Are you more critical of DC or Marvel films?

[useridgoeshere]

I was really impressed with BvS and the moral questions it posed, the fleshing out of each character through unique dialogue and visual cues (the scene where Bruce wakes up in his lake house struck me the most, everything in that scene paints the perfect picture of a damaged Bruce Wayne) . There were so many different plot threads and visual moments that made the most sense when the film was finished and the arc of both characters was fully explored. I appreciate it so much as a stand-alone film, since we never got to really see its true follow up.

In Aquaman I loved it as a truly family-friendly superhero film. The ties to family are so strong and Arthur isn't dealing with tragedy, he's dealing with loneliness and not being able to fit in. In that scene at the bar Arthur is at first super standoffish to those guys who approach him to take a selfie, but ends up getting drunk with them, and yes that was a comedic scene but it showed a lot of insight into Arthur's character, he doesn't actually want to be a loner. He's rejected by one world and feels alone in another, I feel that the movie illustrated these feelings beautifully. I also LOVED that Arthur practiced forgiveness towards Orm in the end, the family theme reached its peak with that scene. Arthur identifies with Orm as almost his reverse-equivalent. The scene gives me chills even now, and it made me wish more action/adventure movies had the heroes forgiving and sparing the villain in the end.

I didn't really care for Shazam (although there were parts I liked) and it's been a little bit since I saw the other ones so if you'd like more examples I'd have to take a little time to attempt to write up some more thoughts for you. MoS and BvS I've watched several times and always come back with greater appreciation and understanding. I don't feel that any of the other DC films have lived up to those two, but I found quality moments in all. Sorry that you did not.

Thanks for the response. I liked Aquaman a lot, while MOS and BVS were very disappointing for me. I just don’t see how any of them are more intellectually challenging than an MCU movie. I appreciate reading your perspective.

[Scott Taylor]

I was really impressed with BvS and the moral questions it posed, the fleshing out of each character through unique dialogue and visual cues (the scene where Bruce wakes up in his lake house struck me the most, everything in that scene paints the perfect picture of a damaged Bruce Wayne) . There were so many different plot threads and visual moments that made the most sense when the film was finished and the arc of both characters was fully explored. I appreciate it so much as a stand-alone film, since we never got to really see its true follow up.

BvS explored the idea of whether or not a Superhero should be viewed as a God or Devil. And it explored how that societal struggle played out with Batman versus how it played out with Superman. Superman was by far the more public hero/menace whereas Batman was much more of an underground guy whose status was more discussed only by the authorities. But it was the same struggle. Other characters, like Lex, Lois, Crippled Blow-Up guy, Alfred, Perry White etc. were just the mouthpieces for the discussion.

It was the DC version of Civil War. Civil War explored those same issues by just blowing up a building and then having the government suddenly make a unilateral decision that all heroes were potentially bad. BvS treated the issue more from the perspective of the general public. Both movies have drawbacks in their approaches. The MCU didn't really touch upon the hypocrisy of the government's stance. And BvS had the government as barely a presence in the whole argument.

[Elmo]

BvS explored the idea of whether or not a Superhero should be viewed as a God or Devil. And it explored how that societal struggle played out with Batman versus how it played out with Superman. Superman was by far the more public hero/menace whereas Batman was much more of an underground guy whose status was more discussed only by the authorities. But it was the same struggle. Other characters, like Lex, Lois, Crippled Blow-Up guy, Alfred, Perry White etc. were just the mouthpieces for the discussion.

It was the DC version of Civil War. Civil War explored those same issues by just blowing up a building and then having the government suddenly make a unilateral decision that all heroes were potentially bad. BvS treated the issue more from the perspective of the general public. Both movies have drawbacks in their approaches. The MCU didn't really touch upon the hypocrisy of the government's stance. And BvS had the government as barely a presence in the whole argument.

I agree to an extent. With Civil War I saw all of the developments as simply plot devices and not any kind of statement on superheroes or superhero media. BvS to me is not just if superheroes should be viewed as Gods or Devils, but Superman himself. Most of the main characters and several side or one-off characters have their own perspectives on Superman, whereas Batman is just someone Clark Kent is pursuing and growing more ambivalent toward. But it's all about inner conflicts... Bruce has spent decades thwarting evil in his own city and the arrival Superman basically challenges everything. The Joker, who killed his Robin, is the worst person he's ever faced, but what if the Joker also had the ability to fly and catch rocket ships in midair? Bruce's fear is explored and developed in every scene he appears in, the same with Clark's personal turmoil regarding his personal sacrifice, to be a hero and this beacon of hope for essentially the entire human race when he himself is not human, is developed in every scene. Most of this isn't done through any sort of exposition. I feel that it was left this way for people to come out of it with their own interpretations, but that is what I found to be the strongest part of BvS