, do a 180º turn and then team up against Luthor is because their mothers have the same name. Jesus wept.

Batman goes to save Martha in a veritable orgy of death, violence and destruction, killing several hundred of Luthor's goons. Superman confronts Luthor, who releases Doomsday before scampering off. Doomsday is a gigantic half Kryptonian, half human cave troll, er, I mean alien monster who's completely unstoppable. There's even more destruction of property as Superman and Batman battle Doomsday. But no casualties this time, laws no! It's after 5pm, so Metropolis is deserted! It's OK to knock down buildings this time! Man, I need to go lie down in a dark room. I'm getting one of my sick headaches.

Just as Batman's about to be fried by Doomsday's heat vision, Diana, aka Wonder Woman shows up. She's armed with a sword and shield, along with her own cool theme music. She battles Doomsday for a bit as well, until the three "heroes" notice that the harder they fight him, the stronger he gets. Superman retrieves the kryptonite spear and impales Doomsday with it. Doomsday returns the favor by using his bony protrusions to stab Superman in the heart. Oh, the humanity, er, I mean the kryptonianity.

Luthor's then imprisoned for blowing up the Capitol. For some they shave his head, which totally isn't a thing in prison. Batman visits him in his cell, and Luthor warns him that "someone" is hungry and is coming. I suppose he means Darkseid, but it's never actually stated. Clark is buried in Smallville, while Superman, or I guess his empty coffin, is buried in Metropolis. How they explained that to anyone is left to our imaginations. Bruce and Diana attend Clark's funeral, and he says he plans to form a team of superheroes to protect the world in Superman's absence.

Lois looks down at Clark's coffin, tosses a handful of dirt into the grave and leaves. We see the dirt briefly levitate as we thankfully smash cut to black.

Thoughts:

• Lord, where to start?

• As I stated earlier, elements of this film were based on The Dark Knight Returns comic. They made a lot of changes though, mainly reversing who takes out who, making this version almost unrecognizable.

See, in the comic, Batman comes out of retirement to fight the escalating crime in Gotham. After he defeats the leader of a gang of mutants, they rename themselves the Sons Of Batman and begin violently ridding the city of criminals. The US Government observes these events and determines that Batman needs to be taken out. They send Superman after him, and the two battle to the death.

For some reason this was switched in the comic, and Batman goes after Superman.

The "Superman Gets Nuked And Then Restored By The Rays Of Our Yellow Sun" scene was pulled pretty much verbatim from the comic though.

• In the obligatory Batman origin story, Jeffrey Dean Morgan plays Bruce's dad Thomas Wayne, while Lauren Cohen plays his mother Martha.

Morgan and Cohen are both currently starring in The Walking Dead.

• In another flashback, we see Bruce Wayne driving through Metropolis during Superman's battle with Zod, which looks like a thousand World Trade Center disasters happening at once. At one point Bruce calls one of his employees and orders everyone to evacuate the building.

First of all, did he really need to do that? Would his employees have just sat at their desks working while the building came down around them?

Secondly, great confusion surrounds the name of the man Bruce calls. Many people think he's screaming "Dad" into the phone, which makes no damned sense, since we just saw his father die in the previous flashback, and this man looks nothing like Jeffrey Dean Morgan.

He's yelling "Jack!" into the phone, not "Dad." 

• What exactly was Luthor's plan in this film? Apparently he hates Superman and feels he's a threat to the world. To that end, he concocts Plan A, a convoluted way to obtain a sample of kryptonite, which he wants to turn into anti-Superman weapons. 

Then after Batman steals the kryptonite from him (to do the exact same thing with it), he comes up with Plan B: using Zod's ship to create Doomsday. Presumably he intends for him to kill Superman. What he's going to do with Doomsday after that happens is unclear. 

But then he also has a Plan C, which consists of kidnapping Martha Kent and blackmailing Superman into killing Batman. He assumes Batman has created kryptonite weapons, and will kill Superman for him. But for some reason, he puts this Plan C into action before Plan B, which doesn't make any sense at all. 

