Batman v Superman - Dawn Of Justice, Ultimate Edition (2016)

My race through the Snyderverse continues with probably its most divisive entry, but for all its faults (and they are plentiful), Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice - in all its three-hour, ultimate edition glory - is a surprisingly good superhero movie.

The further we get from the initial hullaballoo around this film, and the more times I watch it, the more I find I get from it.

Like Man of Steel, it suffers from some egregious missteps that, as with the original curate's egg, were allowed by many to spoil the enjoyment of the whole.

But as I grow older, that one troublesome dialogue exchange that spawned a million memes (which we will get to later), doesn't bother me so much. Yes, it's still a dreadfully contorted - and unconvincing - exchange, but is, ultimately, small potatoes in a bombastic three-hour film.

A deranged Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) turns the world against Superman (Henry Cavill), then engineers a fight between the Son of Krypton and Batman (Ben Affleck), before unleashing a CGI Kryptonian monster, Doomsday, on Metropolis for reasons that aren't exactly explained.

Jesse Eisenberg is a fantastic actor and his young Luthor blends the modern age comic book take on the character with the mad scientist version in the older comics - with a heavy emphasis on the "mad" part.

I think we're supposed to take it that Lex is jealous of Superman's powers, but, despite his Machiavellian machinations, the one part of his scheme that is never truly made clear is his motivation.

While Ben Affleck's Bruce Wayne/Batman is impressive, the stand-out character of Dawn Of Justice is Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman.

Although her presence is only slightly more justified here than Spider-Man's introduction in 2016's Captain America: Civil War, her grin-inducing impact on the audience is about the same.

Her all-too-brief appearances are certainly helped by the incredible Wonder Woman theme performed by cellist Tina Guo, that still make me tingle with geeky excitement every time I hear it.

There are a couple of sequences that felt superfluous, when looked at just in the context of BvS.

However, knowing now that these were planting seeds for the Zack Snyder's Justice League movie (we shall ignore the Josstice League iteration, even though officially it remains the canon version of the film for the DCEU), we can appreciate that moments like Batman's striking 'vision' of the future, complete with Darkseid mise-en-scène and parademons are more than just great fan service

When BvS was first release, I read a number of industry people championing director Zack Snyder's love of comics, which is as nebulous a comment as saying someone "loves books", but whatever the truth of the matter it's clear that he just doesn't really get Superman.

Snyder is on record as saying he likes dark comics with sex and violence in them. And, while I suspect he may have been 'playing this up' for the expected shock value, that just isn't my (and a lot of people's) idea of Superman.

As, hopefully, you read earlier, I enjoyed his Man Of Steel as spectacle, but it didn't deliver a Superman that I recognised or could relate to.

While still quite moody here, Superman is certainly given the space to become a bit more like his positive and heroic comic book portrayal.

His Clark Kent alter ego shines (despite butting heads with a a very negative Perry White in Laurence Fishburne), but Synder's penchant for darker, anti-heroes comes to the fore in his presentation of Batman.

Again, a lot is left unexplained (Batman's been operating in Gotham for 20 years but the Daily Planet is unaware of him? Why - oh why - does he go round branding villains?), but he's got the tech, the brains, the charisma, and the drive to bring the Dark Knight to life.

One of the positive things about Batman v Superman is that it doesn't try to obfuscate the 'secret identities' of its leads for the audience, it's just a given that Bruce Wayne is Batman, Diana Prince is Wonder Woman, Clark Kent is Superman etc, without trying to explain it all (again).

Like Man of Steel, this initially appears to be a triumph of spectacle, but, again, in Batman v Superman (the Ultimate Edition anyway) we have a story that justifies the action and - generally - everyone stays reasonably true to the comic book source material.

However, rising above all the plot holes and strange character choices, the most awful, groan-worthy moment in the whole script is the "Martha" scene.

I'll be honest, if I'd tried to present that - with a straight face - in one of my scripts at university I'd have been laughed off my Scriptwriting degree course.

There was enough cheese in that scene to choke all the mice in North America. Especially coming in such a "serious" and "realistic" take on the superhero genre, it totally takes you out of the moment.

It's bizarre that amidst all the explosions and property damage, all the spectacular superheroics and tension, the line that stays with you - because it grates so much - is something so mundane and corny.

But that aside (and it could so easily have been avoided by changing the line to something about his "mother", which Bruce would have reacted to in much the same way) Batman v Superman - Dawn Of Justice is definitely a step in the right direction from Man of Steel and paves the way for Zack Snyder's Justice League.

Man of Steel (2013)

With the next iteration of Superman just around the corner, I've decided to take a whistle-stop tour through the Snyderverse take on the iconic character. 

I started with my first ever rewatch of Man of Steel, which I haven't seen since I originally saw it on its home video release and was simultaneously awed by the spectacle and disappointed by the story.

Now, removed from that original atmosphere by many years I find myself pleasantly surprised.

Man of Steel is a lot better than I remember it.

However, it still has an unforgivable problem in its finale: the Superman I grew up reading doesn't kill.

He always finds a different way to deal with a problem.

How else could he have resolved the situation? I don't know, I'm not Superman (Henry Cavill).

That's one of the things that makes him Superman and makes him better than General Zod (Michael Shannon).

The fact that he doesn't see that is due in part to the strange attitude his human-father, Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner), tried to instil in young Clark Kent that he had to guard the secret of his abilities at all costs, even if it meant letting people die.

But again, a young Superman should have been able to find a way to save people and conceal his super powers at the same time.

Outside this rather major character flaw, Zack Snyder delivers a fantastic, action-packed, superhero origin story, from David Goyer's scipt.

I had totally forgotten the impressive, alien-realisation of Krypton at the start of the movie, before his biological father Jor-El (Russell Crowe) and mother Lara (Ayelet Zurer) send their infant child off into space just ahead of the planet's destruction.

If this Superman had gained better box office traction and been allowed to run through multiple sequels, I would have loved to have seen - somehow - a revisit to Krypton as envisaged by Zack Snyder.

Henry Cavill cuts a fine, square-jawed, figure as Superman when dressed in the red and blue costume, and there are moments when you get fleeting reminders of Christopher Reeve (the definitive live-action Superman).

I even found myself warming up to Amy Adams as Lois Lane. Again, she's no Margot Kidder, but actually following the growth of the character, and her relationship with Clark/Superman, I realised that she was more 'Lois Lane' than maybe I had previously given her credit for.

One of the issues I've had with the Snyderverse was the grey and grim filter everything appears through, but approaching this with an open mind - and eyes - I've come to appreciate the fact that, taking the film as a whole, it isn't as grim as the initial trailers portrayed it.

The film still errs towards Zack's trademark grey palette a bit too much on occasion, and there are too many grey/black costumes for my liking, but the story is much stronger than I recall from my previous viewing. And story, ultimately, always triumphs for me.

Man of Steel is flawed, but it isn't quite the "style-over-substance" affair it was originally painted as.

That said, collateral structural damage has always been a given in comics and films when it comes to monumental superhero slugfests, but the destruction wrought in Man of Steel is off the chart.

Smallville is pretty much laid waste in the initial attack by Zod and his fellow Kryptonians (and a significant amount of it is caused by Superman himself), but then when the fight moves to Metropolis, the devastation gets cranked up to 11.

I know Superman ultimately saved the people of the city (and thus Earth), but, seriously, they need to look around themselves and tally the cost. Who pays for all that damage? I bet 'superhero fight damage' isn't covered by insurance.

I realise that this was his first battle, but you'd think the US Government - or the United Nations - might suggest some kind of training course, to reduce the large-scale collateral damage in any future superpowered conflicts.