 |
| Batman vs Superman (2016) - All bad Zack Snyder |
Dear Zack Snyder. You're cool. I loved you with the "Dawn of the Dead" (2004) and has always supported you. When the wave came after the "300" (2007) I'm happy for you. When the "Keepers" (2009) failed at the box office - I was covering you breastfeed (and "Keepers" have become iconic, loss-making, of course, but the cult).
And now I came rolling in "Batman vs. Superman". You know, Zack, Batman I love more than you.
Ladies and gentlemen. Soon you will know the answer to the main question of the universe. Who will win? Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sylvester Stallone? Elephant or a whale? Karate or a boxer? Fans of Alice fans or movie? Batman or Superman?
Valar Margulis, komiksany. Whether I liked the movie "Batman vs. Superman"? Probably not. Should I watch it? Rather yes, but not in the movie, do not feed these people with arms. Otherwise, they will also release a sequel.
His, of course it is possible to see, if you do not have high expectations for the person who removed the "Guardians". But I "Keepers" very much.
First of all, let's assume for the faith that the universe of DC comics adaptation efforts Warner Brosers - it is a necessary evil. Man of Steel, all that. . On viewing the film "Batman vs. Superman" I laughed harder than all of the last three films, Marvel combined. But unfortunately, not in those places where the script provided. Stas Netrebko says that the writers needed glah so the eye. I believe that after this - so whip whip. When it comes to such a ruthlessly pompous, stillborn pathos and tyagomotiny - I feel obliged to learn to enjoy their money's worth.
Of course, you need to have nehily skill to realize the potential of the most powerful of the universe kinematogroficheskoy DC Comix and twist history two stories about superheroes in one. But even in this case, the film "Batman vs. Superman" is so incompetent, so helpless and chaotic, it is even necessarily need to see with their own eyes. And cry. Well, or laugh, as in my case.
Even if the filmmakers set out to combine in one picture all the things that the audience does not like in the superhero franchise - obsession with himself, too cumbersome world, slowness, the eternal destruction of the city, snarling whisper dark robust fellow ... all of these stamps. Even in this case, the film would not have been so shocking as this.
It is unusual for me to review. Possible spoilers. But they do not bear any harm to the perception of the film.
For the people of DC and Warners film "Batman vs. Superman" has a dual function.
Firstly it is the sequel of the film Superman "Man of Steel" (2013), filmed in the same Zack Snyder. They are then more in the press releases were asked not to mention the word "Superman" for some reason. My buddylist from LJ will understand what I mean. So, as you remember, "Man of Steel" was a very mediocre film, but even he looks like a "Batman Begins" in comparison with the new film "Batman vs. Superman".
Secondly - it is also one start Batman franchise that was in seemingly so successfully completed Kistofer coolest Nolan film, "The Dark Knight Rises" (2012).
In the new film Batman older, more izmuchal and it looks like in the same universe as the Nolan trilogy. Nevertheless, we still have to look again at how the murder of his parents, he falls into a well with bats. So this is all. As in "Man of Steel" to review the history of the origin of Superman. Yawn.
Then we are transported to the present, by the end of the movie events of "Man of Steel", and more precisely to the time when Bruce Wayne nayulyudaet destroying Metropolis Superman and Zod gneralom. And when Superman comes out of the clouds of dust Bruce decides that maybe Superman is not so great, after all.
A few months later, Superman, played by Henry Cavill, her completely devoid of charisma, rescues Lois Lane (IBA again plays Amy Adams) from the hands of the African terrorist. One can see that she is a very talented and experienced journalist, time begins to interview the phrase "you are not a terrorist"?
But the bloodshed occurs, causing an investigation by Congress, led by poor Holly Hunter. She says, and the pompous phrase, over which I laughed the most. The fact that Superman can do what it sees fit, without asking anyone. Then she throws a glance behind the camera, as if asking the director if all it has done is true.
Bruce Wayne, meanwhile, examines the activities of Superman and starts villain Lex Luthor, played by Eisenberg. And decides that Superman needs to be stopped, then the hard training in betpeschere. And so amused with shackles like obtor goes on Madonna's clip shooting "Express Yourself".
Wayne's motives are, to put it mildly, a bit confusing. Much of the development of character is revealed in the form of pieces of sleep. Three of them ... well, four, if you count the dream of a dream, a very banal and beaten. And I would not blame the writer if it was his debut and student work.
But no.
Zack Snyder suffered in the film "Batman vs. Superman" all the same mistakes he made in the "man of steel". There is no sense of rhythm, no sense of humor, but there is a fuckin 'interest in geography and movements in space, when you need to show the action. And a lot of these problems. And they are endless. How many ways there are to destroy the city in superhero movies, may I ask? OK, we'll find out!
Snyder also pushes the theme of Christian morality and exclusivity, but halfway inserts a picture of a talking head master modern science popularizer Tyson Nile. I love Neil Tyson. I'm ready to land in his presidential pick, and his TV series "Cosmos" prinulitelno show in schools. But his appearance cancels all previous moral message. Does this make sense? Perhaps the author wanted us to say something? But no. This gives the film and so blunt about superheroes even greater absurdity: to participate in the film invited a bunch znamentostey, which were loaded into a clumsy contest and chose mindless replicas.
And the film is full of such nonsense. For example it is obvious that Snyder wanted to make a revelation to the audience the moment when the mysterious character is revealed and Gadot is Wonder Woman. As if we have not looked at the poster, the right word.
But the strongest evidence of sheer incompetence Snyder is that it lowers Eisenberg to one of the worst performances in the history of professional film. But it was a mistake of casting - supervillains require tetralnosti opera. It's just outside of Eisenberg features. It is primarily a character actor, not a decoration for kinozhvachki. And you see it grinding out each syllable, planning every move. This is a very poor substitute for Heath Ledger, Jack Nicholson, Jim Carrey, and any bad guy from kinovselennoy "Batman."
And if you can wade through the whimpering Eisenberg over the dead body of General Zod without neighing for the whole room, you are much more tolerant zanchit me to kinogovnetsu. It is evident that Eisenberg tries, but that he goes very badly.
Ogladyvayas the protests against Ben Affleck as Batman it makes me feel funny. Zack Snyder and his screenwriters have been much more of a problem for the film. Yes, he even has a few good points, though most of them with Jeremy Irons Alfred, played by the famous music critic Artemy Troitsky.
When the final battle finally begins after 90 minutes of takeoff. You can exhale - it's hopeless. Rainy and hopeless. Maybe fans would intervene need to chip in and buy a light?
By the middle of the movie, I finally realized what had happened with the movie Zack Snyder. And why is he so mean to the world entered by Christopher Nolan. At first, it seemed to me that his attempt sobezyanichat dark aesthetics Nolan was not comparable with the solar character of Superman. But in this case it operates at the expense of both characters.
And he goes on nolonovskogo entourage to a climax: crude ladshaft game, all this fog, grayness and explosions - all this facilitates the creation of special effects. Nothing that was not in the film Nolan. There can be heroes and wore raincoats and rubber suits, but at least take into account the force of gravity, and it was physically real world. This is what makes Nolan's films work.
The film "Batman vs. Superman" does not even pretend to do so. It's a stupid, lazy and meaningless picture. Although, I'm sure it will make millions of dollars. And hundreds of thousands of people come to look at how much money has been invested to ensure that they come peacefully to sleep in the cinema. Tomorrow I'll go further. Valar Dohaeris.