There may even be a Plan D, as he seems to be trying to kill Superman so that there'll be no opposition when Darkseid arrives.

Note that I think this is what Luthor's various plans were, based on what I was able to piece together from viewing the film and reading about it online. I'm not sure though, as the muddled script never clearly states any of this. I have a feeling I'm putting much more thought into it than the screen writers did.

• When did kryptonite become a thing in this universe? As far as I recall it was never even mentioned in Man Of Steel (I'd have to watch the movie again to find out for sure, and that ain't happening). Suddenly in this film it's not only abundant, but Luthor is intimately familiar with the effect it has on Superman.

I assume he somehow discovered its existence and properties between films. I don't need to have every minor detail spelled out for me, but this seems like a big oversight to me. Kryptonite is a major part of the mythos, and in this case we definitely needed a scene or two showing how Luthor unlocked its secrets.

• Lois Lane interviews a terrorist at his African compound. Several things here:

An unnamed (but confirmed) Jimmy Olsen is the photographer assigned to her. One of the terrorist's thugs exposes the film in Jimmy's camera to protect his boss' anonymity. So Jimmy still uses a film camera? What year is this?

One of the terrorist's henchmen is Anatoli Knyazev, who's secretly working for Luthor. In the comics, Knyazev is the villain known as the KGBeast. He's seemingly killed by Batman late in the film, but don't be surprised if he returns in a sequel.

Luthor's men then kill everyone in the terrorist's compound. Superman arrives to save Lois, and for some reason he's blamed for this entire sorry incident. Apparently the whole operation was engineered by Luthor to discredit Superman. The thing is, at this point in the film Superman is already hated by the public, so I really don't understand why Luthor bothered. Did anyone proofread this script before they filmed it?

I also don't understand why everyone's so upset about this incident. A known terrorist and his thugs were killed. Who cares if their blood was spilled? Isn't our government currently doing its best to kill every member of ISIS on the planet? That's what we want, right? To wipe out terrorism wherever it rears its ugly head?

And why does everyone think Superman killed this terrorist cell, when their bodies were all riddled with Luthor's special bullets? Do they think Superman got tired of snapping necks, and picked up a machine gun for a change?

• Near the beginning of the film we see Metropolis has a memorial to the battle in Man Of Steel, complete with a wall listing the names of those who Superman killed, er, I mean who perished in the disaster. 

The memorial features a giant statue of Superman that's… reaching out to help, I guess. Unfortunately the way the hand is sculpted, it looks a lot like he's bending down and flipping off those beneath him. I'm not kidding.

Secondly, why the hell is there a memorial to Superman in the first place? Aren't people afraid of him? Don't they blame him for all the death and destruction? He caused billions, if not trillions of dollars worth of property damage. So who would pay for such a boondoggle?

• The film has a very vague sense of place. The characters seemed to flit back and forth between Metropolis and Gotham in what seemed like minutes. Seconds, even. It wasn't until after I saw the film that I found out the two cities are supposedly right next to one another! That's right, Gotham is visible from Metropolis, lying just across the bay. The movie does such a poor job of depicting this that I honestly didn't realize it until I read it online.

In the comics the exact location of Metropolis and Gotham has always been vague, but they've never been right next to one another. 

This twin cities concept inadvertently makes Clark Kent look like an idiot. He attends a party at Luthor's mansion, and when Bruce Wayne arrives he says, "Who's that!?" If Metropolis really is right next door to Gotham, how the hell can he not know what Bruce looks like? It's not like he's some Hughesian recluse, he's a billionaire celebrity!

• Zack Snyder seems to have a fetish for filming spent shell casings falling to the ground in slow motion. It happens at least five times during the film.

• In the Batcave we see Robin's vandalized costume, implying the Joker killed him, which is supposedly why this particular Batman is such a hard case. Honestly I thought it was one of Batman's costumes. There was certainly nothing Robin-esque about it. I only found out whose costume it was while researching the film online.

• In the Christopher Reeves Superman films, he plays Clark Kent as… well, as a mild-mannered reporter, complete with slumped shoulders and slicked back hair. It's an amazing performance, as his Clark really did seem like a completely different person. He made Clark's disguise— consisting of a business suit and a pair of glasses— seem plausible.

