Oh boy. Where to even begin here? Right away there's the weird title which looks like something from the Castlevania series (maybe Dawn of Sorrow would be a better fit, or Curse of Darkness). So let's step back for a second. Man of Steel came and went, to mixed reviews. It was underwritten and had a lot of tonal problems, but overall it was kind of average. I could just look at it as a sci-fi spectacle movie and, at least at the time, wonder what was next for the character. I certainly didn't predict anything like this which takes all the worst parts and amplifies them. The result is a bewildering mess.
It wastes all the potential from the titular conflict. It takes elements from comics like The Dark Knight Returns amongst others. It throws these story ideas in haphazardly without any apparent planning, and in doing so loses the depth and nuance they originally contained. What I'm saying here is that it's no good. What ever happened to set ups and payoffs, characterisation, plot arcs and plot twists, or satisfying action finales? It's the kind of thing you'd expect in a super hero movie with heinous villains pulling strings behind the scenes and powder kegs of melodrama building up to explode at any moment. But one of the most mystifying aspects of this film is that rational thought and logical deduction seems to have been left at the door.
They have the Man of Tomorrow (Henry Cavill) versus The World's Greatest Detective (Ben Affleck) and neither one seems to be able to see all the obvious ploys and frame up jobs involved here. The story itself involves Superman being blamed for some kind of massacre in Africa but he doesn't seem that interested in clearing his name until the last minute. Meanwhile Bruce Wayne is pushed into fighting him for the most simplistic reasons, without ever seeing through the trickery involved. Then again this is a story in which Batman has been battling criminals for decades, having become so brutal and stupid over time that his skills are blunt. But we're supposed to care when Clark Kent decides to write an article on him. Because of course the audience has just met him.
The first half of the movie isn't so bad overall. It's really boring, but it's never quite this headache inducing. They waste a lot of time replaying Bruce's tragic childhood for some reason when it could have been done in a few seconds of flashbacks. It's clear this is the story they really wanted to tell. Batman gets all the best moments from weird nightmare scenes in his family crypt to bombastic action set pieces. However in hte end so much of it is totally pointless. At one point he kills twenty thugs in the Batwing to steal from Lex Luthor, but fails to do so. But then off screen he has to do it all over again. The lack of structure is really strange, and by the time the major clashes arrive all sense of who is doing what, and why, has been lost. But then again most of the other story choices are also bizarre.
Maybe it's because of the big rush to make a team up picture. Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) isn't too bad as she plays off Bruce Wayne in the scenes were each lead is without costumes. But the sequel bait later on is so cringe worthy that it's almost like a bad joke. They really didn't have a more creative way of showing future Justice League characters than having an email attachment showing them... each with a teaser trailer and matching logos? Is Lex Luthor planning this film series? And the less said the better about Jesse Eisenberg who seems seems to have wandered in from a Looney Tunes animation or one of the old Joel Schumacher Batman films.
Character scenes and spectacle is handled just as clumsily in many cases. They throw in nightmarish terror attack scenes and giant CGI monster fights with the same lack of tact. Nobody ever acts like a human being whether they are actually from planet Earth or not. They say there's a longer cut of this with more character motivation to iron out the issues, but if some of these major problems are still included then I can't imagine how much it would help much. Filling out a few of the gaps in logic might make it smoother, but with such a trainwreck to work with I can't imagine it being a lot better.
2/5
BONUS REVIEW
THE WITCH (2015)
The Witch is a sinister, slow burning horror feature set in 17th Century America after English settlers have moved to the New World. After being thrown out of the town because of a religious dispute a single family has to start over. Their plan is to start farming on the edge of civilisation. But an eerie forest next door hides more than just the local wildlife. There's a lot of discussion about faith but isn't just a story about paranoia or ill founded beliefs in witchcraft. It's clear from the start that these things are very real after their new born child goes missing. What's interesting is how the characters deal with this problem as their domestic situation unravels and their crops fail. Soon their are accusations and arguments, even before things go really bad.
It's a dark and creepy looking film with lots of misty woodland scenes and household dialogue lit with the smallest candles. But this is a horror film after all. It certainly delivers on weird and disturbing imagery. The atmosphere in general is really claustrophobic and depressing but the quick glimpses into the supernatural are what leave a lasting impression. There's a lot of debate on the nature of original sin and the evil of humankind, and the cast are all great including Anya Taylor-Joy as Thomasin the oldest daughter and Ralph Ineson as her father William. A lot of tension is buit up as they start to feel threatened by one another. It's all pretty miserable overall. But this isn't trying to tell a heart warming story; and it delivers in terms of both grim period detail and harrowing nightmare fuel.
4/5
