A Few Words About A few words about...™ Batman v Superman (extended) -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

I purposefully steered clear of the theatrical version of Batman v Superman on my son's advice, and have now caught the film via the extended version on 4k UHD mit HDR.

The storyline, for what it is, works in the longer version, and hangs together, but at least to me, it seems in many ways to be a re-make of a film that's been dear to my heart since I was a kid -- Universal's wonderful, black & white, 74 minute epic, Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman.

"Never before, in the history of mankind has their been such an epic battle, as monster is pitted against monster!"

I found it interesting that in B v S, Ben Affleck was outfitted with Frankenstein's footwear.

One must presume that different age groups will respond differently to this film.

Kids probably love it for the noise, the sturm and drang...

I see it as a gigantic studio film, created by a studio mindset, toward a platform of future DC epics, now of course, involving Gal Gadot as Diana Prince aka Wonder Woman.

I kept thinking, as I was viewing, is Bruce Wayne really that myopic that he doesn't see beyond the Superman headlines, and truly believes him to be a menace that must be destroyed at all costs?

I guess, if he didn't, we wouldn't have S v B.

The most important thing about the 4k UHD release of Batman v Superman is that it represents the first release of a film on 100 GB media, opening the possibility to those classic films shot in large format, to make their way to the platform.

As a disc, B v S is magnificent. Both visually, as well as aurally, it's perfect. And should be as it was finished as a 4k DI.

A perfect Blu-ray in 4k, with audio in Dolby Atmos, which provides spectacularly precise audio.

Be sure to prepare for Justice League, coming from WB in 2017, when you'll be able to see your favorite comic book characters come to life once again, after which it will be available on 4k UHD.

Be sure to prepare for Wonder Woman, coming from WB in 2017, when you'll be able to see your favorite comic book character come to life once again, after which it will be available on 4k UHD.

Image - 5

Audio - 5

4k - 5

Pass / Fail - Pass

RAH

 

[OliverK]

The most important thing about the 4k UHD release of Batman v Superman is that it represents the first release of a film on 100 GB media, opening the possibility to those classic films shot in large format, to make their way to the platform.

Amen to that!

 

[Cranston37+]

Mr. Harris,

Can you confirm that both cuts are presented in 4K? When the press release first came out there was some confusion because it made it sound like the Theatrical Cut was 4K and the Extended Cut was on a seperate, regularly flavored Blu...

 

[Robert Harris]

In the 4k release, 4k is extended, BD is theatrical.

In the 3D release, BD is extended and theatrical, 3D is theatrical, only.

Unfortunately, even in an Ultimate configuration, there is no 4k extended / 3D theatrical.

Therefore, for those who wish to have 4k and 3D, you'll be forced to purchase twice.

RAH

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I kept thinking, as I was viewing, is Bruce Wayne really that myopic that he doesn't see beyond the Superman headlines, and truly believes him to be a menace that must be destroyed at all costs?

That's one of the issues that I and many others had with the film - that it requires characters that we've generally seen portrayed as intelligent and thinking to behave out of character by rushing to judgment in order to make the plot function.

Spoiler

One could argue that there wouldn't even be a final battle between Batman and Superman if Superman arrived in Gotham, used his super strength to lift Batman into the air above his Bat-weapons, and simply spoke to him. Their entire battle happens not because they both want to fight, but because Batman doesn't want to listen to what Superman has to say. Superman certainly has enough superpowers that he could have forced a conversation to happen. There are elements in the movie I did enjoy, but this wasn't really one of them. It felt like the powers that be had decided the movie would feature a battle scene, and then tried to figure out how to justify one after that decision had already been made.

 

[Howard Tom]

That's one of the issues that I and many others had with the film - that it requires characters that we've generally seen portrayed as intelligent and thinking to behave out of character by rushing to judgment in order to make the plot function.

A rather typical function of films or comics (or WWE wrestling, let's face it) with eventual team-ups would be for established characters to meet as adversaries or at least be highly contrasted in some or many ways (personality or technique, all part of the mix); if there is an initial conflict, it is usually prompted by outside manipulation. I imagine the current generation of superhero films will eventually also define the character's political views as part of their personal philosophy. Or has that already happened?

 

[Brandon Conway]

I for one am an admirer of the film, in particular the Ultimate Edition which is obviously the intended version of the film from the creative people involved.

I read an interesting analysis recently of Snyder's work about how he is a filmmaker that more often than not goes with romanticism in his storytelling rather than the more common naturalism of today's film/television; by specific example he wants his characters to define their ideologies by being confronted with choices of extreme circumstance. (The Zod dilemma at the end of Man of Steel is a perfect embodiment of this). This approach does bring an element of risk, for if such moments don't hit the viewer in the right frame of mind or taste it can easily illicit dismissal or even disdain. Batman v Superman's most discussed moment and the split reaction from audiences to it is yet another example of this.

Regardless, I find the film is better with subsequent viewings, and the UC allows for the pacing/flow of the film to come across naturally and as a more proper film; the theatrical cut, though I enjoy it, becomes even more stiff and herky-jerky by comparison. One thing I've enjoyed about Snyder's four films (so far) from comic properties is that they are seemingly endless conversation pieces, in part because people's reactions to them are so broad, from pure hatred, to indifference, to mild satisfaction, to open love affair. Crowd pleasers and universally praised films are great, and I love my fair share of them, but there's nothing quite like a work of commercial art that brings about every reaction under the sun for providing an infinite supply of discussions. No one is really digging all that deep into Ant-Man, for example (which is also a film I enjoy greatly).