Here Henry Cavill plays Clark exactly the same way he plays Superman. Interesting choice! And amazingly, no one seems to notice!

• This particular version of Batman literally brands the criminals he catches with his logo (!). We're later told that such a brand is a virtual death sentence in prison, as apparently the other inmates will kill the brandee. 

Why this would happen, I have no idea. There is a hierarchy in most prisons— for example, child molesters are typically at the bottom and are regularly beaten and even killed by other inmates. But I don't get why they'd care if another prisoner had a bat brand. Does getting caught by Batman make the criminal profession look bad?

It's never stated in the film, but it's possible that maybe Batman is only branding the lowest of the low, like human traffickers, as he does here. Maybe the other criminals see someone with the brand and know they're bad news? I feel like this explanation is giving the movie too much credit, as once again I probably spent more time thinking about this issue than the writers.

• Let's look at Clark Kent's job performance at the Daily Planet, shall we? He wants to write a story about Batman's brutality in Gotham. His editor and boss Perry White says no, and tells him to write about a local football game instead. Clark refuses, writes the story he was told not to write, and doesn't write the one he was told to.

He then disappears from his desk for days at a time, much to Perry's chagrin. How the hell does Clark still have a job?

It's probably time for Clark to find a new profession anyway. Newspapers were thriving in 1938 when the Superman comic premiered, but these days… oy, not so much. It's a part of the mythos that definitely needs an update.

• Several times during the movie, Batman has bizarre dreams that are sort of precognitive, but not really. Because having dreams about the future is something he's always done in the comics for decades, right? Right? No? My bad.

First he dreams about falling into a cave as a child, as bats swirl around him and lift him into the air (!). I assume he's dreaming about a semi real event from his past, which is how he decided to adopt the bat motif here? Maybe?

Then in the most elaborate dream, he's in some Mad Max post apocalyptic world, in which the ground is branded with Darkseid's omega logo. But then Superman is there, supposedly having taken over the world, and there are all these troops with his logo on their arms, and then a bunch of Darkseid's Parademons appear and fly off with soldiers. Are they hinting that Darkseid's going to resurrect Superman and they'll team up? If that's the plan, then well done, but for now it's just needlessly confusing, and seemingly included as an excuse to show Batman and Superman killing more people.

• After Batman dreams about Darkseid, the Flash suddenly sticks his head through his keyboard as he reaches into the past to warn him about the future. It's an odd and very confusing scene, especially if you don't know the mysterious head talking into Batman's chest supposedly belongs to the Flash. And why should we know who he is? We've never seen this particular version of the Flash before, and he doesn't identify himself. I imagine most audiences were completely baffled by the whole thing.

This scene is very similar to one in the Crisis On Infinite Earth comic miniseries, in which the Flash runs so fast he goes back in time and tries to warn Batman of an impending disaster before disintegrating.

• Senator Finch holds a Congressional hearing on Superman. Among those testifying is Wallace Keefe, a man who lost his legs in the Battle Of Metropolis (!). He sits in a wheelchair (given to him by Lex Luthor) that secretly contains a bomb which blows up the Capitol.

Many are wondering why Superman didn't detect the bomb in the wheelchair. Eh, I'm willing to give them this one. We saw the courtroom audience getting screened for weapons before they entered, so why should he scan anyone with his powers if they're clean?

Plus we don't know how his powers work anyway. Maybe his super-hearing and x-ray vision aren't always "on."

• Diana "borrows" Bruce's hard drive skimmer so she can go through Luthor's files. She says Luthor has a photo of her on his drive that doesn't belong to him. Once she's done with the skimmer, she gives it back to Bruce. Oddly enough she didn't erase the photo, because Bruce finds it, sees it's dated 1918, and realizes she's immortal.

Um… none of that makes the least bit of sense. She stole a copy of Luthor's hard drive to get her photo back, but she doesn't delete it before giving the drive back to Batman, plus the original file is still safe and sound back in his mansion. I guess living on Paradise Island as she does, Wonder Woman doesn't understand how digital photography or computer files work.

By the way, the photo in question is dated 1918, and shows her in her full Wonder Woman Amazonian gear, looking just as she does today. Note the man to the left of her— that's Steve Trevor, played by actor Chris Pine. He's starring in the upcoming Wonder Woman film.

• As I mentioned earlier, the future members of the Justice League are included in the film as email attachments from Batman to Wonder Woman.

Note that the metahuman files on Luthor's computer are all branded with the appropriate logos! Did Luthor design those himself? If so, he's not a bad graphic designer!

• After the disaster at the Capitol, Clark decides to clear his mind with a hike to the arctic. I thought maybe they were going to include Superman's Fortress Of Solitude here, but no. That's a beloved part of the Superman mythos, and we can't have that!

Instead Clark sees a vision of his idiot dead dad. Pa Kent is stacking rocks at the top of a snowy mountain, trying to build… I don't know, some sort of outdoor grill or something. As you know, one of my many problems with Man Of Steel was Pa Kent's horrible advice, in which he told young Clark it was better to let a school bus full of kids die rather than reveal his powers to the world (!).

Pa's advice hasn't improved even in death. Here he tells Clark a story about how when he was a boy, he worked hard to divert a flood from the family farm, only to find out that the water just went downstream and destroyed a bunch of horses over at the Lang's. Com-O-Dee! Apparently he's trying to tell Clark that every action has unforeseen consequences. Hear that, kids? Anything you do may potentially blow up in your face! So don't do anything! Ever! Don't take chances. Don't try to help. Play it safe!

Pa then tells Clark he misses him. Well, maybe if he wasn't such a moron and let Clark save him in the previous film, he'd still be alive.

• Ma Kent's advice to Clark isn't much better. After Superman causes yet another disaster, she "comforts" him by saying, "Be their hero. Be their angel. Be their monument. Be anything they need you to be. Or be none of it. You don't owe this world a thing. You never did."

Jesus Jetskiing Christ! Awesome advice there, Ma! You do realize that this planet is Superman's adopted home now, right? He owes EVERYTHING to this world! His planet exploded, for frak's sake! This planet welcomed him into its open arms and saved his life. But god forbid he should lift a finger to save it. He should just sit back and watch as it's ravaged by natural disasters and aliens. I'm sure everything will work out alright without him. In fact, he should take from his adopted homeland. Take and take and take as much as he wants and never give a single thing back. That's the American Way these days, right?

You know, any second I expect Ma Kent's face plate to pop off, revealing she and Pa Kent are both androids being controlled by Lex Luthor. At least then there'd be a good reason for the horrible, horrible parenting advice they've given to their walking nuclear bomb of a son. Either that or his adoptive parents are secretly B.F. Skinner and Ayn Rand (obscure reference time!).

• All through the film we see actual news reporters and celebrities reporting on Superman and Batman. Among these are Anderson Cooper, Nancy Grace, Neil DeGrasse-Tyson, Charlie Rose and Soledad O'Brien.

I'm assuming this was done to give the film some verisimilitude, but for some reason it always yanks me right out of the movie. When I see a real journalist in a film I don't think, "Wow, this is really happening," I think, "Huh. I wonder how much they paid him to be in this film."

Plus once you see one of these "journalists" talking about Superman in a movie like this, it makes it hard to take them seriously when they report on a real world event.

• The "Superman As Christ" theme is alive and well in Batman V Superman. Look at him hovering there above that poor flood victim, as his head is framed halo-like by the sun. He hangs there like that for a good thirty seconds, waiting for her to desperately reach out for him, I guess. Less posing and more saving, Superman!

And look at the reverse angle of this scene. I pointed this out earlier, but it bears repeating— that's quite an impressive logo these flood victims managed to paint on their roof while trying not to drown. They even added the little serif at the top of the "S!" This has got to be the home of a graphic designer!

• When I first saw the trailer I scoffed at the idea that Batman could build a suit that could stop Superman. Now of course we know how it's possible— Batman cheated and weakened Superman with kryptonite.