From a commercial populism standpoint Snyder is probably not the ideal choice to provide a constant golden parachute to Warner Bros. and their shareholders, but as a fan of filmmakers that put all their effort and all themselves (for better or worse) into a project Snyder will never fail to provide intrigue for me.

 

[Tino]

In the 4k release, 4k is extended, BD is theatrical.

In the 3D release, BD is extended and theatrical, 3D is theatrical, only.

Unfortunately, even in an Ultimate configuration, there is no 4k extended / 3D theatrical.

Therefore, for those who wish to have 4k and 3D, you'll be forced to purchase twice.

RAH

That would be me.

 

[Cranston37+]

Having only seen the Extended Cut and not exactly being a fan of the genre, I enjoyed it and had no problem with Bruce Wayne's actions.

They way I viewed it, he was a Batman who had gone through decades of watching custumed characters wreck havoc on his city. When Superman entered the picture, he sought not to destroy him, but to come up with the means to destroy him in case that should ever be needed. It was only at the very end, after Luthor had manipulated things like a puppet master, did Batman actively want to destroy him.

But did we really need to open the movie with Wayne's parents being murdered? There can't be 4 people in the country who don't know that story. On the same token, Hollywood, Peter Parker was bit by a radioactive spider. We got it. Move on.

Anyway, it was enjoyable enough and had a little more meat on the bone than such fare usually does. As long as the next installment doesn't feature Matt Damon as Robin, I'm all in.

 

[Brandon Conway]

But did we really need to open the movie with Wayne's parents being murdered? There can't be 4 people in the country who don't know that story. On the same token, Hollywood, Peter Parker was bit by a radioactive spider. We got it. Move on.

I don't think they would have if it wasn't key to the end of the throw down fight. In other words, once you make it intregal to the story it makes it necessary to convey as information in this particular series continuity. Note the only word said in the scene (aside from the voiceover).

 

[Cranston37+]

I don't think they would have if it wasn't key to the end of the throw down fight. In other words, once you make it intregal to the story it makes it necessary to convey as information in this particular series continuity. Note the only word said in the scene (aside from the voiceover).

Fair enough

 

[Bryan^H]

I have only watched the extended cut

I thought it was decent, but the problems I had with it were the direct dialogue, and visual presence of Frank Miller's 'The Dark Knight Returns' from 1986 duplicated in this film.
Even with Miller's blessing, as someone that feels TDKR is the greatest comic book story ever told(so does Stephen King) it was kind of jarring and took me out of the film every time I saw something directly linked to that book. I wondered since I first heard about this film, if they are going to borrow so heavily from 'The Dark Knight Returns', why not just make that movie instead? There would be zero issues about a good coherent story being told.
And Lex Luthor was a pain to watch I thought.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Fair enough

Ironically, one of my close friend's biggest criticism of both MoS and BvS was that it skipped over so much of the familiar backstories. He wanted more time with young Clark in Smallville, and more time with Batman pre-BvS to see his iconic moments depicted again. My response was just simply "really?" I mean, we have several other films and TV shows that deal with all that. At least with Snyder's films he only retreads in areas that he directly ties into the immediate story, whether it's the Wayne murders, the brief glimpses of Clark's youth in Smallville, or the different take on Krypton and its culture, etc.

 

[Raul Marquez]

One thing I didn't "get" was the Jimmy Olsen bit at the beginning of the film. WTF was that all about?

 

[Brandon Conway]

One thing I didn't "get" was the Jimmy Olsen bit at the beginning of the film. WTF was that all about?

Because the future stories in the series are going to be Justice League centric and not have the Clark Daily Planet Reporter persona as part of it they saw no future use of the Jimmy Olsen character, so Snyder decided to use him for a misdirection. I don't think it panned out even to Snyder's real satisfaction, which is why the theatrical cut doesn't state who the character is in the film (though it does in the credits).

 

[Cranston37+]

Ironically, one of my close friend's biggest criticism of both MoS and BvS was that it skipped over so much of the familiar backstories. He wanted more time with young Clark in Smallville, and more time with Batman pre-BvS to see his iconic moments depicted again. My response was just simply "really?" I mean, we have several other films and TV shows that deal with all that. At least with Snyder's films he only retreads in areas that he directly ties into the immediate story, whether it's the Wayne murders, the brief glimpses of Clark's youth in Smallville, or the different take on Krypton and its culture, etc.

I would love Affleck's standalone Batfilm to be set before MoS, when he was younger and less weary...

 

[Ray0414]

Robert, how does the quality compare to the other top quality 4k movies? Will this be top 5?

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I would love Affleck's standalone Batfilm to be set before MoS, when he was younger and less weary...

I would have loved that before this movie, but in general, I'm not huge on prequels - I don't like going into a movie knowing already what can and can't happen. If they do a movie with Robin, for instance, we already know that Robin will die before the end of the movie. If they do a movie about whether Batman is a friend or foe, we already know that the Gotham public is on his side. Etc., etc.

So while I would have loved to have seen that with Affleck, to me, it's too late to go there now.

 

[Brandon Conway]

I also say just go forward and have small flashbacks as needed. This is apparently how Suicide Squad is - 90-95% after the events of BvS with a handful of pre-MoS era flashbacks.

 

[Cranston37+]

I also say just go forward and have small flashbacks as needed. This is apparently how Suicide Squad is - 90-95% after the events of BvS with a handful of pre-MoS era flashbacks.

See my way of thinking is that when all of these films are said and done, I would hate for BvS to have been Batman's introduction for this world.

I want a movie that can stand as a companion alongside MoS as a character intro. Justice League 1&2 will cover future events - I say use the standalone Batflick to achieve something else. Not an origin story far in the past, but one that takes place concurrently with MoS...