I like the design of the Armored Anti-Superman Bat Suit quite a bit, and it looks a lot like the one from The Dark Knight Returns. There's just one problem with it— just like in the comic, it features a goddamned cape! A cape that Superman could easily grab and use to hurl Batman into the sun.

• I already mentioned the monumentally stupid reason why Batman and Superman stop fighting, then kiss and make up— because their mothers are both named "Martha." Did you get that? Not because they realized their battle was endangering innocents, not because they realized they were both being duped by Luthor, but because their moms have the same name. Bravo! Author, author!

• At one point we see Wonder Woman boarding a plane, trying to stuff her carry-on bag into the overhead compartment. I guess this version of Wonder Woman doesn't have her own invisible airplane. Anyway, she sees news footage of the Superman/Batman/Doomsday scuffle on TV.

We then see her jump into the fray, dressed in her Wonder Woman armor, complete with a shield and sword. So… did she have the shield and sword in her carryon luggage? How'd she get all that through the TSA?

Hey, don't accuse me of being pedantic! These movies want to be as "realistic" as possible, so I think it's a fair question. You can't be realistic and comic booky at the same time. It's one or the other!

Maybe this Wonder Woman spins around like the TV version and her weapons magically appear?

"They have a cave troll!"

• As pretty much everyone and their dog have pointed out by now, the Doomsday design looks for all intents and purposes like the Cave Troll from The Fellowship Of The Ring. I can also see a bit of the new Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles in there as well.

I have no idea why they didn't use the design from the comic. It was perfectly fine and could have easily been adapted into live action.

• Batman honestly isn't much use against Doomsday, even after weakening him with kryptonite. Doomsday corners Batman in the Batmobile and is about to blast him with his heat vision, when Wonder Woman jumps in and deflects his attack. Hooray!

We then get the big trailer moment, as Superman gapes at Wonder Woman for a second, then turns to Batman and says, "Is she with you?" Batman replies, "I thought she was with you."

Wait a minute... earlier in the film Batman saw the 1918 photo of Wonder Woman, decked out in the very same costume she wears here. So he knows she was active as far back as WWI. So why the hell would he think she was affiliated with Superman in any way?

Just another example of the care and detail put into the script by the screen writers!

• Once again we get a Superman film in which Lex Luthor doesn't become bald until the very end. At the end of Superman The Movie, Gene Hackman's Luthor whips off his wig, revealing he's bald underneath.

• Superman dies while ridding the world of Doomsday. Surprisingly he doesn't snap his neck, but simply stabs him in the chest with a kryptonite spear.

So why didn't he give the spear to Wonder Woman? She appears to be close to Superman's strength level, and she wouldn't be weakened by the kryptonite. He died for nothing!

• After Superman dies, we see Clark Kent's funeral in Smallville. So did Martha Kent request that Clark's body not be embalmed? Because I don't think a mortician could cut open a Kryptonian's body even in death.

• Clark gets buried in Smallville's cemetery, while Superman is buried in Metropolis. We know for a fact Clark's body is in the casket in Smallville. So who or what's in Superman's? Is it empty?

Maybe Batman told everyone that Superman was vaporized by Doomsday, and it was a symbolic burial?

• In the final scene, Lois tosses a handful of dirt into Clark's grave. The dirt lands on top of the casket, then levitates slightly as the film fades to black.

Obviously this is meant to suggest that Superman's isn't really dead, of course. It's a given that all comic book characters treat death like nothing more than a bad head cold, but c'mon! This scene totally negates any slight emotion his "death" may have brought to the movie, making the whole thing pointless. Why kill off a character if they're not even going to stay dead for the entire movie? At least let the audience believe he's dead for more than five minutes before bringing him back to life.

Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice is a dour, muddled mess of a film that mashes together two famous comic stories in a desperate attempt at setting up a DC Movie Universe just like Marvel's. It's slightly better than the awful Man Of Steel, but not much. Do yourself a favor— skip this film and re-watch Superman The Movie or The Avengers. I give it a C+.